Gophers coach P.J. Fleck says some transfer portal prices are in the millions, and not just for quarterbacks

[BleedGopher]

Per Randy:

Nebraska coach Matt Rhule said last week that a good quarterback in the transfer portal goes for $1 million to $2 million these days. Gophers coach P.J. Fleck agreed Thursday, adding, "That's almost any position."

Fleck was speaking in a video news conference previewing the Dec. 26 Quick Lane Bowl, and he didn't hold back describing the runaway trains of name, image and likeness (NIL) deals and the transfer portal, which have collided spectacularly to change college football.

"I've heard numbers this week, whether real or not, that just make your jaw drop, that are pretty much most of our entire NIL [total]," Fleck said.

Gophers coach P.J. Fleck says some transfer portal prices are in the millions

The first window for the transfer portal is open and teams can shop for transfers to fill their needs. But the Gophers can't shop at the same level as football's elite programs.

www.startribune.com

Go Gophers!!

 

[fmlizard]

Looking obvious that we’re going to see a trend of guys not declaring for the NFL Draft until they have to. Especially the guys who are great college players that don’t have pro traits. Players with anything less than a first round grade may make more money in the college portal

If run-first QBs come back into popularity it is their time to shine and get paid. Top flight running backs also might stay in college as long as they can to maximize their earnings.

 

[Gophergrandpa]

The NIL/Portal phenomenon is a very confused, inefficient, emerging marketplace. But, it is clear that most schools, such as the Gophs, have little NIL money to play with, and that they must devote the majority of NIL money to retaining their own key roster players rather than going on shopping sprees. So, I believe that the opening bid "asking prices" for all but the most elite players will over time normalize to amounts that non-helmet schools can afford and justify. The market must and will become more efficient and rational over time. There just isn't enough money in the system for every decent player to command a million dollars to play. Remember, the helmet schools already have near full rosters of 4 and 5 star HS recruits, and have to live with an 85 player scholarship cap. These schools can't and won't be buying in quantity; they will buy a few of the most elite players each year (and might get some others who are willing to transfer for the opportunity without big NIL pay).

The truly elite and battle-seasoned players, especially those who (as someone pointed out) now want to maximize their time--and earnings--in college rather than declare early for the NFL draft, will see huge paydays. But the obscene paydays simply won't be there for the vast majority or transferees; the money just isn't there. With the volume of decent players now entering the portal, "asking prices" for all but the cream of the crop must eventually "normalize" to what the marketplace can afford.

Somewhat perversely, as it becomes clear that certain top programs are investing heavily in transfer portal free agents as their starters (to the disadvantage of HS recruits in development), it might become a bit easier for schools such as the U to get higher quality HS recruits--who are essentially getting squeezed out a bit in the helmet school market by top players over-staying their normal tenure, and fully-developed players trying to transfer in to those programs as one or two year rentals.

This is a very disruptive and unconstrained market at the moment. Maybe it will get tamed by legislation or NCAA initiatives (or a players' union with a collective bargaining agreement). But if not tamed by regulation (or a union), it will eventually find an equilibrium in which teams like the Gophers will have a place, a very decent place. We just have to live through a few mystifying years until things get sorted out.

 

[upnorthkid]

joy of everything being off the record with complete lack of transparency or reporting requirements. guys can say anything they want in terms of what they're being offered elsewhere. was harder in the shadow realm when it was illegal to do but now when you can "offer" whatever and strap it all over in contingencies, it's a lot easier to manipulate for all parties.

 

[short ornery norwegian]

Grandpa has a point. if certain schools are loading up on transfers, other schools can use that to recruit against them with HS players - "if you go to Helmet U, they're just going to bring in transfers that will bump you down the depth chart. You're better off going to our school where we recruit the majority of our players from HS."

 

[Unregistered User]

Looking obvious that we’re going to see a trend of guys not declaring for the NFL Draft until they have to. Especially the guys who are great college players that don’t have pro traits. Players with anything less than a first round grade may make more money in the college portal

If run-first QBs come back into popularity it is their time to shine and get paid. Top flight running backs also might stay in college as long as they can to maximize their earnings.

Or you see guys like Verse from FSU who come back for a more year to try to win a championship (and yes, get paid), only to get screwed…hard…by the NCAA passing them up even for the expanded playoffs. And those guys say no thanks and just go pro.

Its all very confusing these days.

 

[EasyThere Pilgrim]

It's actually simple. Not confusing.

Michigan, Georgia, Oregon....grown men can drink beer and yell "yyyeeeaaahhh" when paid players push a ball across a line....as if that improves their fat ass in any way.

 

[Goldmember]

1. Actual NIL money paid isn’t reliably reported anywhere. It’s all hearsay.
2. There are all sorts of incentives for people to lie about how much NIL money is out there.

 

[Great Plains Gopher]

NIL is anarchy as is the portal. Both should be tossed by any means necessary.

 

[disco]

NIL is anarchy as is the portal. Both should be tossed by any means necessary.

NIL won't be tossed. Doing so is restraint of trade. The portal needs corrections.

 

[disco]

It's actually simple. Not confusing.

Michigan, Georgia, Oregon....grown men can drink beer and yell "yyyeeeaaahhh" when paid players push a ball across a line....as if that improves their fat ass in any way.

Why are you even here if you're just going to act like a "sportsball" hater?

 

[Panthadad2]

It's actually simple. Not confusing.

Michigan, Georgia, Oregon....grown men can drink beer and yell "yyyeeeaaahhh" when paid players push a ball across a line....as if that improves their fat ass in any way.

Sounds good to me!

 

[Panthadad2]

The NIL/Portal phenomenon is a very confused, inefficient, emerging marketplace. But, it is clear that most schools, such as the Gophs, have little NIL money to play with, and that they must devote the majority of NIL money to retaining their own key roster players rather than going on shopping sprees. So, I believe that the opening bid "asking prices" for all but the most elite players will over time normalize to amounts that non-helmet schools can afford and justify. The market must and will become more efficient and rational over time. There just isn't enough money in the system for every decent player to command a million dollars to play. Remember, the helmet schools already have near full rosters of 4 and 5 star HS recruits, and have to live with an 85 player scholarship cap. These schools can't and won't be buying in quantity; they will buy a few of the most elite players each year (and might get some others who are willing to transfer for the opportunity without big NIL pay).

The truly elite and battle-seasoned players, especially those who (as someone pointed out) now want to maximize their time--and earnings--in college rather than declare early for the NFL draft, will see huge paydays. But the obscene paydays simply won't be there for the vast majority or transferees; the money just isn't there. With the volume of decent players now entering the portal, "prices" for all but the cream of the crop must eventually "normalize" to what the marketplace can afford.

Somewhat perversely, as it becomes clear that certain top programs are investing heavily in transfer portal free agents as their starters (to the disadvantage of HS recruits in development), it might become a bit easier for schools such as the U to get higher quality HS recruits--who are essentially getting squeezed out a bit in the helmet school market by top players over-staying their normal tenure, and developed players trying to transfer in to those programs as one or two year rentals.

This is a very disruptive and unconstrained market at the moment. Maybe it will get tamed by legislation or NCAA initiatives. But if not tamed by regulation, it will eventually find an equilibrium in which teams like the Gophers will have a place, a very decent place. We just have to live through a few mystifying years until things get sorted out.

Good post! This situation could be an interesting micro economics case study.

 

[MplsGopher]

The only way limits could legally be placed on the ability to sell the rights to your own Name, Image, and Likeness is if the players agreed to be apart of a players union and the union agreed to a deal that the players voted to accept which included such limitations.

I doubt even the NFL has that, though. But maybe

 

[BronkosGhost]

Grandpa has a point. if certain schools are loading up on transfers, other schools can use that to recruit against them with HS players - "if you go to Helmet U, they're just going to bring in transfers that will bump you down the depth chart. You're better off going to our school where we recruit the majority of our players from HS."

Then Helmet U pulls out a bag of cash and the recruitment ends with a commitment. The portal is just part of the problem. College football has become unregulated free agency with no salary cap. When top talent has a successful year at one school and then hits the portal its obvious what for, money.

 

[Catechol]

The only way limits could legally be placed on the ability to sell the rights to your own Name, Image, and Likeness is if the players agreed to be apart of a players union and the union agreed to a deal that the players voted to accept which included such limitations.

I doubt even the NFL has that, though. But maybe

Unionization would be one way to regulate this. It would make things more equitable, it could allow for paying all players some stipend, and then place some regulations around NIL, profit sharing of NIL, standards for compensation for sponsorships etc.

It would also help protect the kids, who could hardly have any idea of what they’re signing up for, what kind of guarantees and stipulations are there, and avoiding exploitation. Like that kid who signed an NIL contract which was more like a huge payday loan.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

Unionization would be one way to regulate this. It would make things more equitable, it could allow for paying all players some stipend, and then place some regulations around NIL, profit sharing of NIL, standards for compensation for sponsorships etc.

It would also help protect the kids, who could hardly have any idea of what they’re signing up for, what kind of guarantees and stipulations are there, and avoiding exploitation. Like that kid who signed an NIL contract which was more like a huge payday loan.

Wow, what happened?

 

[Gophergrandpa]

The only way limits could legally be placed on the ability to sell the rights to your own Name, Image, and Likeness is if the players agreed to be apart of a players union and the union agreed to a deal that the players voted to accept which included such limitations.

I doubt even the NFL has that, though. But maybe

There could also be federal legislation if major football were viewed as an industry that required rational regulation to prevent weird excess and abuses and predation. Pretty unlikely that Congress would engage on this issue (as it isn't an element of our partisan culture wars), but federal legislation, properly drawn, could settle things down industry-wide and establish uniform playing rules and disclosure rules as well.

 

[Sparlimb]

1. Actual NIL money paid isn’t reliably reported anywhere. It’s all hearsay.
2. There is all sorts of incentives for people to lie about how much NIL money is out there.

All true. And "the market" for NIL will evolve. Money isn't unlimited and boosters aren't going to pay a million dollars a year for a 4 loss team. The money will dry up over time. That's my prediction.

 

[NotAFanOfBecky]

I keep hearing about all these big dollar amounts. Does anyone know if it’s really true? Like Goldember said, it’s all hearsay. Are the coaches just trying to pad their NIL or is it really this bad? I don’t know what’s true and what isn’t. I do know that I have spoken to a couple of well connected boosters and they both said that things are not as dire as portrayed on this board. That the Gophers are middle of the pack in NIL and that’s why they were able to get a coveted transfer QB and keep many of their best coming back here. I’m still somewhat skeptical but there seems to be some merit to what they said. Are they Michigan, Oregon or OSU, no definitely not. But they are probably in the top 30 teams in the country by those metrics.

 

[MplsGopher]

There could also be federal legislation if major football were viewed as an industry that required rational regulation to prevent weird excess and abuses and predation. Pretty unlikely that Congress would engage on this issue (as it isn't an element of our partisan culture wars), but federal legislation, properly drawn, could settle things down industry-wide and establish uniform playing rules and disclosure rules as well.

I think any such law would be thrown out by our current SCOTUS on the grounds of antitrust laws.

I can't see why college (football, men's basketball) varsity athletes somehow should not possess the right to sell their own Name, Image, and Likeness, when everyone else does ...

 

[Pompous Elitist]

I think any such law would be thrown out by our current SCOTUS on the grounds of antitrust laws.

I can't see why college (football, men's basketball) varsity athletes somehow should not possess the right to sell their own Name, Image, and Likeness, when everyone else does ...

The players willingly sign away their broadcast tv NIL rights rights. Barring congressional or court intervention the only way to stop that would be a widespread labor revolt which is like herding cats.

 

[MplsGopher]

The players willingly sign away their broadcast tv NIL rights rights. Barring congressional or court intervention the only way to stop that would be a widespread labor revolt which is like herding cats.

Citation please. Where do they sign that, what document, and what does this even mean?

What are “broadcast TV NIL rights”? Who has ever sold such claimed rights?


Not disagreeing. Wanting to learn

 

[Pompous Elitist]

Citation please. Where do they sign that, what document, and what does this even mean?

What are “broadcast TV NIL rights”? Who has ever sold such claimed rights?


Not disagreeing. Wanting to learn

Whether Division I student-athletes hold any ownership rights in their athletic performances does not depend on the scope of broadcasters’ First Amendment rights but, rather, on whether the student-athletes themselves validly transferred their rights of publicity to another party.”
– U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken, Pre-Trial Ruling
In Marshall v. ESPN, NCAA student-athletes are testing just how much clout Judge Wilkin’s words have. The suit, which is primarily a right of publicity claim aimed at television networks, rests on the premise that current contracts between Division I athletes and the NCAA are unconscionable.

Given the terms and the “sign or sit out” option given by the agreement, it’s possible that the court may side with the plaintiffs on the contract issue. But the convoluted nature of the dispute renders it hard to determine why this suit is different than Keller and O’Bannon, both of which also addressed student-athlete likeness rights. In sum, the type of violation alleged here is different than that addressed in previous suits because it is not dependent on the antitrust determination. Rather, it builds off of the O’Bannon holding that the NCAA may not bar student-athlete revenue, and demands relief from the major networks for profiting off athlete names, images, and likenesses—a right that the broadcasters claim does not belong to the athletes.

Prior to O’Bannon, it was somewhat assumed that the right of publicity for sports broadcasts did not belong to the athletes but rather to the producers, and the NCAA barred the receipt of compensation for the use of player likeness for athletic promotion, rendering the issue moot. However, Judge Wilkin’s comment in O’Bannon challenges this notion and has created a new legal battle with consequences that may stretch beyond NCAA major sports coverage.

Publicity Rights in Major College Sports Telecasts: To Whom Do They Belong? - NYU Journal of Intellectual Property & Entertainment Law

“Whether Division I student-athletes hold any ownership rights in their athletic performances does not depend on the scope of broadcasters’ First Amendment rights but, rather, on whether the student-athletes themselves validly transferred their rights of publicity to another party.” – U.S...

jipel.law.nyu.edu

 

[Pompous Elitist]

Curiously, the oft-quoted NCAA waiver form has been washed from the goooogle machine.

Surely someone or some thing with more time on their hands can dig up a copy.

 

[disco]

I think any such law would be thrown out by our current SCOTUS on the grounds of antitrust laws.

I can't see why college (football, men's basketball) varsity athletes somehow should not possess the right to sell their own Name, Image, and Likeness, when everyone else does ...

Other than voluntarily signing away said rights, the only instance I can think of where those rights would be taken away would be in criminal sentencing where someone isn't allowed to profit from their fame related to a crime they committed.