Since we’re already past the point of pay for play, with the NCAA basically saying they won’t be pursuing NIL-related cases, why not get more creative with how we structure NIL contracts through the collective? Why not offer NIL deals that require and reward demonstrated commitment to a school? Stipulate that a player must stay at the school for at least two years to begin making real NIL bucks, regardless of performance. And then incentivize performance, as well. To my understanding, the major problem with offering big-time NIL money upfront to unproven players is the risk of upsetting team dynamics, especially among returning players who have been there and demonstrated that commitment to the school. So, start offering players the same big NIL deals as other schools, but structured in a way that lends toward longer-term player buy-in and commitment to the team rather than short-term gratification.
www.dailydot.com
