Athletics directors from Football Bowl Subdivision institutions are concerned with using name, image and likeness as an inducement for recruiting, according to a new survey.
Of those ADs polled by the LEAD1 association, a group representing the 130-member schools, 90% were concerned that collectives were using NIL deals as improper recruiting tools. Approximately 80 FBS athletic directors were surveyed on NIL, transfer portal and Division I structure.
Advertisement
Seventy-eight percent of ADs surveyed also believe that NIL collectives will impact athletic department fundraising, limiting a department’s financial resources and 77% of those surveyed believe an unregulated NIL market will eventually lead to scandals.
Some of the other findings include:
Advertisement
- 92% disagree that NIL payments should be allowed as “pay for performance.”
- 87% disagree that NIL payments should be permitted as “pay for play” tied to a specific athletics team.
- 72% agree NIL payments should be tied to market value.
The ADs also were surveyed about the transfer portal, with 87% agreeing that there should be designated “dead periods” to curtail unlimited transferring to other schools.
[ Former UCF and current Nebraska coach Scott Frost punished by NCAA ]
Those polled were asked about reducing the number of members in the Division I structure, with 67% agreeing that a reduction is needed from the current 350 members and 58% were against individual conferences holding full autonomy over issues such as NIL and athlete compensation and scholarship regulations.
This article first appeared on OrlandoSentinel.com. Email Matt Murschel at mmurschel@orlandosentinel.com or follow him on Twitter at @osmattmurschel.
