Send the money to the AD and state it has to be used for those sports. Legally they have to follow your restriction.
Average Joe Cyclone Fan contribute to NIL
- Thread starter CyclonePower44
- Start date
Send the money to the AD and state it has to be used for those sports. Legally they have to follow your restriction.
You have a cheap wife if she only costs you 20% of your income.I get plenty of ROI on the 20% she gets
Correct. If you don't live in a city with an alumni base I doubt you get much value from it.
Can’t fathom contributing to NIL to pay a star player who then can go a pro within a year in some cases, then make millions.
She makes good money in her job. The only reason I even work is to support my racing.
And that’s fine. Personal choice. My assumption is that you are likewise going to reduce expectations accordingly regarding our mbb and fb teams moving forward.
We’re ******* Iowa St. dude. Give it a rest. The people you want to talk to run this site and others like it and work for newspapers and radio stations. Go tell them about it.
I understand the Collective idea… But a lot more information will need to be released for me or anyone I know to donate to it.
Our biggest questions are who will be making the final decisions and how those decisions will be made.
We can see issues if our group gives an amount and we don’t like where the money went/decisions made - we are likely not to give again.
Our biggest questions are who will be making the final decisions and how those decisions will be made.
We can see issues if our group gives an amount and we don’t like where the money went/decisions made - we are likely not to give again.
Didn’t Texas A&M have a program where they tried to get every living alumni to donate $100? There’s no reason that Iowa State can’t do something similar for athletics. I’d even consider donating and I’m a college student
I would donate that to the University. I’m not going to donate that to an “NIL Collective”
We always travel in masses to every bowl game, tourney game and especially kansas city. This is probably a big contributing factor why our donation levels are so low. People spend their disposable income on taking entire families to support our teams on these trips.
The one issue I have with "donating" to an NIL fund is there are no guarantees these kids are going to honor their commitments and just up and leave us high and dry after a year to chase a better deal. If they were here for the long haul I'd probably feel differently about it. At least with coaches if they leave they usually have a buyout tied to their contract where the university is able to recoup some money but we could essentially pay a kid a bunch of money for 1 year then see him bolt for a bigger deal and at least for me I would feel like that was wasted money.
The NIL has created more loopholes and negatives than it has positives IMO. Needed some caps or restrictions placed on it from the start but the cat is out of the bag now and probably only going to get worse going forward. Some of these kids are going to make 6 or 7 digits with the NIL which at that point I question why we even have to pay them a scholarship too.
I dunno, maybe this Hunter thing has me bitter since it's still fresh but I'm not interested in putting my hard earned money into an NIL fund. Already get enough nut kicks as a Cyclone fan as it is, don't need to willingly have my bank account suffer the pain too. I'd rather donate to a general scholarship fund where the kids receiving the benefits are going to appreciate it more. I'm sure some will find this view as "not being a team player" but if these kids can just transfer out without any consequences then I don't feel they are being a team player with their involvement in this aspect as well.
The NIL has created more loopholes and negatives than it has positives IMO. Needed some caps or restrictions placed on it from the start but the cat is out of the bag now and probably only going to get worse going forward. Some of these kids are going to make 6 or 7 digits with the NIL which at that point I question why we even have to pay them a scholarship too.
I dunno, maybe this Hunter thing has me bitter since it's still fresh but I'm not interested in putting my hard earned money into an NIL fund. Already get enough nut kicks as a Cyclone fan as it is, don't need to willingly have my bank account suffer the pain too. I'd rather donate to a general scholarship fund where the kids receiving the benefits are going to appreciate it more. I'm sure some will find this view as "not being a team player" but if these kids can just transfer out without any consequences then I don't feel they are being a team player with their involvement in this aspect as well.
SIAP but here is an article from the Athletic today on what the going rate is for particular positions in football:
In early March, The Athletic reported that a five-star 2023 recruit signed an $8 million NIL deal with a school’s donor collective. While that remains by far the highest known deal to date, other top recruits are reaping the benefits of a rapidly soaring arms race.
The Athletic reviewed three recruits’ recently signed NIL contracts, each with a different school-specific collective. The Athletic agreed to preserve the anonymity of all parties in order to get a better sense of the current market rates for top recruits. A four-star receiver landed a deal that will pay him more than $1 million over the next four years in exchange for his exclusive NIL rights. A defensive lineman ranked among the top 10 at his position received a three-year deal worth $1 million. And a three-star defensive lineman signed for $500,000 over four years. The latter two are non-exclusive.
“(NIL) creates a situation where you can basically buy players,” Alabama coach Nick Saban recently told the Associated Press. “You can do it in recruiting. I mean, if that’s what we want college football to be, I don’t know.”
Corey Staniscia, who helped author the state of Florida’s NIL law last year and now works for Dreamfield Sports, agreed. “You have adults with a lot of money who just want to win championships and buy athletes,” he said.
All of the deals The Athletic reviewed stipulate that they are not an inducement to attend a specific school, but it’s no secret which collectives support which college teams. And given the Supreme Court’s 9-0 decision in last year’s NCAA vs. Alston antitrust case, experts consider the NCAA unlikely to take aggressive action limiting athletes’ compensation.
“This is the hierarchy,” said attorney Mike Caspino, who has represented dozens of recruits in their dealings with collectives and executed the contracts The Athletic reviewed. “Five-star quarterbacks: They’re getting $2 million a year. The next-most sought after players are D-linemen, edge rushers; they’re getting seven figures. The next is a stud offensive lineman with quick feet — they’re in the high six figures. Everyone else is a hodgepodge, but in the six-figure range.”
Many coaches and administrators are experiencing sticker shock over an above-table market that sprouted up seemingly overnight and is now having a profound effect on where certain recruits are committing. Others have resigned themselves to NIL bidding wars becoming the new normal.
“I think it’s not going to be long until every signee at a Power 5 school is on some form of NIL — and that may be this coming year,” said Ole Miss head coach Lane Kiffin.
Many states’ NIL laws adopted last summer prohibit schools from directly brokering deals. That opened the door for third-party collectives — organizations that pool fan and booster donations in order to compensate a specific school’s athletes. Boosters at a small handful of programs — Texas A&M, Texas, Tennessee, Oregon and Miami chief among them — mobilized the quickest when the NCAA allowed NIL compensation for the first time last July. But they are far outnumbered by exasperated coaches and administrators who fear their programs getting left behind. Many have lost recruits simply because another school’s collective offered an NIL package it couldn’t match.
“We lost a kid (on signing day) over that. That hurt,” a Power 5 head coach told The Athletic. “Two hours before, the mom is telling me he’s coming here. And then she said, ‘Coach, how can we turn down $300,000?’ You can’t. Take it, I get it.”
In recent weeks, new collectives have been announced everywhere from Ohio State and Penn State to Kansas State and FIU.
“It’s a conversation that is absolutely being had, collective by collective, across the country right now. Do we need to go in this direction to compete?” said sports attorney Darren Heitner, who advises Florida’s Gator Collective. “A benchmark has been set, and if you’re a talented player, and if you’re willing to take the risk, then you probably think you’re worth that much or more.”
On April 8, offensive lineman Josh Conerly Jr., from Seattle, the last remaining unsigned five-star in the class of 2022, spurned presumed favorite USC, which does not have a collective, in favor of Oregon, which does. It’s called Division Street, and Ducks mega-booster Phil Knight is heavily involved.
“(Recruiting) doesn’t even resemble what we used to do before NIL,” USC coach Lincoln Riley told reporters the day after losing Conerly. “In every sense of the word, it’s different. The reality is, it’s made what’s gone on at certain places for a long time … it’s going to put it out in the open. So maybe (there are) some positives there.”
Elsewhere, Ohio State has long been considered the favorite for five-star 2023 receiver Carnell Tate from IMG Academy in Florida, but two weekends ago he visited Tennessee, and late last week, On3 revised its prediction for Tate to Tennessee. The co-president of Spyre Sports, a for-profit collective associated with Tennessee, told The Athletic in February, “We’re prepared to invest a substantial amount of resources into the 2023 recruiting class.” A co-founder of The Foundation, Ohio State’s recently announced non-profit NIL fund, recently said on a Bucknuts podcast, “We can’t make an official deal with a recruit.”
But not everybody’s jumping on board the collective movement. Many prominent football schools have explicitly warned their donors against getting involved in recruiting — which is still technically against the rules. USC does not have a collective. A Notre Dame version launched Monday but is being marketed as a charity endeavor. The co-founder of a Michigan NIL partner said of paying recruits: “Michigan’s not doing that.”
“I think there are some places that have weaponized NIL and are using it in recruiting,” said UCLA coach Chip Kelly. “That’s not going to happen here, so we don’t even discuss it.
Heitner fears some of the more brazen deals being made for recruits may lead to future repercussions for the players. “The athlete is the one with the risk,” he said. “Don’t put it past the NCAA to render an athlete ineligible after the fact.”
Caspino, the attorney that helped author dozens of these recruit-collective contracts, disagrees that they violate NCAA rules.
“What blows everybody away by my contracts is there is no mention of the school and there is no commitment that he has to go there and play football,” he said. “I welcome the NCAA looking at my contracts.”
Beyond the legality, there’s also the question of whether throwing seven-figure deals at unproven high school players or inexperienced portal transfers is a sensible investment. Saban called it an “unsustainable model.” Riley predicted an eventual “market correction.”
“You’re really guessing that this 18-year-old guy who has proven zero is worth a million dollars from somebody, somehow, however that money is getting there,” said the Power 5 head coach. “Like … what the **** are we talking about? Why even want to be associated with this? We’re ruining kids.”
The 2023 class could turn out to be a fascinating case study. Will the players who cashed in be less likely to transfer because they risk blowing up their deal — or perhaps more likely because they picked a school solely for financial reasons? If a lot of the top recruits become busts, will donors be less likely to pitch in going forward? Or will 2024 kids get even richer as more schools’ collectives become better funded?
“A lot of people tell me hey, don’t worry, this isn’t here to stay, these numbers you’re seeing out there, people can’t keep that up. I disagree,” said Kiffin. “(Schools) always find a way to keep up. They find money.”
In early March, The Athletic reported that a five-star 2023 recruit signed an $8 million NIL deal with a school’s donor collective. While that remains by far the highest known deal to date, other top recruits are reaping the benefits of a rapidly soaring arms race.
The Athletic reviewed three recruits’ recently signed NIL contracts, each with a different school-specific collective. The Athletic agreed to preserve the anonymity of all parties in order to get a better sense of the current market rates for top recruits. A four-star receiver landed a deal that will pay him more than $1 million over the next four years in exchange for his exclusive NIL rights. A defensive lineman ranked among the top 10 at his position received a three-year deal worth $1 million. And a three-star defensive lineman signed for $500,000 over four years. The latter two are non-exclusive.
“(NIL) creates a situation where you can basically buy players,” Alabama coach Nick Saban recently told the Associated Press. “You can do it in recruiting. I mean, if that’s what we want college football to be, I don’t know.”
Corey Staniscia, who helped author the state of Florida’s NIL law last year and now works for Dreamfield Sports, agreed. “You have adults with a lot of money who just want to win championships and buy athletes,” he said.
All of the deals The Athletic reviewed stipulate that they are not an inducement to attend a specific school, but it’s no secret which collectives support which college teams. And given the Supreme Court’s 9-0 decision in last year’s NCAA vs. Alston antitrust case, experts consider the NCAA unlikely to take aggressive action limiting athletes’ compensation.
“This is the hierarchy,” said attorney Mike Caspino, who has represented dozens of recruits in their dealings with collectives and executed the contracts The Athletic reviewed. “Five-star quarterbacks: They’re getting $2 million a year. The next-most sought after players are D-linemen, edge rushers; they’re getting seven figures. The next is a stud offensive lineman with quick feet — they’re in the high six figures. Everyone else is a hodgepodge, but in the six-figure range.”
Many coaches and administrators are experiencing sticker shock over an above-table market that sprouted up seemingly overnight and is now having a profound effect on where certain recruits are committing. Others have resigned themselves to NIL bidding wars becoming the new normal.
“I think it’s not going to be long until every signee at a Power 5 school is on some form of NIL — and that may be this coming year,” said Ole Miss head coach Lane Kiffin.
Many states’ NIL laws adopted last summer prohibit schools from directly brokering deals. That opened the door for third-party collectives — organizations that pool fan and booster donations in order to compensate a specific school’s athletes. Boosters at a small handful of programs — Texas A&M, Texas, Tennessee, Oregon and Miami chief among them — mobilized the quickest when the NCAA allowed NIL compensation for the first time last July. But they are far outnumbered by exasperated coaches and administrators who fear their programs getting left behind. Many have lost recruits simply because another school’s collective offered an NIL package it couldn’t match.
“We lost a kid (on signing day) over that. That hurt,” a Power 5 head coach told The Athletic. “Two hours before, the mom is telling me he’s coming here. And then she said, ‘Coach, how can we turn down $300,000?’ You can’t. Take it, I get it.”
In recent weeks, new collectives have been announced everywhere from Ohio State and Penn State to Kansas State and FIU.
“It’s a conversation that is absolutely being had, collective by collective, across the country right now. Do we need to go in this direction to compete?” said sports attorney Darren Heitner, who advises Florida’s Gator Collective. “A benchmark has been set, and if you’re a talented player, and if you’re willing to take the risk, then you probably think you’re worth that much or more.”
On April 8, offensive lineman Josh Conerly Jr., from Seattle, the last remaining unsigned five-star in the class of 2022, spurned presumed favorite USC, which does not have a collective, in favor of Oregon, which does. It’s called Division Street, and Ducks mega-booster Phil Knight is heavily involved.
“(Recruiting) doesn’t even resemble what we used to do before NIL,” USC coach Lincoln Riley told reporters the day after losing Conerly. “In every sense of the word, it’s different. The reality is, it’s made what’s gone on at certain places for a long time … it’s going to put it out in the open. So maybe (there are) some positives there.”
Elsewhere, Ohio State has long been considered the favorite for five-star 2023 receiver Carnell Tate from IMG Academy in Florida, but two weekends ago he visited Tennessee, and late last week, On3 revised its prediction for Tate to Tennessee. The co-president of Spyre Sports, a for-profit collective associated with Tennessee, told The Athletic in February, “We’re prepared to invest a substantial amount of resources into the 2023 recruiting class.” A co-founder of The Foundation, Ohio State’s recently announced non-profit NIL fund, recently said on a Bucknuts podcast, “We can’t make an official deal with a recruit.”
But not everybody’s jumping on board the collective movement. Many prominent football schools have explicitly warned their donors against getting involved in recruiting — which is still technically against the rules. USC does not have a collective. A Notre Dame version launched Monday but is being marketed as a charity endeavor. The co-founder of a Michigan NIL partner said of paying recruits: “Michigan’s not doing that.”
“I think there are some places that have weaponized NIL and are using it in recruiting,” said UCLA coach Chip Kelly. “That’s not going to happen here, so we don’t even discuss it.
Heitner fears some of the more brazen deals being made for recruits may lead to future repercussions for the players. “The athlete is the one with the risk,” he said. “Don’t put it past the NCAA to render an athlete ineligible after the fact.”
Caspino, the attorney that helped author dozens of these recruit-collective contracts, disagrees that they violate NCAA rules.
“What blows everybody away by my contracts is there is no mention of the school and there is no commitment that he has to go there and play football,” he said. “I welcome the NCAA looking at my contracts.”
Beyond the legality, there’s also the question of whether throwing seven-figure deals at unproven high school players or inexperienced portal transfers is a sensible investment. Saban called it an “unsustainable model.” Riley predicted an eventual “market correction.”
“You’re really guessing that this 18-year-old guy who has proven zero is worth a million dollars from somebody, somehow, however that money is getting there,” said the Power 5 head coach. “Like … what the **** are we talking about? Why even want to be associated with this? We’re ruining kids.”
The 2023 class could turn out to be a fascinating case study. Will the players who cashed in be less likely to transfer because they risk blowing up their deal — or perhaps more likely because they picked a school solely for financial reasons? If a lot of the top recruits become busts, will donors be less likely to pitch in going forward? Or will 2024 kids get even richer as more schools’ collectives become better funded?
“A lot of people tell me hey, don’t worry, this isn’t here to stay, these numbers you’re seeing out there, people can’t keep that up. I disagree,” said Kiffin. “(Schools) always find a way to keep up. They find money.”
This is the way:
Collective buys HUGE farm, obtains sponsorships from John Deere, etc., grows pot, sells to dispensaries everywhere. Cha-Ching. We buy Alabama football and Duke basketball players now.
In my mind, it's Iowa State, Jamie Pollard. Everyone else fall into line. Too (expletive) bad.
Collective buys HUGE farm, obtains sponsorships from John Deere, etc., grows pot, sells to dispensaries everywhere. Cha-Ching. We buy Alabama football and Duke basketball players now.
In my mind, it's Iowa State, Jamie Pollard. Everyone else fall into line. Too (expletive) bad.
I like to challenge myself to determine the story behind the data. Why for example is our alumni so large compared to our donation base? Playing devils advocate here, ISU wasn't a "power house" of alumni growth until around the 2000 era. It was around this time that the number of students at ISU really started to explode. ISU I believe took over the spot at largest university (undergrad) in Iowa around this period too I believe. I was one of those kids.
IF this is why we have such a large alumni base then that means a significant portion of our base is under the age of 45. It is a younger and newer base then maybe some of our more established peers. This also means that if they were anything like me, they spent a good 20 years trying to pay off student loans, buying their long term homes, building families, etc. Things that cost a lot of money. Once people hit their 50's kids are ideally off the payroll, they are established in life, and that discretionary cash flow looks a bit better.
My HOPE is that as our alumni base continues to age and we all become more established in our careers that we see donations start to tick up. I will tell you from my personal situation that no matter how bad I wanted to donate, I couldn't afford it until recently. I didn't make my first cyclone club donation until last year when I felt like I needed to in order to retain top coaching talent. I for one would also be interested in contributing to the NIL fund. I don't love the idea of it, but ISU performance on the field/court has been something that has brought me a ton of joy (and stress) through my entire adult life. I'd like to think that I'm doing what I can to help continue that trend.
Everyone obviously needs to do whatever works for them and their situation. Nothing else. Maybe it's confirmation bias. Maybe I'm just too optimistic. But I really do think that as this boom in alumni starts to mature in life and find themselves in better financial standing that we'll see better support from a financial side of things.
It’s because our AD never cultivated donations. We also are mostly bachelor degrees. Med and law schools create larger donors, we have neither. Ag is capital intensive so cash isn’t as plentiful as oil type states.
I’m aware we are Iowa State. Donated since 2001 when I was 24 years old. The panhandler analogy was a really great one. I l love the super cool guy act that I’m not going to donate $.17 a day because I have to buy alcohol and I’m not getting a return out of it. I’m guessing you take from the penny bowl at the local store as well.
I already donate more than $.17 a day to things that I feel are important. This is not important. These players and their handlers and the AD and the hype lords in the media can **** right off. I’m not paying people directly to play basketball at Iowa State. I’ll take whatever leftovers we can scrounge together and cheer them on. If we end up not having a team, great, whatever. I’ll move on.
