Marquette NIL Strategy

[MarquetteVol]

I saw a posting recently that Archie Manning, the back up quarterback at the University of Texas, is making three times the amount of salary as Brock Purdy, the starting quarterback of the San Francisco 49ers. This is due to NIL deals.

I wonder and honestly don’t fully understand, if it’s possible for the Marquette NIL program to focus on heavily funding, juniors and seniors who might be on the verge of going into the draft or other professional leagues? For example, if Tyler could come back to Marquette next year knowing there is a $3 million payday do we have a greater chance of retaining him  and our other core upperclassman? 

You’ll never get a top 5-10 lottery pick to stay in school in extra year, but I believe that Shaka’s system is going to produce a number of guys that may be pros after their third or fourth year. Is this a way to equitably ensure we have more continuity with the older guys?

[BCHoopster]

Not sure MU has a Ted Kellner in there back pocket, but a fringe player makes around 450K on a two contract, so you offer more then that they may stay, heard Kolek makes more then that

[CountryRoads]

I don’t think we’ll see a day where NIL money is keeping potential first round picks in college for another year. Though I think it could make a difference in retaining fringe players like Justin Lewis and Vander Blue for another year. I think it’s too early to tell where Kolek falls on that spectrum.

[Goose]

BC

Kolek is making more than $450k?

As for giving guys crazy big pay to come back for another year, I would think $3m could used in a far better manner than that. I love seeing anyone have a big score but that might be excessive, even in my book.

[avid1010]

If Kolek is getting $450k+ MU is in great shape moving forward.  I haven't heard a number remotely close to that.

[4everwarriors]

Ah, my source sez both #11 and #1 are gettin' $300k, hey?

[MarquetteVol]

Agree that it's a strategy for the fringe players who are likely second round picks in the best case scenario. Even $500k would make it awfully hard to roll the dice if you're Tyler or Kam thinking about making the leap at the end of the year. It'll be interesting in the broader landscape if NIL results in more players using 3-4 years of eligibility especially at the power conference programs with deep pockets.

[BobWildLoyalist]

Are Kolek and Kam seriously getting $300k? What about Oso?

[tower912]

Google Tyler Kolek NIL.   Scroll

[muwarrior69]

According to this Ty has earned over 700K.

https://www.sportskeeda.com/college-basketball/tyler-kolek-nil-deal-worth

[rgoode57]

The article does not say Tyler earned $770K; it says his marketing valuation is $770,000. And, the article specifically says that his actual income is unknown.

[Goose]

It is very to know what these guys are getting paid, there is NIL fund and then extra endorsements. I am pretty confident that no MU player is getting paid $450k by the MU fund, but have no idea how much the side hustles are bringing in. I cannot imagine being big money, but that is just my hunch.

If I had to make an educated guess, Oso and TK are the highest paid and would not surprise me if they are both getting the same amount. Kam is likely third on the list and the remaining guys well behind the top three. 

[brewcity77]

I saw a posting recently that Archie Manning, the back up quarterback at the University of Texas, is making three times the amount of salary as Brock Purdy, the starting quarterback of the San Francisco 49ers. This is due to NIL deals.

I would be wildly skeptical of these claims. Unless maybe Arch's dad is still giving him a big allowance.

[MarquetteVol]

https://talksport.com/sport/nfl/1686404/arch-manning-nil-deal-brock-purdy/

Manning, nephew of Peyton and Eli, grandson of Archie and son of Cooper Manning, will reportedly earn $3.2 million in NIL money this season as the backup quarterback for the Texas Longhorns.

Purdy, meanwhile, will be paid $870,000 for the 2023 season - over three times less than what Manning will make.

It's a whole new world out there with NIL.

[Dr. Blackheart]

The article does not say Tyler earned $770K; it says his marketing valuation is $770,000. And, the article specifically says that his actual income is unknown.

And it's bot generated

[brewcity77]

https://talksport.com/sport/nfl/1686404/arch-manning-nil-deal-brock-purdy/
It's a whole new world out there with NIL.

I'm sticking with this statement:

I would be wildly skeptical of these claims. Unless maybe Arch's dad is still giving him a big allowance.

"will reportedly earn" $3.2 million doesn't mean he has earned that or will earn that. More often than not, it means there's a potential in the contracts of that amount being earned, but those numbers are often unreliable.

[BobWildLoyalist]

I remember a Ben Steele article over the summer quoting Tyler getting around $5k for his first TKO Miller ad. I dont know how much who's on third is paying to promote a burger but it appears there is a large delta between the side hustle/ads and the NIL fund.

[swoopem]

I remember a Ben Steele article over the summer quoting Tyler getting around $5k for his first TKO Miller ad. I dont know how much who's on third is paying to promote a burger but it appears there is a large delta between the side hustle/ads and the NIL fund.

Free bar tabs at who’s on third can go a long way

[BobWildLoyalist]

Free bar tabs at who’s on third can go a long way

Depends on how good of a beer drinker you are.

[We R Final Four]

Coming from a reliable source deep within UW……Creighton offered Chucky Hepburn $600K this offseason. The numbers are higher than one might think…..especially the older guys on here.

[GoldenEagles03]

Coming from a reliable source deep within UW……Creighton offered Chucky Hepburn $600K this offseason. The numbers are higher than one might think…..especially the older guys on here.

If true, I'm sure they'll have that same offer again after this season. They'll need a PG next year too.

[MU82]

$600K? That's nearly twice as much as Marquette paid me to stick around for my 7th year!

[marqfan22]

That was the market valuation of Arch. He has only done a trading card signing for about 100-200k

I saw a posting recently that Archie Manning, the back up quarterback at the University of Texas, is making three times the amount of salary as Brock Purdy, the starting quarterback of the San Francisco 49ers. This is due to NIL deals.

I wonder and honestly don’t fully understand, if it’s possible for the Marquette NIL program to focus on heavily funding, juniors and seniors who might be on the verge of going into the draft or other professional leagues? For example, if Tyler could come back to Marquette next year knowing there is a $3 million payday do we have a greater chance of retaining him  and our other core upperclassman? 

You’ll never get a top 5-10 lottery pick to stay in school in extra year, but I believe that Shaka’s system is going to produce a number of guys that may be pros after their third or fourth year. Is this a way to equitably ensure we have more continuity with the older guys?

[cheebs09]

I'm sure they said Chucky had the opportunity to make 600K. Just like I have the opportunity to win the lottery.

Wasn't it Dawson Garcia that was looking at $1M in NIL? I'd be curious to see how much he actually got. I wouldn't be surprised if he barely cleared 6 figures.

[We R Final Four]

I'm sure they said Chucky had the opportunity to make 600K. Just like I have the opportunity to win the lottery.

Wasn't it Dawson Garcia that was looking at $1M in NIL? I'd be curious to see how much he actually got. I wouldn't be surprised if he barely cleared 6 figures.

It makes zero difference to me if you choose to believe it. I dont know how you are “sure” of anything on this topic.

[MarquetteVol]

My initial point was more that NIL is often viewed as a recruitment tool. I like MU thinking about it also as a key retention tool.

[rocket surgeon]

here's another example of the NIL in action(from a very good source)

  vj edgecombe- 5* recruit out of long island lutheran heavily recruited narrowed down his final 3 to
                               duke, kentucky & baylor
                         duke offered $1.3 mil
                         kentucky offered $1 mil
                         baylor initially offered #300k then upped it to $800k

   on sunday, vj chose baylor bears

[brewcity77]

Coming from a reliable source deep within UW……Creighton offered Chucky Hepburn $600K this offseason. The numbers are higher than one might think…..especially the older guys on here.

"Creighton offered Chucky Hepburn $600k" is miles away from "Chucky Hepburn made $600k."

I wouldn't dispute that schools are putting crazy inflated numbers in front of players, but the vast majority of the time, those numbers are just that. Crazy, inflated, and ultimately inaccurate because the players won't make that much.

This is another reason the NCAA shouldn't have let NIL become the Wild West. There's no regulation, so there's nothing to stop a booster or collective from offering $1M then delivering 10¢ on the dollar.

[real chili 83]

Chucky is getting $600k from Westgate Barbers.

[Jay Bee]

My initial point was more that NIL is often viewed as a recruitment tool. I like MU thinking about it also as a key retention tool.

Viewed that way by fans who dream stuff up, sure

Schools can’t say they view it as a direct recruitment tool used by them

[muwarrior69]

And it's bot generated

I am old fart. How can you tell it was bot generated?

[Coleman]

"Creighton offered Chucky Hepburn $600k" is miles away from "Chucky Hepburn made $600k."

I wouldn't dispute that schools are putting crazy inflated numbers in front of players, but the vast majority of the time, those numbers are just that. Crazy, inflated, and ultimately inaccurate because the players won't make that much.

This is another reason the NCAA shouldn't have let NIL become the Wild West. There's no regulation, so there's nothing to stop a booster or collective from offering $1M then delivering 10¢ on the dollar.

Perhaps there's nothing written that stops that, but I think players will wise up pretty quickly if program X is not delivering on NIL promises. Once you lose your credibility, good luck recruiting going forward.

[We R Final Four]

"Creighton offered Chucky Hepburn $600k" is miles away from "Chucky Hepburn made $600k."

I wouldn't dispute that schools are putting crazy inflated numbers in front of players, but the vast majority of the time, those numbers are just that. Crazy, inflated, and ultimately inaccurate because the players won't make that much.

This is another reason the NCAA shouldn't have let NIL become the Wild West. There's no regulation, so there's nothing to stop a booster or collective from offering $1M then delivering 10¢ on the dollar.

Well, he is not at Creighton so he didn’t “make” anything from Creighton.

Or, a booster can offer $1M and pay $1M.

[Jay Bee]

Well, he is not at Creighton so he didn’t “make” anything from Creighton.

Or, a booster can offer $1M and pay $1M.

They can, but it’s a violation

[Dr. Blackheart]

They can, but it’s a violation

And Creighton has in the past

[Avenue Commons]

And Creighton has in the past

There's quietly a ton of money in Omaha with the insurance companies, gas/oil and Berkshire Hathaway.

[Dr. Blackheart]

There's quietly a ton of money in Omaha with the insurance companies, gas/oil and Berkshire Hathaway.

Add in tech (Offutt driven), farmers and banks. Omaha has the largest collection of millionaires per capita.

[StillAWarrior]

...so there's nothing to stop a booster or collective from offering $1M then delivering 10¢ on the dollar.

I suspect that the "market" would address that fairly quickly.

I'm not arguing that all the promises made by these collectives/boosters will be kept, but I do think that these kids will learn pretty quickly who delivers and who does not. They talk. A school would not benefit if its collective/boosters developed a reputation of not being able to deliver.

[TallTitan34]

"Creighton offered Chucky Hepburn $600k" is miles away from "Chucky Hepburn made $600k."

I wouldn't dispute that schools are putting crazy inflated numbers in front of players, but the vast majority of the time, those numbers are just that. Crazy, inflated, and ultimately inaccurate because the players won't make that much.

This is another reason the NCAA shouldn't have let NIL become the Wild West. There's no regulation, so there's nothing to stop a booster or collective from offering $1M then delivering 10¢ on the dollar.

You mean Dawson never made his $1M at UNC???

[marqfan22]

Just saw Jimmy Butler jerseys advertised through Marquette NIL store. Does he get a portion of the sales?

[wisblue]

They can, but it’s a violation

The kind of violation that the NCAA doesn't seem to care too much about.

[MU82]

Ben Steele article on Kolek's NIL deals:

https://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/college/marquette/2024/03/27/marquettes-all-american-tyler-kolek-has-nil-deal-with-crocs-kim-kardashians-skims-priority-sports/73103618007/?utm_source=jsonline-dailybriefing-strada&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=dailybriefing-greeting&utm_term=newsletter-greeting&utm_content=pmjs-milwaukee-nletter65

[avid1010]

"Creighton offered Chucky Hepburn $600k" is miles away from "Chucky Hepburn made $600k."

I wouldn't dispute that schools are putting crazy inflated numbers in front of players, but the vast majority of the time, those numbers are just that. Crazy, inflated, and ultimately inaccurate because the players won't make that much.

This is another reason the NCAA shouldn't have let NIL become the Wild West. There's no regulation, so there's nothing to stop a booster or collective from offering $1M then delivering 10¢ on the dollar.

Interesting article in the Journal Sentinel today with Bart Lundy referencing the big time schools paying more than any pro league minus the NBA and Euro.   

The %'s the NIL agents are taking is ridiculous, but it keeps funders from screwing over kids as you suggest.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

The kind of violation that the NCAA doesn't seem to care too much about.

They do, but its become unenforceable because the schools run to the courts. It's all just a shell game now, and that's fine I guess. No one is really getting harmed here.

Like Nebraska's new AD said, eventually the schools will be paying the players directly. It's inevitable.

This is another reason the NCAA shouldn't have let NIL become the Wild West. There's no regulation, so there's nothing to stop a booster or collective from offering $1M then delivering 10¢ on the dollar.

I would suggest the NCAA *didn't* like NIL become the wild west. It's the schools. The NCAA knows it realistically can't manage NIL, which is why they went to Congress. But that isn't going anywhere.

And yes there is something that would prevent a collective from offering and then not paying. A contract.   

[MUBurrow]

Interesting article in the Journal Sentinel today with Bart Lundy referencing the big time schools paying more than any pro league minus the NBA and Euro.   

This would make sense as to why G League Ignite shut down.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

NIL collectives are starting to be denied tax-exempt status by the IRS.

https://www.sportico.com/leagues/college-sports/2024/irs-letter-nil-collectives-tax-exempt-status-1234774152/

This doesn't mean that the collectives are illegal or anything like that, but individuals cannot get a tax deduction for making a "charitable gift" to the organization.

[forgetful]

NIL collectives are starting to be denied tax-exempt status by the IRS.

https://www.sportico.com/leagues/college-sports/2024/irs-letter-nil-collectives-tax-exempt-status-1234774152/

This doesn't mean that the collectives are illegal or anything like that, but individuals cannot get a tax deduction for making a "charitable gift" to the organization.

Universities will navigate around this.

You'll see new NIL collectives popping up, that have a different strategy. Likely, they will ensure that over 50% of their revenue goes to "charitable causes," likely a significant amount being earmarked for University initiatives, e.g. scholarships for disadvantaged students (a funding priority given changes in the US-News rankings), and research funding. The universities will essentially be diverting some funds that would go directly to them, through the collectives. The rest of the money will go to the athletes.

Illegal, yes, but not going to be enforced, just like the rest is not being enforced.

If the above is set up, you cannot block tax exempt status. I'm not sure, blocking the current iterations iterations from obtaining tax-exempt status is legal, and wouldn't be surprised to see lawsuits.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

My guess is that eventually the collectives will go away all together. They will be folded into the schools they sponsor and the schools will manage the process more directly. The NCAA is looking at legislation that will allow schools to be more hands-on with NIL (reflecting the reality that already exists) so there will eventually be no need for a third party here.

[DoctorV]

Sounds to me like it’s a collective crapshoot, aina?

[forgetful]

My guess is that eventually the collectives will go away all together. They will be folded into the schools they sponsor and the schools will manage the process more directly. The NCAA is looking at legislation that will allow schools to be more hands-on with NIL (reflecting the reality that already exists) so there will eventually be no need for a third party here.

You are most likely correct on this.

[brewcity77]

I would suggest the NCAA *didn't* like NIL become the wild west. It's the schools. The NCAA knows it realistically can't manage NIL, which is why they went to Congress. But that isn't going anywhere.

They slow rolled it to try to keep all the money to themselves. If you want to blame the member institutions that make up the NCAA, I'm not sure I see any real difference.

The writing on the wall for this was penned during the O'Bannon case. They knew for years this was coming and tried to keep it away. Had they come up with regulations, they could've controlled it for far longer, just like they did for decades with amateurism. But they did nothing, so here we are.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

They slow rolled it to try to keep all the money to themselves. If you want to blame the member institutions that make up the NCAA, I'm not sure I see any real difference.

The writing on the wall for this was penned during the O'Bannon case. They knew for years this was coming and tried to keep it away. Had they come up with regulations, they could've controlled it for far longer, just like they did for decades with amateurism. But they did nothing, so here we are.

My point is that as soon as the NCAA as an organization set the regulations, they were ignored by its members.  And when the enforcement staff has tried to enforce them, the members started to sue their own organization.  So it *is* the wild west. Everyone is getting paid, which is fine because obviously a scholarship wasn't enough compensation.  But essentially there are no longer regulations on any of this.

Agreed on your second paragraph, but now the only entity that can put the genie back in the bottle is Congress - and they don't seem all that interested.

[Lennys Tap]

Agreed on your second paragraph, but now the only entity that can put the genie back in the bottle is Congress - and they don't seem all that interested.

Congress is interested in two things - making speeches and maintaining an environment where they can stay forever and become multimillionaires.

Any “legislation” they want handled by the executive and judicial branch. So, other than a speech here and there, they are most definitely not interested.

[The Equalizer]

Only a few years ago the NIL advocates assured us that schools would never be directly involved, because making NIL conditional on attending a particular school was not only against NCAA rules but also against the law in many states. 

The quaint notion at the time was that NIL would consist of examples like Caitlin Clark independently negotiating directly with State Farm to earn a promotional fee.  What we got was an organized way that boosters funnel money to players to pay-for-play under the guise of charitable acts, and now whining that their payments aren't tax deductible.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Only a few years ago the NIL advocates assured us that schools would never be directly involved, because making NIL conditional on attending a particular school was not only against NCAA rules but also against the law in many states. 

The quaint notion at the time was that NIL would consist of examples like Caitlin Clark independently negotiating directly with State Farm to earn a promotional fee.  What we got was an organized way that boosters funnel money to players to pay-for-play under the guise of charitable acts, and now whining that their payments aren't tax deductible.

Who said this?  I've always been an NIL advocate, but I never once said that schools wouldn't be directly involved or that it would be a way to funnel booster money to the players.  It was obvious that was going to be the case.