I actually agree. Colleges and universities profited from athletes' names, images, and likenesses for way too long with no benefit to the athlete - outside of what they could parlay their college experience into once they were able to go pro. Scholarships were seen as giving schools carte blanch control over student athletes and schools got off cheaply as a result. I don't begrudge the athletes for finally getting value for their personal value. I also understand that kids don't always fit or can find better value elsewhere - but having largely unrestricted transfer allowances is not a good thing IMHO. You should be able to transfer once without penalty. After that, there has to be some disincentive or chaos will persist in the college game, which isn't good for anyone.
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your WyoNation.com experience today!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Waylee entering the portal
- Thread starter Itsux2beaewe
- Start date
ragtimejoe1
Well-known member
Not that it effectively changes anything, but NIL for recruiting became even more official https://apnews.com/article/ncaa-college-athletes-6374733a663eba0d4d5564b47fdb39fc
It was already going full steam so I don't know if this changes much
It was already going full steam so I don't know if this changes much
You know, all this portal stuff doesn't bother me as much as it apparently bothers some. You lose some players, you pick up some players. It's more like the pros.
I certainly don't find any moral/ethical dimension to it. These athletes are now free to try to improve their situations year-to-year, like everyone else in the country. So they do. And there shouldn't be any of this "kids these days!" snark. They're doing just what would have been done from the beginning, had they been allowed.
It's unclear how a pro model could be applied to college athletics. The pro sports can do what they do because they're monopolies. I know how baseball became exempt from the rules -- an absolutely hilarious USSCt opinion in the 1920s -- but I'm not sure how the other leagues manage to skate.
I certainly don't find any moral/ethical dimension to it. These athletes are now free to try to improve their situations year-to-year, like everyone else in the country. So they do. And there shouldn't be any of this "kids these days!" snark. They're doing just what would have been done from the beginning, had they been allowed.
It's unclear how a pro model could be applied to college athletics. The pro sports can do what they do because they're monopolies. I know how baseball became exempt from the rules -- an absolutely hilarious USSCt opinion in the 1920s -- but I'm not sure how the other leagues manage to skate.
OrediggerPoke
Well-known member
Does telling a coach that you will be sitting out games (when you otherwise could play and could help your team) so that you can maintain an extra year of eligibility to make money through the portal pose a moral/ethical issue for you?You know, all this portal stuff doesn't bother me as much as it apparently bothers some. You lose some players, you pick up some players. It's more like the pros.
I certainly don't find any moral/ethical dimension to it. These athletes are now free to try to improve their situations year-to-year, like everyone else in the country. So they do. And there shouldn't be any of this "kids these days!" snark. They're doing just what would have been done from the beginning, had they been allowed.
It's unclear how a pro model could be applied to college athletics. The pro sports can do what they do because they're monopolies. I know how baseball became exempt from the rules -- an absolutely hilarious USSCt opinion in the 1920s -- but I'm not sure how the other leagues manage to skate.
(Or what about telling the coach - you are sitting out games so you can return to the team next year- but really you intend to enter the portal?) Moral or ethical issue?
If a coach accepts a player’s “decision” like that, that’s on the coach—not the player.Does telling a coach that you will be sitting out games (when you otherwise could play and could help your team) so that you can maintain an extra year of eligibility to make money through the portal pose a moral/ethical issue for you?
(Or what about telling the coach - you are sitting out games so you can return to the team next year- but really you intend to enter the portal?) Moral or ethical issue?
Swavel fumbled the bag here. His fitness, aptitude, and preparation for this new era of college athletics are absolutely fair to question.
Athletes are going to make decisions that benefit their future, and they have every right to do so. It’s the coach’s job to manage that and make decisions that put the team first. Blaming the player for using their leverage is just deflecting. This is the new reality of college sports—coaches who can’t adapt won’t last.
There is a ton of money available to players right now. Can't blame them for chasing their bag. It's probably time for Wyoming fans to come to terms with this new reality, even if we hate it. I don't blame those of you who are choosing to tune out.
I suppose...If it went down exactly as you say... Including the Machiavellian scheming....Does telling a coach that you will be sitting out games (when you otherwise could play and could help your team) so that you can maintain an extra year of eligibility to make money through the portal pose a moral/ethical issue for you?
(Or what about telling the coach - you are sitting out games so you can return to the team next year- but really you intend to enter the portal?) Moral or ethical issue?
It would surprise me greatly if these players are not making the statements they are making with the intention of it working out.... But sometimes what we want and intend to happen changes over time. Fans on the outside of that process have long had moral outrage towards that.
I actually think a coach could advise a player to do exactly as Waylee did.... What with load management and what we know about recovery...a coach could absolutely advise a player to do some "load management" even if it enraged the fan base.
Either way, it seems obvious that our moral intuitions about this stuff are in need of updating. I think this thread and discussion have restored some of my faith in fans abilities to hold some competing values in their head at the same time. It's not simple.
Last edited:
ragtimejoe1
Well-known member
I've said this before but there needs to be a deep assessment of football's future in the new MWC. You will always be able to field a team with just scholarships. If conference peers are sharing revenue and have some NIL deals, then scholarship only probably won't be competitive consistently if ever. The question is: what does football do for the university/state and does chasing nil/revenue sharing enhance that benefit enough above just fielding a team of scholarship players? At our level, I honestly don't know the answer to that.
I will say, and probably get roasted, but spending 2.5-4 mill on NIL football might get us to compete near the top of the new mwc. Spending that much on bball probably gets us dancing relatively consistently. What's better?
This is what I want from an ad and president. Not just palms up asking for a handout but a thorough analysis of UW sports in the new era, creating a clear vision for the future, and aggressively pursuing that vision.
I will say, and probably get roasted, but spending 2.5-4 mill on NIL football might get us to compete near the top of the new mwc. Spending that much on bball probably gets us dancing relatively consistently. What's better?
This is what I want from an ad and president. Not just palms up asking for a handout but a thorough analysis of UW sports in the new era, creating a clear vision for the future, and aggressively pursuing that vision.
bladerunnr
Well-known member
Actually, if that was his goal, I'd have sat out the entire year. As injury prone as he is, playing 4 games was a big risk to play for team that only won 1 game without him.Does telling a coach that you will be sitting out games (when you otherwise could play and could help your team) so that you can maintain an extra year of eligibility to make money through the portal pose a moral/ethical issue for you?
(Or what about telling the coach - you are sitting out games so you can return to the team next year- but really you intend to enter the portal?) Moral or ethical issue?
OrediggerPoke
Well-known member
How many teams are offering significant NIL (or even a roster spot) to a running back that was injured and didn’t demonstrate that they could return to the field at full strength?Actually, if that was his goal, I'd have sat out the entire year. As injury prone as he is, playing 4 games was a big risk to play for team that only won 1 game without him.
bladerunnr
Well-known member
Ike sat out the entire year. Didn't hurt his NIL. I suspect many teams would have taken a chance on Waylee whether he played or didn't.How many teams are offering significant NIL (or even a roster spot) to a running back that was injured and didn’t demonstrate that they could return to the field at full strength?
This is actually a great idea. The reality is that the game has changed. We need to fully and factually evaluate athletics. What sports make sense and where? What donors do we have, facilities do we have, where are our profit centers, where are our cost centers, and how do we optimize all facets of our operations?I've said this before but there needs to be a deep assessment of football's future in the new MWC. You will always be able to field a team with just scholarships. If conference peers are sharing revenue and have some NIL deals, then scholarship only probably won't be competitive consistently if ever. The question is: what does football do for the university/state and does chasing nil/revenue sharing enhance that benefit enough above just fielding a team of scholarship players? At our level, I honestly don't know the answer to that.
I will say, and probably get roasted, but spending 2.5-4 mill on NIL football might get us to compete near the top of the new mwc. Spending that much on bball probably gets us dancing relatively consistently. What's better?
This is what I want from an ad and president. Not just palms up asking for a handout but a thorough analysis of UW sports in the new era, creating a clear vision for the future, and aggressively pursuing that vision
Once you are finished with the AD, move to Old Main. Rinse, lather, repeat.
OrediggerPoke
Well-known member
Agree. Athletics should be accessed with economics and the law (Title IX) in mind.This is actually a great idea. The reality is that the game has changed. We need to fully and factually evaluate athletics. What sports make sense and where? What donors do we have, facilities do we have, where are our profit centers, where are our cost centers, and how do we optimize all facets of our operations?
Once you are finished with the AD, move to Old Main. Rinse, lather, repeat.
I would argue that fielding golf makes zero sense and I suspect cost/benefit analysis will back that up. Swimming and Diving and Tennis should be evaluated too. Wrestling should be evaluated too. However, wrestling is a relatively low cost sport and it baffles me that we can’t take advantage of existing facilities and redundancies to add women’s wrestling and eliminate something like women’s tennis. You could even share coaching staffs to reduce cost.
We are not a warm weather sports town. Cancel everything that rhymes with tennis and golf and then move through the ranks of the rest of the sports with DOGE-like expediency and terror and see what's left. Most of our teams are so bad that no one would know that they ever existed. Start fresh. Men's and women's hockey, curling, basketweaving...what's the harm? It's not like we have such a loyal golf or track following that donors will be hot if we lose them. Hell, outside of the Trues, McMurrays, Pivics, and Rochelles, do we even have donors anymore? And those folks have been ridden so hard Burman and the Foundation should have their names tatooed on their souls.Agree. Athletics should be accessed with economics and the law (Title IX) in mind.
I would argue that fielding golf makes zero sense and I suspect cost/benefit analysis will back that up. Swimming and Diving and Tennis should be evaluated too. Wrestling should be evaluated too. However, wrestling is a relatively low cost sport and it baffles me that we can’t take advantage of existing facilities and redundancies to add women’s wrestling and eliminate something like women’s tennis. You could even share coaching staffs to reduce cost.
OrediggerPoke
Well-known member
To be FBS - NCAA rules require a school to sponsor 16 sports minimum. (14 for FCS)DOGE-like terror? That's funny. But, yes, maybe Elon could do for us what's he done for X. Lol.
One thing this -- eliminating all but 3-4 sports -- would do for us is make us ineligible for a conference. Maybe we could go independent? "Notre Dame, But With Mountains!"
ragtimejoe1
Well-known member
Look at facts. Enrollment has been on the decline (lots of reasons). What do sports do for the University? Would UW drop significantly in on-campus attendance without sports, without football??
If the answer is yes, what world UW look like without sports? We're already below 10k in on-campus attendance Not trolling; wondering.
If the answer is yes, what world UW look like without sports? We're already below 10k in on-campus attendance Not trolling; wondering.
Look at facts. Enrollment has been on the decline (lots of reasons). What do sports do for the University? Would UW drop significantly in on-campus attendance without sports, without football??
If the answer is yes, what world UW look like without sports? We're already below 10k in on-campus attendance Not trolling; wondering.
Legitimate and always-interesting questions.
There's the big picture question that many have asked many times: why are American colleges the institutions that support athletics? Why don't the various sports set up their own support systems and pay for it themselves? It's all money-losing for the universities, so what the hell are we doing?
Then the next question is yours: what happens if a college just opts out? Nobody -- not lately, anyway -- has been brave enough to do it and help us find out. That'll change, probably over the next 50 years. Some school will say, for financial reasons, this is insane. Let's just turn ourselves into one of those places, like in the rest of the world, where people just come to learn things.
OrediggerPoke
Well-known member
Some schools are picking up D3 football to increase enrollment. Azusa Pacific the latest one. D3 sports seem to make a lot of sense to keep costs low and increase enrollment.Look at facts. Enrollment has been on the decline (lots of reasons). What do sports do for the University? Would UW drop significantly in on-campus attendance without sports, without football??
If the answer is yes, what world UW look like without sports? We're already below 10k in on-campus attendance Not trolling; wondering.
Colleges will always have their toes in sports, but the model will shift. I work in campus recreation and oversee sports clubs, and we’re actively preparing for club sports to explode when the NCAA dominoes fall. Schools are moving toward a more social/recreational model where students can still compete, travel, and represent their university—without the financial burden of high-cost athletics. Wyoming has some nationally competitive club teams (Hockey, Nordic Skiing, and Rugby, to name a few) - What excites me about this is that Club Sports can come and go based on student interest, and regional viability. We could test a club softball team, and cut bait quickly if it's a flop.
The reality is, athletics serve a purpose beyond just money. They’re a student engagement tool, a retention strategy, and a major part of university culture. But the traditional NCAA model isn’t sustainable everywhere. Schools that recognize this and invest in alternative options like competitive club sports may actually find a sweet spot—keeping students engaged without hemorrhaging money.
Honestly, Wyoming’s athletic future looks pretty bleak. Our best years are behind us, and unless something drastically changes, I don’t see that turning around. What Burman really needs to do is level-set the program and redefine what success looks like.
Wyoming just isn’t an attractive landing spot for high-caliber athletes anymore. And even if we do land one, we don’t have the NIL money to keep them. The second they prove they can make an impact, they’re out the door for a bigger payday elsewhere. That’s just the reality now.
Instead of chasing an outdated model, maybe it’s time to rethink what Wyoming athletics should be—lean into what makes sense financially and competitively instead of trying to keep up in a race we can’t win.
The reality is, athletics serve a purpose beyond just money. They’re a student engagement tool, a retention strategy, and a major part of university culture. But the traditional NCAA model isn’t sustainable everywhere. Schools that recognize this and invest in alternative options like competitive club sports may actually find a sweet spot—keeping students engaged without hemorrhaging money.
Honestly, Wyoming’s athletic future looks pretty bleak. Our best years are behind us, and unless something drastically changes, I don’t see that turning around. What Burman really needs to do is level-set the program and redefine what success looks like.
Wyoming just isn’t an attractive landing spot for high-caliber athletes anymore. And even if we do land one, we don’t have the NIL money to keep them. The second they prove they can make an impact, they’re out the door for a bigger payday elsewhere. That’s just the reality now.
Instead of chasing an outdated model, maybe it’s time to rethink what Wyoming athletics should be—lean into what makes sense financially and competitively instead of trying to keep up in a race we can’t win.
The reality is, athletics serve a purpose beyond just money. They’re a student engagement tool, a retention strategy, and a major part of university culture. But the traditional NCAA model isn’t sustainable everywhere. Schools that recognize this and invest in alternative options like competitive club sports may actually find a sweet spot—keeping students engaged without hemorrhaging money.
Great post and this paragraph is right on the money. For schools like ours, which means the vast majority of colleges, sports can fulfill these goals in what is essentially a high school model: you want to study here and have some fun playing a sport you love for a few hours a week? We can set you up. If you think you'll go pro in a sport, don't come here. See if you can get into one of those places that runs a professional minor league system.
