In the NFL there is the expectation of a financial return to the spending party for paying and playing the best players. Not so in CFB. Is notoriety for spending big NIL money a sustainable motivation?

its the wild wild west, literally noone knows.

think of the hundreds of millions spent on rosters this year that didnt make the playoffs.

its crazy

I can't imagine it is sustainable. The money made by football pays for scholarships, admins, & god only knows the amount of waste. It doesn't pay for players, at least not to the level it needs to do so.

CFP Playoffs. First time ever.

The same its been for 50 years

Texas 8&4 said:

---

What's the ROI for the individuals funding it?

---

Maybe a company they have interest in will magically win lots of construction bids for campus projects? I don't know.

Exactly my point

Queso1 said:

---

In the NFL there is the expectation of a financial return to the spending party for paying and playing the best players. Not so in CFB. Is notoriety for spending big NIL money a sustainable motivation?

---

Individual players in the NFL aren't responsible for return on investment. Quit trolling.

college sports had mega rich boosters way before NIL. what was their ROI?

Those Warby Parker glasses don't sell themselves, ya know?!!

Eventually you may get to buy an overpriced t-shirt, hat, pullover, etc., that says "National Champion". What better ROI do you need?

it's a night and day compared to the70's and 80's

no one was paying $1 MM to a college player back then

heck no one was probably paying $100k back then either

W said:

---

it's a night and day compared to the70's and 80's

no one was paying $1 MM to a college player back then

heck no one was probably paying $100k back then either

---

networks weren't paying 800mm+ to televise game back then either

Will BMA's look back in 20 yrs and think, damn we should have paid x 5mm?

greg.w.h said:

---

Queso1 said:

---

In the NFL there is the expectation of a financial return to the spending party for paying and playing the best players. Not so in CFB. Is notoriety for spending big NIL money a sustainable motivation?

---

Individual players in the NFL aren't
responsible for return on investment. Quit trolling.

---

You're right that the aren't responsible for it, but there is an expectation of an ROI from the spender. If I sell Lays potato chips, and I pay Tom Brady $10M to eat Lays potato chips on a commercial, my hope is that I sell more Lays potato chips. If I don't, I don't continue to pay him.

But that's also a large company, with a big marketing budget. Maybe I have $10M to spend for the year. I could buy a bunch of crappy radio ads, or just get one shot at a commercial Tom Brady eating them, but that's my choice as the business how I want to allocate those dollars. And if I blow it all on Tom Brady this year and nothing changes, I just go back to a bunch of crappy radio ads.

Most of the NIL isn't NIL at all, just collective payments, and exactly what it's not supposed to be, which is pay for play. My contract with Tom Brady to eat my chips doesn't stipulate that Tom has to come to my hometown team to get the ad deal. I guess if I'm a more localized business, like a big city car dealer or something I might have an ongoing contract with the towns star player I want in my ads that if he leaves the team for another could cancel it, but I am
Not luring him to the team with my ad money like NIL collectives.

And like the Warby Parker example someone pointed out, I don't hate that one because at least Aech is doing what NIL is intended which is using his name image and likeness to sell a product.

There are only so many NFL teams to go around. If you have too much money to spend, might as well play in the minors.

Imagine spending 6 or 7 figures and not winning a natty.

The return is that he can get on Facebook and talk **** to other schools' fans. That's all it is ever about. Even for all of us. The Ags winning or losing has zero affect on people outside of the program. The amount of money, fandom, and coverage that goes on to college sports is pretty freaking dumb...

No, it is not sustainable... I have no sympathy for anyone dumb enough to donate money for NIL purposes. As they say, a fool and his money.....

A longtime Colorado booster is expressing his frustration with funding payments to players who have no loyalty to the program.

"You give them [that] check and the guy’s gone tomorrow. To hell with that. That ain’t happening to me. No allegiance, no money.”

How many schools are…

— Kristi Dosh (@SportsBizMiss) January 6, 2026

ccolley68 said:

---

greg.w.h said:

---

Queso1 said:

---

In the NFL there is the expectation of a financial return to the spending party for paying and playing the best players. Not so in CFB. Is notoriety for spending big NIL money a sustainable motivation?

---

Individual players in the NFL aren't
responsible for return on investment. Quit trolling.

---

You're right that the aren't responsible for it, but there is an expectation of an ROI from the spender. If I sell Lays potato chips, and I pay Tom Brady $10M to eat Lays potato chips on a commercial, my hope is that I sell more Lays potato chips. If I don't, I don't continue to pay him.

But that's also a large company, with a big marketing budget. Maybe I have $10M to spend for the year. I could buy a bunch of crappy radio ads, or just get one shot at a commercial Tom Brady eating them, but that's my choice as the business how I want to allocate those dollars. And if I blow it all on Tom Brady this year and nothing changes, I just go back to a bunch of crappy radio ads.

Most of the NIL isn't NIL at all, just collective payments, and exactly what it's not supposed to be, which is pay for play. My contract with Tom Brady to eat my chips doesn't stipulate that Tom has to come to my hometown team to get the ad deal. I guess if I'm a more localized business, like a big city car dealer or something I might have an ongoing contract with the towns star player I want in my ads that if he leaves the team for another could cancel it, but I am
Not luring him to the team with my ad money like NIL collectives.

And like the Warby Parker example someone pointed out, I don't hate that one because at least Aech is doing what NIL is intended which is using his name image and likeness to sell a product.

---

You nailed it. NIL in it's true form would be awesome for the players to make some money, but very few would have cracked a $1mil in actual NIL. Johnny would have. Maybe Tebow. There are companies who could have used them like your Lays example. And theoretically Lays would have profited. There is an exchange of goods and services happening there.

It was never meant to be a budget to buy a roster. I think the Big Money Donors will burn out eventually. This money is being spent is a pure entertainment spend. The only potential ROI that's been mentioned before is "access". They get to feel important or maybe rub elbows with other important people. Maybe some business deals do get made, but are never made public..

This would be wonderful if it happened. But schools have to reach that conclusion separately (apparently) or it violates anti-trust laws (apparently). Either that or collective bargaining. But if some schools try to do this, the schools that will still throw money down the drain are still there to lure talent with immediate pay days.

More "meet-and-greets"

Queso1 said:

---

In the NFL there is the expectation of a financial return to the spending party for paying and playing the best players. Not so in CFB. Is notoriety for spending big NIL money a sustainable motivation?

---

Oh no CFB is going out of business. Except it's not. I'll know CFB is in financial trouble when a big school retains a coach because the $50-70M+ buyout is too much.

SteveA said:

---

The return is that he can get on Facebook and talk **** to other schools' fans. That's all it is ever about. Even for all of us. The Ags winning or losing has zero affect on people outside of the program. The amount of money, fandom, and coverage that goes on to college sports is pretty freaking dumb...

---

This is exactly right. It was bragging rights back in the day of the bag men, and its still bragging rights today

Wut?

I'd guess 99.5% of players getting paid (I mean, NIL'd) aren't returning much if anything at all. I loved the Ags who - when this all started - were so defensive claiming that this isn't pay to play.