There has been much discussion about the topic of NIL and how to prevent college athletics from becoming a minor league. I propose a simple solution to address some of these issues and invite your critique.

PROPOSAL

Part A: Limit the recruitment size to 100 over a four-year sliding window. This means that your four-year running average can’t exceed 100, but there is no explicit limit for each cycle.

Part B: Count all transfer recruits towards the total of 100.

Addressing the "Rent-a-QB" Scenario: I dislike the idea of acquiring a player, such as a QB, with only one year of eligibility left. Take Sam Hartman as an example. Wake Forest invested in him for years, and ND paid millions to have him for a year. ND did not develop Sam Hartman; they simply paid for his services. So, how does this proposal help stop the practice of renting a player for a year? It does so because a transfer player with one year of eligibility left and a high school player with four years of eligibility left would count the same against the recruitment allotment of 100. Recruiting transfer players with only one year of eligibility would no longer be attractive as the team would get one year of playing time as opposed to four years. To illustrate, imagine if a team's roster is built exclusively from transfer players with one-year eligibility; under this proposal, the team’s roster would be stuck at 25 and never grow to 85.

Addressing Bidding Wars for High School Athletes: This proposal will not eliminate the practice of schools outbidding each other for five-star recruits, but it will limit each school's buying power. Currently, a school needs only a wealthy booster to pursue high-ranked recruits, with little consideration for the number of students being recruited. Most schools "process out" unwanted athletes before the season starts without any consequences. With the limit of 100, schools will need to be more selective in pursuing high-school athletes. If a school recruits a large class in one cycle, they will have to recruit a smaller class in subsequent cycles to balance the numbers.

Improving Player Retention: With limited recruitment slots, schools will have a vested interest in retaining players. This could mean that schools will invest more in the financial well-being and development of their players that are already on the roster. While schools that send more juniors to the NFL each year will be at a slight disadvantage, I don’t think it to be a major setback as OSU sends about three juniors to the NFL each year.

There is room for debate about whether that number should be slightly lower or higher than 100, but the idea would be to tighten the supply a bit so that schools are forced to be more intentional in pursuing players. Also, I think this proposal will withstand legal challenges but it does not restrict what recruits can or can't do. 

The main challenge to this proposal, which would effectively eliminate oversigning, is the SEC. In 2011, the SEC made a half-assed effort to limit oversinging, but it has not stopped the SEC schools from oversigning. For example, Alabama’s average class size (recruits + transfers) from 2020—2023 is 30.25!