Kansas Crimson

Yukon.

We'll see what this means when all the details come out but seems like a big deal.

https://twitter.com/JayhawkSlant/status ... 7240560640

Huge deal.

Full details below. Sounds like this is something that's been in the works for a long time but the people involved were sitting back and monitoring the NCAA situation before fully launching this thing.

https://twitter.com/MSwain247/status/15 ... 6184132608

I had heard a couple unverifiable rumblings that KU was quite behind in the NIL-game last season.

Self said exactly that on Tulsa radio this week.

This should help. A hoops program of our stature can't be losing there.

We're all loosing here.

pdub wrote: ↑Wed Jul 27, 2022 10:12 am We're all loosing here.

No, you are. You are not representative of a meaningful portion of fans on this issue.

I’m loving it

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 27, 2022 10:14 am

pdub wrote: ↑Wed Jul 27, 2022 10:12 am We're all loosing here.

No, you are. You are not representative of a meaningful portion of fans on this issue.

Meaningful meaning will the loss in interest of said portion of fans prevent college basketball from becoming just another professional sport?
No, money always wins.

There are a good number of fans out there ( and you can pretend that there are not to bolster your point ) who think NIL is ruining college sports -- or is the beginning of the ruin of college sports. I'd argue that portion is larger than you think. But yes, you are correct that it won't matter in the end.

Cascadia wrote: ↑Wed Jul 27, 2022 10:20 am I’m loving it

Kids are getting money that used to go to middleman hanger-on weirdos.

Kids are staying in school longer.

Coaches don't have to be brokers for shoe companies.

The shoe companies have less power.

People are talking about college basketball in times other than March.

People are getting to know the college basketball players.

People love the kitschy/weird/funny NIL stuff (indeed, it's becoming something unique about college sports, which is, broadly, what we like about college sports).

It's dizzyingly hard to find any negatives, really, except if you are someone who likes deluding themselves as to what the sport has and has not been for your entire lifetime.

It also seems like the new-ish NIL rules are going to help save KU and Self from major sanctions.

"People love the kitschy/weird/funny NIL stuff (indeed, it's becoming something unique about college sports, which is, broadly, what we like about college sports)."

Which people? You, CnB and Cascadia?

"It's dizzyingly hard to find any negatives..."

Please.
You're dizzyingly one sided here.

"It also seems like the new-ish NIL rules are going to help save KU and Self from major sanctions."

Truth.

pdub wrote: ↑Wed Jul 27, 2022 11:45 am "People love the kitschy/weird/funny NIL stuff (indeed, it's becoming something unique about college sports, which is, broadly, what we like about college sports)."

Which people? You, CnB and Cascadia?

"It's dizzyingly hard to find any negatives..."

Please.
You're dizzyingly one sided here.

"It also seems like the new-ish NIL rules are going to help save KU and Self from major sanctions."

Truth.

I don't think ESPN - which, right/wrong/indifferent, absolutely IS the right place to see which way the popular wind blows - relies on the interest of people on this message board to determine what it covers/highlights.

NIL has been a huge, popular hit. It just has. People love the Oscar Tschiebwe story, and they love the Jared Casey story.

"NIL has been a huge, popular hit. It just has."

No.
I'm sorry, it has not.

pdub wrote: ↑Wed Jul 27, 2022 11:53 am "NIL has been a huge, popular hit. It just has."

No.
I'm sorry, it has not.

I suppose everything is subjective, so I can't say you're wrong (even though, come on, you are).

But: https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2 ... fans-poll/

About half of Americans (48 percent) have heard “a lot” or “some” about the NCAA’s decision last year to allow college athletes to be paid when their name or image is used commercially, such as in video games or to sell merchandise. Among those who have heard about these NIL agreements, the majority (60 percent) say it “hasn’t made a difference” in their enjoyment of college sports. For those who say the rule change has made a difference, more than twice as many say it had a “positive impact” (28 percent) than a “negative impact” (11 percent).

So, 88% of casual-or-more fans are either neutral or positive. That's pretty definitive.

Oh, and.

The change is particularly popular among Black Americans who have heard about it, with 53 percent saying payments for athletes have had a positive impact on their enjoyment. The change is also relatively popular among Hispanic and younger adults who have heard about the change, with more than 4 in 10 of each group saying it has made college sports more enjoyable.

“hasn’t made a difference” == "huge popular hit".
Huh.

I'd also argue, most of these people polled, have a vague understanding of NIL and see it presented as ( making money of video games, showing up in local commercials ) vs what it actually is ( boosters just paying for players to play at the school ).

"Hey did you see Nightmare Alley?"
"Yea, it was fine."
"It was a huge popular hit!"

Middle men hanger-on weirdo cash slowed. Thread

pdub wrote: ↑Wed Jul 27, 2022 12:27 pm “hasn’t made a difference” == "huge popular hit".
Huh.

Go ask a politician what he would call something that has 88% neutral-or-positive polling.