Sports
If Nick Saban wants to help NIL and college football, he should be realistic about it
Nick Saban has been an excellent addition to ESPN’s “College GameDay,” adding deep and digestible film analysis, well-prepared insight on teams around the country and a sense of humor that may surprise some — culminating in Saturday’s back and forth with the show’s “celebrity guest picker” from Tuscaloosa, his wife, Terry.
But he has a lot of work to do on what’s actually happening with the economics of college football, which is disappointing because he should be an important voice on player compensation and movement. On Saturday he was a disingenuous voice, painting a picture of the past that insults the intelligence of anyone who follows the sport and pining for a future that would amount to going backward.
The panel got into a discussion of the big story of the past week, UNLV quarterback Matthew Sluka’s announcement that he’s done for the season because promised financial obligations weren’t met. Sluka’s agent told ESPN he was “verbally promised” at least $100,000 and Sluka’s father, Bob, told The Athletic’s David Ubben that the negotiation happened in February — and that the family didn’t ask for more during UNLV’s 3-0 start to become a College Football Playoff contender.
That’s been disputed, and absolute truth on this story is unlikely. “College GameDay” host Rece Davis said, appropriately, of the situation: “If the promise was made, let’s not let (whoever made it) off the hook either. That’s despicable, that’s sleazy, to try to get a kid like that.”
Saban, unfortunately, was eager to interject.
“But at the end of the day, what kind of value did that young man create for himself by making this decision?” Saban said. “Being put in this situation and then making this decision. What kind of real value does he create for his future by doing this? And that’s the unfortunate thing about all this.”
“Yeah, chasing short-term money, affecting their future,” Kirk Herbstreit added.
So let’s try to answer that question, regardless of what exactly happened with Sluka and UNLV. If he were promised this money and didn’t get it, he wasn’t trying to “create value” for himself — he was understandably frustrated about being wronged despite demonstrating value. If his camp is lying about the promise, that’s obviously wrong of them — but if he’s received just $3,000 for his work at UNLV, which has not been disputed, that’s ridiculous and unacceptable in today’s market.
The market is hazy, sure, but we know enough about it to know that a quarterback of Sluka’s quality joining an FBS program — which has millions of dollars at stake as a viable candidate for the 12-team Playoff — should have five figures in the bank before he completes a pass.
So if I’m hearing correctly, pay for play started with NIL. Per the former Alabama coach who had a lot of amazing players over the years who were all fine with tuition, room, board, books, etc.
— Joe Rexrode (@joerexrode) September 28, 2024
The answer to Saban’s question is that Sluka has already created value, by graduating from Holy Cross, by starring there and earning an opportunity to play at a higher level, and then by excelling at that level. This means he should and will have another college opportunity next season, and he should be paid market value for it.
It’s almost as if Saban thinks everyone is an NFL prospect — Sluka likely isn’t — or as if having millions of dollars makes it difficult to understand what $100,000 can do for the life of a young person who is not destined for millions.
It’s disappointing. Because Saban should offer a lot of value to this discussion and has made other points that resonate.
He has said he retired from coaching in part because the discussion from his players after last season ended in the CFB semifinals was all about money, and I believe him. He’s right that there can be a benefit to sticking out tough times when things don’t go well early for a player. He’s right about the high value of having a university and program as a home base, with enduring connections, long after playing.
He would have been better off Saturday talking about locker-room dynamics in this era, as opposed to advocating for a future with a combination of revenue sharing — which is, of course, court-mandated and inevitable — and a “true NIL” based solely on marketing opportunities.
This remains an apparent NCAA fantasy as well, though the richest programs in college football will continue to pursue the best players so they can win and profit as a result. Which will always create a market beyond obligatory compensation. Which isn’t new.
It’s just that a lot more money is going to players, in tandem with constant player movement, which means some form of players organizing and signing standardized contracts must come next. There will be unintended consequences as with any major change, but it’s necessary and inevitable. I’d like Saban to embrace that reality and talk about how that will affect his previous profession.
Instead, he said this: “We’ve turned it into pay for play, because we have donor-raised funds to be able to pay people. So that system does not create value long-term for players. I mean you’re supposed to go to college to create value for your future. Now we have guys making decisions about how much money they’re gonna make. Which I’m not sure that’s what we want the college experience to be.”
Did he seriously suggest that just now we’re getting to “donor-raised funds to be able to pay people?” Is he seriously claiming such funds weren’t pooled in the past, by the very richest programs, to pay the very best prospects to help those programs win and profit? After decades of thinly disguised — and in some cases reported and NCAA-punished — bidding wars for some of those players leading up to signing days, is he really saying that just now guys are making decisions based on money?
Anyone who cares about college football should be insulted by that. Just as I’m sure Saban was when he saw the guy who helped run his Alabama recruiting operation from 2007-09, Jeremy Pruitt, cheat in such a brazen, sloppy way at Tennessee that his coaching career evaporated over it in 2021.
No one really cares about that stuff anymore, now that we’ve taken the amateurism mask off college football. Also, no one is expecting coaches to start writing tell-all books about where the bags of cash were hidden.
But we can have more honest, less disingenuous, conversations about the past, present and future. Saban talks about “value” a lot, and he knows it well — Forbes estimated he made $150 million in his coaching career. He shouldn’t devalue what a free market can and must mean to the labor force of an industry like college football.
And he should whisper one of the all-time great Saban-isms — “Don’t waste a failure” — to himself before he tackles this topic in front of millions of viewers again.
(Photo: Ken Ruinard / USA Today Network via Imagn Images)
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
In previous years, the Round of 16 was the first knockout stage match, but with an expanded field of 48 teams— it is now the second.
Let’s check out the odds at FanDuel Sportsbook as of July 2 for which countries are favored to make the Round of 16 and emerge from it.
This page may contain affiliate links to legal sports betting partners. If you sign up or place a wager, FOX Sports may be compensated. Read more about Sports Betting on FOX Sports.
To Reach Round of 16
Argentina: -2000 (bet $10 to win $10.50 total)
Colombia: -550 (bet $10 to win $11.82 total)
Portugal: -340 (bet $10 to win $12.94 total)
Switzerland: -235 (bet $10 to win $14.26 total)
Egypt: -148 (bet $10 to win $16.76 total)
Australia: +122 (bet $10 to win $22.20 total)
Algeria: +186 (bet $10 to win $28.60 total)
Croatia: +260 (bet $10 to win $36 total)
Ghana: +380 (bet $10 to win $48 total)
Cape Verde: +1160 (bet $10 to win $126 total)
Now let’s check out the odds at FanDuel Sportsbook as of July 2 for the matchups already in place.
SATURDAY, JULY 4
Canada vs. Morocco
To Advance: MAR -300, CAN +225
Moneyline: MAR -130, Draw +240, CAN +420
Paraguay vs. France
To Advance: FRA -1800, PRY +1140
Moneyline: FRA -600, Draw +600, PRY +1800
SUNDAY, JULY 5
Brazil vs. Norway
To Advance: BRA -245, NOR +196
Moneyline: BRA -120, Draw +260, NOR +340
Mexico vs. England
To Advance: ENG -134, MEX +110
Moneyline: ENG +145, Draw +210, MEX +200
MONDAY, JULY 6
USA vs. Belgium
To Advance: USA -110, BEL -110
Moneyline: USA +165, Draw +230, BEL +170
Sports
Thousand Oaks native Claire Liu finally reaches Wimbledon’s third round, will face Coco Gauff
LONDON — Claire Liu packed her bags and checked out of her London hotel room on Wednesday morning before heading to the All England Club.
It was more pragmatism than pessimism — a reality of a qualifier navigating her Wimbledon journey one day at a time.
But as her boyfriend reminded her while organizing her luggage: “Just because you’re packing doesn’t mean you’re leaving,” Liu recalled with a laugh.
He was right.
The Thousand Oaks native went on to win her second-round match against 51st-ranked Zeynep Sonmez of Turkey 7-5, 6-3, advancing to the third round of a Grand Slam for the first time in her professional career. She had tried 29 previous times at majors, including qualifying rounds, since 2015.
“I was just super relieved to get through that,” said Liu, noting she had blown a set and a break lead in the French Open’s second round last month.
For Liu, who turned 26 in May, returning to the manicured lawns of SW19 brings her tennis journey full circle. Nine years ago, she captured the 2017 Wimbledon girls’ singles title — the first American to do so since Chanda Rubin in 1992 — and was the No. 1 junior in the world. She still holds fond memories of that heady achievement, including chatting with her idol, Roger Federer, at the Wimbledon Champions Ball.
Yet, the transition from teenage phenom to professional mainstay has been anything but a linear ascent. When asked if she expected to be in the third round of a major this late in her career given her junior success, Liu was candid.
“Younger me would have believed it more than now,” she said.
That shift in perspective comes after weathering some brutal setbacks.
Liu climbed as high as No. 52 in early 2023 but then endured a wrist injury and took a months-long mental health hiatus in 2024 that eventually saw her ranking plummet outside the top 400 last year.
Currently sitting at No. 146, she’s been rebuilding her standing by playing a mix of WTA 125 events and ITF tournaments before returning to the main WTA Tour, with 2026 stops in far-flung places from Bahrain to Boca Raton and plenty of places in between.
“My goals haven’t changed, but I think the stress of how I got there really took a toll on me,” said Liu.
To navigate the darkness, Liu leaned heavily into both sports psychology and traditional therapy, including EMDR, a technique that helps people process traumatic experiences. She also started a Substack newsletter called “Finding Claire-ity,” where she openly chronicles her life and struggles on the tour.
The Southern California native, who has trained at the USTA facility in Carson since she was 9 years old and resides in Redondo Beach, also split with her longtime coach last season, a difficult decision, and hired Clemens Wagner.
The switch following the U.S. Open last year is clicking.
“I saw in her someone who fought a lot of battles inside herself,” says Austrian-born Wagner, who has a background in tennis analytics.
Together, they have focused on keeping an “aggressive undertone” on the grass, emphasizing coming to the net and squeezing the most out of her game.
Wagner notes that the 5-foot-7 player’s game isn’t the flashiest, but describes her as a “silent killer” who excels at “redirecting pace, standing close to the baseline, constantly putting pressure on her opponents.”
The reboot is starting to pay significant dividends.
Liu put together her best stretch in years this spring, winning a lower-tier title in Trnava, Slovakia, her first professional title since 2024, and then qualifying for the French Open.
Having again successfully navigated three rounds of qualifying to reach the main draw here, Liu has now won five consecutive matches at Wimbledon. Not surprisingly, she currently has no sponsors, just equipment support from Head Sport and Asics Corp., making her Wimbledon run particularly lucrative. By reaching the third round, Liu achieved her highest career payday: around $250,000. A victory Friday would boost that to nearly $400,000.
First, she faces her biggest test yet: a third-round contest against two-time major champion Coco Gauff on No. 1 Court, which perhaps fittingly is the same show court where Liu won the girls’ title almost a decade ago.
Gauff, 22, noted that she and Liu haven’t crossed paths much since Liu is older, but expects a serious battle. Gauff won both of their previous meetings on hard courts.
“I feel like anytime you’re playing a qualifier, it’s always tough because they have three matches already,” the seventh-seeded American said.
Liu, who didn’t even know she was playing Gauff until a reporter told her after her match, is purposefully keeping her focus narrow.
“I will just take today to be happy for winning, and then tomorrow I’ll think about it,” Liu said. “Obviously she’s one of the best players in the world right now, so that’ll be a good experience.”
Veteran Jessica Pegula, 32, the top-ranked American who also toiled away on the sport’s lower tier before becoming a top-10 mainstay, appreciates Liu’s resolve.
“It’s always nice to see girls that are figuring it out slowly but surely,” the No. 4 seed said. “I think I can relate to that.”
Liu’s accommodations? Fortunately, her mother was able to rebook the same hotel after the match, which eased some of the logistical issues for her unexpectedly extended stay in London.
“It definitely makes me stay in the moment, like, day by day,” Liu smiled of her lodging limbo.
On Wednesday morning, Liu packed her bags expecting she might leave Wimbledon. Instead, she emptied them one more time, with the biggest match of her career still waiting.
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Folarin Balogun’s teammates came to his defense after the USA World Cup star was given a red card during the team’s 2-0 win over Bosnia and Herzegovina on Wednesday night.
Balogun received the red card after he stepped on defender Tarik Muharemovic’s right ankle. Brazilian referee Raphael Claus only gave Balogun the card after a VAR review. The red card meant Balogun will not be able to play in the team’s Round of 16 match against Belgium.
ZERO BS. JUST DAKICH. TAKE THE DON’T @ ME PODCAST ON THE ROAD. DOWNLOAD NOW!
United States’ Folarin Balogun, right, stands by after being issued a red card by Referee Raphael Claus, of Brazil, as United States’ Weston McKennie (8) looks on during the World Cup round of 32 soccer match between the United States and Bosnia in Santa Clara, Calif., near San Francisco, Wednesday, July 1, 2026. (AP Photo/Martin Meissner)
A FIFA official told The Athletic a team cannot appeal against the red card or the suspension. The official pointed the outlet to a portion of the organization’s rules and regulations, which states, “A sending-off automatically incurs suspension from the subsequent match. The FIFA judicial bodies may impose additional match suspensions and other disciplinary measures.”
Balogun’s teammate, Weston McKennie, called the lack of an appeal process “bogus” and disagreed with the referee’s decision to issue the red card.
Bosnia’s Sead Kolasinac (5) talks to United States’ Folarin Balogun after Balogun was sent off, as Christian Pulisic (10) watches during the World Cup round of 32 match between the United States and Bosnia in Santa Clara, Calif., Wednesday, July 1, 2026. (Julio Cortez / AP)
“Obviously the ref made a decision that he made, but I think it’s questionable,” McKennie said. “I think there’s been many other plays like that throughout the tournament on other players that a card wasn’t given at all. It’s disappointing.”
U.S. coach Mauricio Pochettino said Balogun’s act “was never intentional.”
“It’s never a red card. Never. … If the intention is to damage the opponent, OK, I understand. But that never was. It was a normal action in football that you are fighting for the ball and your feet land,” he said.
Balogun is the third player to score in a World Cup knockout match and be sent off. He follows Brazil’s Ronaldinho in 2002’s quarterfinal match against England and France’s Zinedine Zidane in the 2006 World Cup final against Italy.
Referee Raphael Claus of Brazil shows a red card to United States’ Folarin Balogun, right, during the World Cup round of 32 soccer match between the United States and Bosnia in Santa Clara, Calif., near San Francisco, Wednesday, July 1, 2026. (AP Photo/Julio Cortez)
It’s the fifth red card handed to an American in the squad’s World Cup history.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Eric Wynalda received one against Czechoslovakia in 1990, Fernando Clavijo got one against Brazil in 1994 and Pablo Mastroeni and Eddie Pope each received one against Italy in 2006.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
-
Los Angeles, Ca1 hour agoBoy, 17, with autism accused in murder of 4-month-old girl at Claremont daycare
-
Detroit, MI1 hour agoBrief rally not enough for Tigers vs Rangers as win streak ends at 3
-
San Francisco, CA2 hours agoCrash on freeway in Millbrae leaves driver dead after reportedly overturning multiple times, CHP says
-
Dallas, TX2 hours agoPaige Bueckers, Azzi Fudd do the usual in Hartford, win. This time with Dallas Wings
-
Miami, FL2 hours agoWorld Cup-inspired art exhibit transforms Miami’s Wynwood with interactive soccer experience
-
Boston, MA2 hours agoStairlift brings relief to residents stuck in building with broken elevator
-
Denver, CO2 hours agoFree agent point guard Tyus Jones re-signs with the Denver Nuggets – Denver Stiffs
-
Seattle, WA2 hours agoHusky Recruit To Move From Seattle to Florida For High School Ball
