Is USC's NIL Strategy Going to Pay Off?

[HDuck]

CFB Analyst Sees Big Win for Lincoln Riley

 

[Charles Fischer]

Within the article he admits that, "Right now, USC’s average NIL valuation for its 2026 class is already sitting at $163k per athlete" thus the metro area does not matter, IMHO. If the NIL contract passes the smell test, then the athlete has a name that can command the million dollar contract.

 

Very few college athletes can actually do that, and if the NCAA entity created digs into these contracts--they will invalidate them.

 

On another pay-site, they explained how Oregon is going to portion 17 million of the 20.5 million toward football, and that means an average of about $200,000 per player on the team. For a QB to get a million, a boatload of other players have to take 100K.

 

For a player to have an outside NIL contract--they have to be able to prove commercial value to a company writing a check.  How is a USC freshman tight end going to show proof that he is even worth over 100K, let alone 10 million?

 

 

Players in the NFL...very few can get commercial contracts;

do you see any ads with NFL tight ends? Almost none, and

certainly not a rookie.

 

Oregon has this figured out with Division Street, I'm sure,

and will be waiting in the wings for some tasty transfers.

 

[JabbaNoBargain]

When it comes to USC’s return the last 16 years, all I hear is Charlie Brown listening to adults. 1-2 in “BCS” bowls with zero playoff appearances since PC left. Anything less than 10 wins should be an F minus for USC. LR has done that 2 straight years now, but is somehow being celebrated for apparently having a complete rebuild going into his 4th season.

 

Edited 3 hours ago by JabbaNoBargain

[HDuck]

I thought this was a key passage:

 

"new rules allow NIL deals to be judged partly by geographic market value. That means deals made in major cities like Los Angeles can legally carry more weight—more money—than similar offers from less commercially vibrant locales. If a USC athlete gets a major NIL deal from a company based in L.A., it’s much easier to justify that deal as fair market value under the new rules than, say, the same deal in Ames, Iowa."

 

Now, the total value of all deals across all geographies may have to be the same, but if the folks reviewing individual NIL deals can consider market factors, then it seems it would be different potential dollars for a RB in Seattle vs one in Pullman.

[Charles Fischer]

On 6/28/2025 at 10:27 AM, JabbaNoBargain said:

...somehow being celebrated for apparently having a complete rebuild going into his 4th season.

What none of the pundits ask is "why" USC is recruiting so hard?  Nobody is talking about all the transfers out?

 

[Charles Fischer]

On 6/28/2025 at 10:30 AM, HDuck said:

"new rules allow NIL deals to be judged partly by geographic market value. That means deals made in major cities like Los Angeles can legally carry more weight—more money—than similar offers from less commercially vibrant locales. If a USC athlete gets a major NIL deal from a company based in L.A., it’s much easier to justify that deal as fair market value under the new rules than, say, the same deal in Ames, Iowa."

I'm not sold.

 

In the end...the recruits will be on print, digital or TV media. It comes down to the player name recognition regardless of where they reside. The only people who know a recruit's name are the tiny segment of fans (like us) who follow a team and recruiting. The marketing is geared to the general public...who have no clue.

 

Does USC know better than the NFL?

 

 

[The Kamikaze Kid]

SUC: The proud leader in doing it epically wrong since Carrol left.

[Jon Joseph]

 

NIL Go is the first lawsuit away from being neutered. Player and Agent attorneys are waiting in the wings to file suit, the first time seven Deloitte accountants determine a deal to be above market value.

 

NIL Go does provide for an appeal, but I think a judge will find delay in payment to be a loss in payment, and that any effort to control the NIL market will be found to be a restraint on trade that violates antitrust law in a given state, or in the federal district where a federal judge makes such a ruling.

 

Then, there are states, like Tennessee, that have passed a law not allowing the enforcement of the House settlement within state borders. 

 

Without Congressional relief from litigation, the NCAA will lose, and plaintiffs' attorneys will win in court.

 

Also, the idea that players receiving 'revenue sharing' payments are not employees is doomed. 

 

Once again, the NCAA comes with form over substance arguments that will not hold up.