Greg Olsen is arguably one of the best talents at FOX Sports and came with his “A game” once again. During an appearance on the “Never Settle Podcast,” the former NFL star had some very interesting thoughts on the current state of college football.
Specifically, how to fix NIL and the transfer portal. Olsen began by explaining how, “The toothpaste is outside of the tube right now and I don’t know how we put it back.” But from the conversation came an idea that many college football supporters could likely get behind.
The basic idea is simple. You can have NIL or you can have the transfer portal but you can’t have both. He didn’t mean college football picks one, rather the individual players must pick one. “The second you take a dollar, you’re at that school for four years whether you like it or not. Whether you ever play or not. If you want to be able to transfer, you can’t take the money.”
He would go on to explain a hypothetical. If a high school kid gets recruited and is offered $2 million per year to go to one school and can potentially save his family, then you have to do that. The trade-off for that payday is you’re there the entire time.
The way the system is constructed now is creating a free agency in a way that would not be tolerated in any pro sports league. Currently, a player signs with a program, makes a couple million, has a good or bad year, and jumps in the portal for another bidder. With no stipulation that prevents them from doing that every year.
There is no scenario in the NFL or other major sports league that would allow a guy on a multi-year contract to become a free agent every year, just to see if he could increase his earnings. A collective bargaining agreement would emphatically prevent that. Yet, how college football is currently governed, any player could become a free agent and renegotiate his situation for a better deal.
“It would be like if an NFL player every year could re-shop,” Olsen added. “If I have a bad year, I’m contractually obligated to the Carolina Panthers because I have a four-year deal. But the second I make the Pro Bowl, I can re-enter the market and shop my services to everybody else, people would say I’m crazy. So why can we do it in college?”
Marty Smith offered the idea of multi-year contracts for players that include buyout clauses. If a college football coach leaves one school to go to a better one, the school he’s leaving is compensated for losing that coach. If a player is under recruited and a program develops him, they can lose that player to the portal with nothing to show for it. If players had buyouts, it would likely diminish the frequency in which players are leaving. Not to mention, Power Five schools would pay a “Pass Go” fee to uproot a player from an FCS school.
The overwhelming consensus by most college football viewers was this is a great idea. The system is broken and connects back to one basic idea. Going from no money to NFL money was a bad idea. Paying players is a logical concept. It’s an idea that was started by UCLA’s Ed O’Bannon in the famed “O’Bannon vs NCAA” court case. The issue is not that college players are no longer amateurs. This issue was moving to pay players as if it was a bidding war situation.
Yes, players should earn money for their name, image and likeness. The days of a player getting suspended for wearing a suit to a funeral he didn’t buy was always ridiculous. Pay the players, but college players don’t need to make NFL money.
There should have been some regulations put in place that stipulated much lower monetary levels. That payment amount does not need to be as much as programs, donors, or athletic departments are willing to pay. College Football has weaponized the worst aspects of Capitalism. What we have now is essentially a bidding war for everyone.
Many coaches, including but not limited to Nick Saban and Deion Sanders have explained publicly that this system is untenable. Whether it’s a bidding war for a five-star or a role player, who has a solid year, leaving to make an amount of money that is not representative of their on-field contributions. Major programs cannot bank on any player staying, no matter their level of production. Olsen and Smith articulated a great selling point, creating an unregulated free agency where any player can re-shop themselves every year isn’t good for business.
The NIL/Transfer Portal bubble is headed towards bursting. Not today, not next year, but the current system will not survive. An interesting correlation is rookie slotting in the NFL. Once upon a time, the top pick of the NFL draft was expected to make 5-10% more than the guy that went No. 1 overall the year prior. Increasing salaries every year for some time. Eventually Sam Bradford’s rookie contract was worth more than perennial Pro Bowlers Tom Brady and Peyton Manning. The league had to put an end to that, and now all rookies have slotted contracts based on where they were drafted.
The House settlement will help some programs, but a revenue share is not the final answer. Whether it’s contracts or lower payout thresholds, something is going to need to give for this landscape to survive. Otherwise, the NCAA is paving the way for only the elite programs with deep pockets left to be competitive.
The bottom line might be great players going from no money to multi millions was the wrong path to take. The college football NIL/transfer portal aspect in short order has become the sports equivalent of the Wild West Gold Rush. The programs with money will take whatever they want, leaving most other programs to try to compete with table scraps.
MORE COLLEGE FOOTBALL NEWS:
- Reporter slams Shedeur Sanders after Colorado's third-string QB shines against Delaware
- ESPN analyst blasts Arch Manning as 'pretty average,' says Texas isn't a threat
- Bill Belichick’s girlfriend Jordon Hudson trolled with jumbotron diss
- Patriots coach breaks silence on Bill Belichick's scouts ban at UNC