Protein Bar Co., Built Bar, Paying Tuition for All BYU Walk-Ons

Submitted by HelloHeisman91 on August 12th, 2021 at 2:00 PM
https://twitter.com/redditcfb/status/1425860661003829253?s=21

ShadowStorm33

August 12th, 2021 at 2:11 PM ^

Very cool for them. While this would seem to be squarely in the realm of the new NIL rights, looking more broadly it seems like a complete end-around on scholarship limits. Who cares if you have a "scholarship" or are a walk-on if all the walk-ons are getting their tuition paid anyway, just from a different entity. While on the surface it would seem to re-enable teams to stockpile talent like they did in Bo's day, I guess today's quick trigger on the transfer portal for kids not seeing the field does put some kind of limit on the number of players a team could realistically stockpile at any given time.

Still, just one more layer of complexity in the changing nature of today's college sports landscape...

Sambojangles

August 12th, 2021 at 2:27 PM ^

Yep, Craig mentioned this early on, on the first Roundtable podcast after the NIL change. There are effectively no scholarship limits anymore, assuming a school can find someone to sponsor a top-up for the walk-ons and partial scholarships given in sports other than football and basketball. 

This should help Michigan a lot in getting and keeping talent in hockey, baseball, and most other sports, relative to the rest of the country and maybe even the Big Ten.

1VaBlue1

August 12th, 2021 at 3:14 PM ^

One would think, on the surface, that this benefits Michigan in a big way.  But looking a little deeper, is this something Michigan will actively pursue or allow?  I suspect Harbaugh would love it.  I'm not so sure that Manuel, Schlissel, and the BoR would go along because it might 'disparage' the good name of the University of Michigan in some elitist, academic way.

And when I say Manuel, I mean that he won't stand up to Schlissel and/or the BoR to push the case.  He's not the person that will fight for you when you're interest is different from the boss' interest.  He's a really good manager of business, and a good fundraiser, decent with interviews - a pretty good AD overall.  But he's not the guy that will lead the fight for something new against established interests.

leu2500

August 12th, 2021 at 3:28 PM ^

“I'm not so sure that Manuel, Schlissel, and the BoR would go along because it might 'disparage' the good name of the University of Michigan in some elitist, academic way.”


That ship has sailed.  See the Anderson report.

 

also see the J. IRA AND NICKI HARRIS FAMILY HEAD FOOTBALL COACH, SANFORD ROBERTSON OFFENSIVE COORDINATOR, LESTER FAMILY DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR and DONALD C. GRAHAM FOOTBALL OFFENSIVE LINE COACH/CO-OFFENSIVE COORDINATOR.

Sambojangles

August 12th, 2021 at 4:03 PM ^

What possible academic reason would there be to turn this down? The walk-ons are already closer to "real students" than the scholarship players, who are more likely to be there to play football instead of play school (granted exceptions go both ways). More scholarship money is good no matter what, and I can think of no scenario where anyone on the academic side would say no to letting a group of walk-ons get paid, either in compensation or scholarships. 

I pointed out the partial scholarships in hockey and other sports, since I think that's where the bigger advantage will be to Michigan relative to the competition. In football, we can't do anything much different than what OSU is doing - they have a comparable amount of money and investment in football. However, I envision a world where we can fill out the bottom of the hockey roster with NHL draft picks because we can offer them more money than BC, BU, North Dakota, etc. 

bluebyyou

August 12th, 2021 at 5:12 PM ^

How does Michigan, after the SC decision, have the right to intercede in any financial transaction between a 3rd party and a player?  Amateurism as we knew it, or thought we knew it, is done. It is over with.

I was thinking that a university might use as a form of recourse, the right to not admit someone, but I Ibelieve that could be actionable as a school would be doing indirectly what the can't do directly.  A court would likely frown on that.

Michigan needs to figure out how to use its alumni base and supporters in a way that impacts its athletes positively and publicly. Unfortunately, that takes leadership and perhaps Schlissel will prove me wrong but I have my doubts.

PeteM

August 12th, 2021 at 2:38 PM ^

That was my question too.  College football generates a lot of direct and indirect money, and I have no issue with dollars going to players.  That said, I think that there's a business case to be made for maintaing some semblance of balance.  Given that high school recruits aren't drafted but pick their destination schools with some combination of brand name, recuirint advantages, wealthy/motivated alumni will always have an edge.  That said, we've seen in the last decade various schools that aren't historic bluebloods like Boise State, Utah, Wisconsin, Kansas State etc have success.  

I wonder if scholarship limits are essentially gone, and NILs are the wild west, will the spread between the haves and have nots expand to the point where more and more schools can't compete, and if so will interest gradually decline meaning that athletes 5 or 10 years from now will be looking at a smaller pie. 

KC Wolve

August 12th, 2021 at 2:56 PM ^

I think its mostly good since the players are getting the money/scholarship. It isn't like Saban is going to be able to stash a bunch of 5* as walk ons. Those kids want to play it it may happen every once in a while, but once the walk on passes the starter, the starter will probably hit the portal. I think it will work itself out more often than not. I do see your point though. 

bronxblue

August 12th, 2021 at 6:31 PM ^

I agree there is some danger of "stockpiling" to a degree, but being a non-scholarship athlete does come with some limitations.  They may be fewer now than before, but I the athletic departments do treat levels of walk-ons differently.  

But I think one benefit is that this that the forced transfer of players a staff thinks is taking up a scholarship spot may disappear as well.  Guys won't feel pressured to leave or medically retire as much if there's a means of still getting their education paid for and have a chance at competing.

Brianj25

August 13th, 2021 at 2:19 PM ^

If that becomes a problem then just put further limitations on the # of walk-ons a team can have on its roster. 

Doubt it'll become a problem though. How many guys want to walk-on in reliance on a NIL deal and be #86+ on the roster when they could go somewhere else where they'll get PT and therefore probably get a better NIL deal? 

Go Blue Eyes

August 12th, 2021 at 2:25 PM ^

Still waiting for the vaunted Michigan “Money Cannon” to start firing.   Seriously doubt it’s going to happen though.  The gunpowder seems either wet or missing. 
 

I wonder how President Mark Fizzle would react if someone came to Ann Arbor offering to pay the tuition of all the walk ons at UM. 
 

Great for the BYU kids though.  

bronxblue

August 12th, 2021 at 6:39 PM ^

He'd probably respond the same way he did when he got 60+ athletes to license their names on the back of official jerseys or Jace Howard signed a deal with Lulemon.  

I mean, we can't all have MMA gyms in Miami or a protein bar company being sued for not providing proper safety measures during the initial COVID outbreak and then firing an employee who pointed out these failings after 23 people got sick.

Anyway, I swear this place complains constantly about UMs inability to make money off their sports while simultaneously complaining every part of the sports experience is overly monetized.

Hab

August 12th, 2021 at 2:52 PM ^

If I were a potential walk-on or a partial-scholarship recipient of a non-revenue sport, I would find a lot of this frustrating.

swalburn

August 12th, 2021 at 3:03 PM ^

This is cool for these kids but some school with big donors just figured out how to get around scholarship limits.  Now, Alabama will be able to take everyone they want in a year.

Indonacious

August 12th, 2021 at 3:34 PM ^

The gap between Alabama and our program is massive and genuinely insurmountable. Don’t see a point in making that comparison. In modern era, our peers are PSU, wisco, MSU as far as big ten goes. Indiana may join that group with their current coach and trajectory but we will see how they do post penix too.

mitchewr

August 12th, 2021 at 5:07 PM ^

Outside of that one player selling apparel, and the team getting their names on jerseys selling in the campus stores, I haven’t heard anything NIL from Michigan football either.

All things considered, I wouldn’t even be remotely surprised if literally nothing was being done officially by the university. Somehow, that would just seem like par for the course at this point.

Here’s hoping though…

1WhoStayed

August 12th, 2021 at 6:24 PM ^

My takeaway from this is different than most. The reaction of the scholarship players was awesome. 
Seems like having a FULL RIDE does have value after all!!

bronxblue

August 12th, 2021 at 6:24 PM ^

This is pretty cool.  I know people are going to start talking about how these types are going to be used to skirt NCAA rules but even if there is an uptick in walk-ons getting paid that's probably a net-win for college athletes.

mwolverine1

August 12th, 2021 at 7:11 PM ^

Some important context here: BYU has surprisingly low tuition. It is about $6k for LDS members and $12k for non-members. This is still a significant contribution, but the money goes a lot further at BYU than it would at Michigan.