Offseason Mailbag: LaNorris Sellers $8 Million Offer, Another New Playoff Format And More On Buyouts

The college sports offseason is in full effect, as we enter the ‘Mount Rushmore’ time of year. But the business part never stops and with July 1st approaching we're about to officially begin the era of revenue-sharing in college athletics. And there are key meetings taking place this week with the College Football Playoff committee on future playoff formats.

But, there are plenty of other storylines to follow as we inch closer to the upcoming football season, especially the offers that South Carolina quarterback LaNorris Sellers received this past offseason to potentially transfer. There's also those buyouts that we keep discussing for athletes in this new era of college athletics following the House settlement. 

There's a lot going on, and given that my inbox has been filled with questions over the past few days, it's time to dive into a few subjects that have been the talk of college sports recently.

LaNorris Sellers Offered $8 Million To Transfer During Off-Season?

We have seen plenty of stories over the past few years of athletes being offered a nice paycheck to transfer to an opposing school, with quarterbacks Carson Beck and Darian Mensah snagging nice paydays in the ACC. But, for South Carolina quarterback LaNorris Sellers, an offer of $8 million was not enticing enough to bolt in the offseason. 

According to The Athletic, Sellers had plenty of suitors following the 2024 season, along with after spring practice, but was not biting. 

"He was offered all kinds of crazy numbers," his father, Norris Sellers told Bruce Feldman. "I told him he could say, 'I'm gonna stay or I'm gonna go.' By my two cents: It was to get into college on a scholarship, play ball, get our degree and go on about our business. This NIL deal came later. We didn't come here to make money. We came here to get our education, play ball. And with schools calling, we're not gonna jump ship because they're offering more than what we're getting. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

"You're 19. You don't need ($8 million). You're in a great spot. There were several talks, but it never really crossed his mind (to leave)."

While Sellers is being taken care of from a financial standpoint in South Carolina, it had to be incredibly hard to see those types of figures and not pull the trigger. But, I still go back to a conversation I had with head coach Shane Beamer a few years ago when LaNorris participated in his first spring practice.

"This kid is going to be special, you just watch. We have big plans for him," Beamer said on the practice field. 

Obviously, LaNorris did not bite when it came to transferring, but we are clearly seeing schools throw around large figures to poach QBs that they think can help their team move forward. If there is one quarterback in the SEC that I'm excited about watching this upcoming season, and see his progression, it's LaNorris Sellers at South Carolina. 

Sign me up. 

CFP Meetings Are Being Held This Week. New Format Coming? 

The next round of college football playoff conversations are happening as we speak at the Biltmore Estate in North Carolina. This particular set of meetings was circled on plenty of calendars, given that we are in the middle of some pretty contentious talks around what the playoff format could look like starting in 2026. 

If you weren't paying attention to SEC meetings a few weeks ago, the talk was clearly centered around strength of schedule, and how plenty of coaches would be for 11 at-large spots, compared to four automatic-qualifiers for the Big Ten and SEC. The problem is that there has been plenty of pushback from the Big Ten side, given that they would prefer the AQ's over fighting for at-large spots. 

There was a sense of tension between both power conferences as SEC meetings started, with the Big Ten liking the idea of the guaranteed spots, while SEC coaches were lobbying for the best sixteen teams to make the playoff. But, the biggest problem is how the strength of schedule will be measured moving forward, if the CFP committee decides that the 5+11 model can garner enough votes to pass. 

Remember, the SEC and Big Ten are in control over future playoff formats, thanks to that power being given to them by other conferences last year in a vote. But, that doesn't mean Greg Sankey and Tony Petitti want to just run rough shot on everyone else at the table. If they can come up with a suitable way to work around not having four AQ's each, they are willing to listen. Well, at least Sankey is right now. 

CFP chair Rich Clark will present a few new ideas this week, which include how the selection committee uses metrics based on strength of schedule, which the SEC has clearly been lobbying for. If the conference doesn't have to move to a nine-game schedule, and can still have their SOS weighed in the favor they prefer, or can at least live with, I would expect Greg Sankey to put his weight behind this format. 

The problem is that the Big Ten continues to harp on the AQ's, and it would take a lot of persuasion to pull them away from voting on a 5+11 format, which takes away four guaranteed spots in the postseason. 

I would expect some interesting conversations over the next two days in Asheville, North Carolina. 

Further Buyouts Coming For College Athletes? Not So Fast

Last week, the NCAA and power conferences released a FAQ that centered around different components of the House settlement, with revenue-sharing obviously being the main topic discussed. 

In the 36-page document that was introduced to help guide schools through the next year, at least, there was a section on buyouts for college athletes. In these revenue-sharing contracts that plenty of players have already signed, the document details how schools could put buyout provisions in contracts that will see the school receive some sort of payout for a player deciding to transfer. 

While we have seen buyout clauses put into NIL agreements over the past few years, it's hard for collectives to recoup that money, though we have seen one case already with former Arkansas QB Madden Iamaleava. 

How would this work? According to the FAQ, if an athlete signs a one-year contract with a school for $100,000, there would also be a $100,000 buyout provision included. In the case of payment, the athlete would receive $50,000 at the start of the deal, and then receive the remaining $50,000 if they stay until the end of the academic calendar. 

Now, if they decide to enter the transfer portal, they will not receive the second $50,000 payment, and then whichever school they transfer to will then pay the previous school $100,000 as a buyout. 

Ok, now imagine how this would play out for a high-profile player with a contract that is substantially more than $100,000. What if the athlete was quietly shown the door, with the team bringing in another player to take their spot? See where I'm going here? There are way too many problems with this buyout proposal, but obviously this is just a starting point. Also, if both sides get hung up 

I think you're starting to see the picture when it comes to what will start occurring once we get to July 1st, and the House settlement aftermath officially begins. 

We are in the middle on CFP conversations, schools preparing for the start of revenue-sharing, while the financial figures around transfer quarterbacks continue to grow. 

Or, as we call it in this business, just another Tuesday.