Nick Saban may have retired from being a head coach, but he’s definitely not stepping away from football. The Alabama legend still has plenty to say about the hot-button issues in college football. At 73, Saban has been a vocal critic of the way NIL (Name, Image, Likeness) deals are shaking up recruiting and team rosters. Last season, as coaches were trying to navigate the new money game, he started noticing things that felt off. He wasn’t shy about calling out how players chasing big money were creating an unfair recruiting landscape. This year, after the whole Nico Iamaleava situation blew up, Saban even took his concerns up the chain to the NCAA president, hoping for some changes. But now, out of nowhere, it seems like the GOAT is starting to push back against the status quo.

Saban, with a stupendous career spanning over three decades and a win-loss record that looks like a glacier in the desert, earns his stripes to control the future of college football to a certain extent. When Josh Heupel turned down Nico Iamaleava’s $4 million contract demand and protested against a practice holdout by letting him go, Saban was among the first to give him due credit. What he did right after was enthralling.

Saban brought it to the attention of President Donald Trump during the Alabama commencement event. The US president appeared convinced that an executive intervention was necessary to address the NIL (Name, Image, Likeness) issue in college football. After a few days, he established a presidential committee to study the situation more closely before taking action. The most interesting development was that Nick Saban was selected to chair the committee, giving him the opportunity to share his thoughts and ideas.

However, just as fans were starting to anticipate positive insights from this respected figure in football, doubts began to surface. Blake Ruffino criticized Saban’s recent stance on the matter, saying, “Any politicians say things before they get elected, and then they don’t say it after they do.” He added, “Saban’s already elected to this commission, and he said, “Oh, I really don’t want to do it.”

Saban’s dual-mindedness again solidifies the proverb easier said than done. The NIL has unfairly left the college football spirit in shreds. The recruiting graph didn’t look this lopsided before. Teams that have money easily win over those who have less. Saban seemed to have a certain plan against that, keeping in mind all the aspects (positive and negative) in his head. But he turned out to be just a critic next door without a solid gateway.

Kirby Smart also received unbridled heat over his recent comment when he said he doesn’t want his freshmen making more money than the seniors. Ruffino believes none of the coaches are really against the NIL consequences. Their initial pushback was nothing but an eyewash. Again, when Saban said he didn’t want that presidential commission, Ruffino thought, “That’s a lie.”

So, what does the legendary former Bama coach say about the recent progression of the NIL regression?

Nick Saban sounds dicey about the presidential influence over the NIL 

The epic incorporation of NIL technically bears two sides of the coin. It’s not easy to just repeal the money clause from the equation. Players from poor financial backgrounds often depend a lot on the money they get from their school.

So, before anyone can take any step over that, they should be careful and considerate of their needs. Also, different states have different rules. League commissioners, athletic directors, and coaches are subsequently hesitant to meet with House leadership. NCAA head Charlie Baker revealed the current status quo, with states having their own NIL laws, is a ”mad race to the bottom.”

Reaching to a conclusion that would be favored by all parties is harder than you think. “I’m not opposed to players making money. I don’t want anybody to think that. I just think the system that we are using, the way it’s going right now, is not sustainable. Saban continued being hypothetical about the issue: “Probably not in the best interest of the student-athletes across the board or the game itself. I think we need to protect the brand and the competitive advantages and disadvantages that are being created right now.”

While his intention is not wrong, the substantiation is zero. The future looks as foggy as a December dawn.