NIL is a convenient scapegoat in recruiting
By: Adam Friedman - Rivals.com
Programs missing on prospects they’ve prioritized is nothing new in the recruiting world but the excuses for why players choose to go elsewhere now include everybody’s favorite new scapegoat - name, image and likeness.
Players are able to monetize their NIL and are actively doing so during the recruiting process and it’s helping them choose which school they want to attend. While, many college coaches will say they’re all for players earning some extra money, those same coaches are really upset that, even though a player is presented an NIL offer from their school's collective, they end up choosing a different offer.
It used to be college coaches would say quietly that a player "was not a take" when that player chose a different school but now the excuse that is commonly heard is about how a competing school's collective offered an astronomical NIL number that their school's collective just couldn’t match. This type of scapegoating seems a little transparent given how flimsy almost all of the rumored NIL contracts seem to be.
So many of these coaches that use the NIL excuse do so in a way that it feels like they are bad-mouthing these players and their rival schools because they feel like a player is just taking the highest offer on the table. In many cases it seems more like a player has narrowed his list down to two or three schools that they would be happy to play at and then the highest NIL offer wins if all else is equal.
Why should a player not use this tactic? Some may say it’s shortsighted and they should pick the school that will help them get to the NFL. That’s certainly solid advice but why can’t the players have their cake and eat it too? Why can’t they pick a school that’s going to help develop them and get them ready for the NFL if it’s also the school that offers the highest NIL amount?
So many of us within the industry would chuckle to ourselves, when we heard the “he’s not a take“ excuse and now the NIL excuse is almost getting the same treatment.
By: Adam Friedman - Rivals.com
Programs missing on prospects they’ve prioritized is nothing new in the recruiting world but the excuses for why players choose to go elsewhere now include everybody’s favorite new scapegoat - name, image and likeness.
Players are able to monetize their NIL and are actively doing so during the recruiting process and it’s helping them choose which school they want to attend. While, many college coaches will say they’re all for players earning some extra money, those same coaches are really upset that, even though a player is presented an NIL offer from their school's collective, they end up choosing a different offer.
It used to be college coaches would say quietly that a player "was not a take" when that player chose a different school but now the excuse that is commonly heard is about how a competing school's collective offered an astronomical NIL number that their school's collective just couldn’t match. This type of scapegoating seems a little transparent given how flimsy almost all of the rumored NIL contracts seem to be.
So many of these coaches that use the NIL excuse do so in a way that it feels like they are bad-mouthing these players and their rival schools because they feel like a player is just taking the highest offer on the table. In many cases it seems more like a player has narrowed his list down to two or three schools that they would be happy to play at and then the highest NIL offer wins if all else is equal.
Why should a player not use this tactic? Some may say it’s shortsighted and they should pick the school that will help them get to the NFL. That’s certainly solid advice but why can’t the players have their cake and eat it too? Why can’t they pick a school that’s going to help develop them and get them ready for the NFL if it’s also the school that offers the highest NIL amount?
So many of us within the industry would chuckle to ourselves, when we heard the “he’s not a take“ excuse and now the NIL excuse is almost getting the same treatment.
