Phil Parker makes noteworthy comment about Oregon’s NIL

[Fryowa]

I get the hyperbole. Schools literally could not get together to foist these changes as a group, but the hope is that schools individually get smarter and demand contractual protections when they shell out this much money. They can do that. They probably already are. These donors didn't get rich being dumb. I am sure they are demanding some assurances.

There are many protections against transfers and reasonable money terms that can be gained via contract. However, this solution too has its flaws as many states restrict or will not enforce employment contracts with restrictive covenants. Others do allow such restrictions. So, you may actually be excasserbating the problem if Oregon is going to say that restrictions upon transfer are not enforceable, but Iowa does. Again, you need Congress to pass a simple law narrowly addressing this issue to make such agreements enforceable. That is a digestible bite.

The other problem with this approach is it does not stem the tide of Oregon spending 4 times as much on players as Iowa. Contracts could cut down on poaching, but not the overall accumulation of talent amongst the Haves.

The simple solution is for Congress to authorize the appointment of a college football Czar or Commission with the power and authority to set reasonable rules and regulations to address all of these issues while exempting such rules and regulations from antitrust and state laws to the contrary. The problems could all be solved in a month and tweaked as needed. But alas, government is not functional enough to solve problems.

I still think regardless of legislation, it all comes to a head very soon in a defacto manner when enough donors putting up a $500k or a million bucks for a QB only to see him get poached stop wanting to lose money. Another part of it is NIL in general. This feeling out period we're in right now is going to end when people look at Texas or Tennessee or LSU and see that you cannot buy a coach and roster to win a national title.

I think that was the approach these huge donor pools took right away when the NIL flood gates opened---we'll just shoot a money howitzer at it---and it doesn't work that way. No matter what, a coach's prior results do not correlate to future success to a degree that's more than say, a 55/45 gamble. Is Phil Knight willing do put $10 million down on a 55/45 bet? Sure. Are most donors going to continue to take those odds? My guess is no.

Donors got together and spent $6.8 million this year on Arch Manning, $10.8 million on Sarkisian, and what is their return? As of right now its bought them a QB who's 8th in the conference in QBR, a team that's 5th place in the SEC looking in from the outside at the playoffs, and they still have Georgia and A&M on their schedule which will likely be two more losses keeping them out of the postseason.

That won't be sustainable IMO.