The College AD suggests that an ‘acquisition fee’ could solve some problems with the transfer portal

NASHVILLE, Tenn. — The athletic director at a mid-sized school that made waves this season has a modest proposal for taming what many say is the transfer portal system running amok in college sports.

Sean Frazier, AD at Northern Illinois — remember, the team that beat national finalist Notre Dame earlier this season — talks about “talent acquisition compensation.”

When schools sign players from other teams, they would pay those teams a fee in exchange for the player. This is not very different from the way transactions are reduced to what are known as “transfer fees” in European football.

It’s an idea that Frazier, admittedly, is still sketching out on cocktail napkins. But he thinks it could help the little guys maintain their programs while adding transparency to deals involving some of the more than 11,000 football players from all divisions who enter the portal – the terms of some of those life-changing transactions they’ve tapped on their cellphones themselves. in the middle of the night.

“At the end of the day, the kid deserves compensation and support,” Frazier said in an interview with The Associated Press at the NCAA convention this week. “But the institution, in order to continue the cycle, they also deserve something. We’re not in a position to continue that if we keep losing the best and the brightest.”

Even with success, challenges come for mid-sized schools like NIU

Buoyed by that win over Notre Dame and a steady run of success over the years, Frazier’s school recently announced it is moving its football program from the Mid-American to the Mountain West Conference starting in 2026.

The Mountain West, with College Football Playoff champion Boise State this season, is arguably the most feared conference in the so-called Group of Five. There are also 129 schools in the FCS – the Football Championship Subdivision which is the latest iteration of what used to be called Division I-AA.

With the House Settlement set to reshape college sports, allowing institutions to pay players directly while changing the size of rosters across all sports, smaller schools like NIU have decisions to make. Namely, will they opt for revenue sharing contracts that allow schools to pay players directly for contracts on their name, image, likeness? Or will they adhere to the model of third-party collectives mediating these deals?

Schools have until March 1 to make a decision. Neither choice avoids the harsh reality of the new college football: it’s more expensive than it used to be, and big schools will always have the resources to attract promising players who honed their skills at small schools.

Frazier used the example of 285-pound defensive tackle Skyler Gill-Howard, who came to NIU as a walk-on, got better every year, had five sacks for the Huskies this season, then entered the transfer portal and will play his final year of eligibility at Texas Tech.

“He did a wonderful job. Our coaching staff has done a great job developing him,” Frazier said. “The heartache is that he left. From a G5 perspective, we’re fine with the development side of things. There is a certain level of respect. But this could help institutions like us, where there’s a fixed fee or a dollar amount, it’s a show of appreciation for the development of the game.”

An interesting plan that would face many obstacles

Any such plan would face numerous obstacles. For one thing, while things have moved faster in recent years, college sports have traditionally been glacial in making big changes.

Second, as the recent NCAA takedowns in court that led to today’s changes reiterated, the American court system generally does not like things that limit players’ ability to earn money.

That’s what happened to the NFL. In the 1970s, a judge ruled illegal the “Rozelle Rule,” a rule named after the late Commissioner Pete Rozelle. The rule is similar to Frazier’s idea in that it allowed the league to assign draft picks (and sometimes players) from teams that signed expiring players to teams that left those players.

In football, transfers have been the norm in Europe – teams essentially paying other teams for players rather than trading for them. The market is estimated to be worth $10 billion, although a recent court ruling there could lead to anything from a tweak to a complete overhaul of that system.

“I would see very little chance of that happening,” Tulane sports law expert Gabe Feldman said of Frazier’s fee idea. “There are a lot of ideas, but that doesn’t mean they’re going to take effect.”

Leaders are looking for innovative plans to calm the transfer portal

Although the House Settlement brings college sports closer to a resolution on how to pay players, the transfer portal remains a moving target.

The lead-up to this year’s national title game between Ohio State and Notre Dame brought with it stories of massive player movement, including from the 12 teams that made the College Football Playoff.

Among the biggest headliners this season was the early-season departure of quarterback Matthew Sluka from UNLV, who said promises to pay him $100,000 were not fulfilled. Last year, former Florida signee QB Jaden Rashada sued Gators coach Billy Napier over an unpaid $13 million contract. Rashada now plays for Georgia.

More common are accusations of tinkering that causes programs to stand idly by while players leave without much, if any, warning.

“I can’t believe we live in a world where people make decisions and make offers over text messages,” said NCAA President Charlie Baker. “The number of kids who have told me horror stories about impersonation — no process, no accountability, no transparency.”

Frazier, always on the lookout for resources to recruit, develop and, now increasingly, trade players, doesn’t necessarily see his “talent acquisition” fee as a panacea. But maybe, he says, it’s the beginning.

He points to the NFL, NBA and other professional leagues that have collective bargaining and drafts that set the framework for their sports.

“We don’t have that,” he said. “This is one of the guardrails that could get us to the point where we acknowledge that, yes, you can still buy your team, but it shouldn’t be the wild, wild west.”