The whole segment (Wednesdays) are great.
Doesn't look like it is on YouTube yet (so I could find the specific portion) but here is the entire convo
View: https://shows.acast.com/the-jason-gregor-show/episodes/the-jason-gregor-show-january-8th-2025-hour-3-ritch-winter
yeah NIL is for football, bball and hot chicks like Livvy DunnSure, I'd listen. But from my point of view, there's not enough interest to generate real NIL money for college hockey, whether via attendance or TV ratings.
Skenes is only lucky SOByeah NIL is for football, bball and hot chicks like Livvy Dunn
The whole segment (Wednesdays) are great.
Doesn't look like it is on YouTube yet (so I could find the specific portion) but here is the entire convo
View: https://shows.acast.com/the-jason-gregor-show/episodes/the-jason-gregor-show-january-8th-2025-hour-3-ritch-winter
I dont follow how NIL funds workJust listened to the podcast, and the agent talking about NILs starts off correctly. "We haven't had much exposure to it yet." But that's about the end of where I agreed with anything he hypothesized.
Everything he elaborated after that is pie in the sky, and frankly, bordering on being a bad financial advisor. He mentions that a program like Ohio Miami has $100M to spend on NIL. Just because they have money to spend doesn't mean they will spend it. The NCAA programs are under no obligation to spend a single dime if they don't want to. Then he uses the example of, what happens if a top prospect doesn't want to sign in Calgary/Buffalo and instead stays in college if they're getting $2M / year and then becomes a UFA after his full college ride?
Good example, let's analyze it. Let's say it applied to Lane Hutson.
Current trajectory, assuming he received the most NIL money in college hockey and we'll use the $2M they used.
Draft +1 NCAA $2M
Draft +2 NCAA $2M + 2 ELC gamechecks
Draft +3 ELC $900k
Draft +4 ELC $900k
Draft +5 $8M+ annually
If he had stayed in NCAA for a full 4 years, before then going to UFA:
Draft +1 NCAA $2M
Draft +2 NCAA $2M
Draft +3 NCAA $2M
Draft +4 NCAA $2M
Draft +5 ELC $900k
Their example wouldn't have been good for a player like Lane Hutson, staying in college just delays his timeline before receiving real money. Same thing for Macklin Celebrini and other top prospects. The NIL might be kinda interesting for good college players that are longshot to making it to the NHL, but I remain extremely skeptical that there will ever be any kind of real money available for hockey players in college.
(Unrelated, but I do think ELC contracts are going to increase in $$ with the next CBA signature.)
Just listened to the podcast, and the agent talking about NILs starts off correctly. "We haven't had much exposure to it yet." But that's about the end of where I agreed with anything he hypothesized.
Everything he elaborated after that is pie in the sky, and frankly, bordering on being a bad financial advisor. He mentions that a program like Ohio Miami has $100M to spend on NIL. Just because they have money to spend doesn't mean they will spend it. The NCAA programs are under no obligation to spend a single dime if they don't want to. Then he uses the example of, what happens if a top prospect doesn't want to sign in Calgary/Buffalo and instead stays in college if they're getting $2M / year and then becomes a UFA after his full college ride?
Good example, let's analyze it. Let's say it applied to Lane Hutson.
Current trajectory, assuming he received the most NIL money in college hockey and we'll use the $2M they used.
Draft +1 NCAA $2M
Draft +2 NCAA $2M + 2 ELC gamechecks
Draft +3 ELC $900k
Draft +4 ELC $900k
Draft +5 $8M+ annually
If he had stayed in NCAA for a full 4 years, before then going to UFA:
Draft +1 NCAA $2M
Draft +2 NCAA $2M
Draft +3 NCAA $2M
Draft +4 NCAA $2M
Draft +5 ELC $900k
Their example wouldn't have been good for a player like Lane Hutson, staying in college just delays his timeline before receiving real money. Same thing for Macklin Celebrini and other top prospects. The NIL might be kinda interesting for good college players that are longshot to making it to the NHL, but I remain extremely skeptical that there will ever be any kind of real money available for hockey players in college.
(Unrelated, but I do think ELC contracts are going to increase in $$ with the next CBA signature.)
Players in college almost always sign their ELC in Spring and burn the first year, leaving them with effectively a 2 year ELC. See Poehling, Farrell, Hutson. I'm 100% sure it's why Gauthier & McGroarty refused to sign with the teams that drafted them, btw. Philly & Winnipeg didn't want to sign them in Spring and burn the first year of the ELC.How many ELC years with that?
And could they burn one like hutson did?
Which was the right move because they were nowhere near ready.Players in college almost always sign their ELC in Spring and burn the first year, leaving them with effectively a 2 year ELC. See Poehling, Farrell, Hutson. I'm 100% sure it's why Gauthier & McGroarty refused to sign with the teams that drafted them, btw. Philly & Winnipeg didn't want to sign them in Spring and burn the first year of the ELC.
If a college players stays 4 years, he becomes a UFA on August 15th of the year he finished college and has to sign a 2 year ELC without the option of burning the first year.
but the bad press and bad vibes it gives off to other players who end up being drafted by those shit organizations is not optimalWhich was the right move because they were nowhere near ready.
Honestly it's on the players, 2 years in college after being drafted is quite normal. Didn't seem to hurt Hutson at all.but the bad press and bad vibes it gives off to other players who end up being drafted by those shit organizations is not optimal
Which was the right move because they were nowhere near ready.