Ferris 1

Tucker Ferris

Miss Chinelo

ENC 2135

15 April 2024

Rhetorical Analysis of Artifacts in the Sports Industry

I. Introduction

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) launched the transfer portal almost

six years ago, which manages and clears the way for student-athletes wishing to transfer schools.

The transfer portal is a database and tool that allows students to place their names in and have the

eligibility to transfer to whichever university they want. In addition to the transfer portal, the

NCAA recently allowed athletes to profit off their name, image, and likeness (NIL), however, the

complex legislation of the NCAA has led to ill-advised recruiting violations on coaches,

universities, and NIL booster groups.

II. Analysis of First Artifact

In the online peer-reviewed journal “NIL Tampering”, Josh Lens aims to demonstrate the

inevitable death of the National College Athletic Association (NCAA) as we know it. In order to

effectively explain this, he presents a full-scale investigation of the significant changes

throughout college athletics by focusing on the introduction of the transfer portal, easy

restrictions on athlete transfers, and the emergence of name, image, and likeness (NIL) deals. His

thorough assessment reveals his purpose to emphasize the negative consequences of these recent

changes, specifically in the framework of tampering in college athletics recruiting and challenges

in enforcing rules set by the NCAA.

 Ferris 2

Throughout his publication, Len formulates ethos by referencing the NCAA as a

governing body and presents a timeline of changes to further support this reference. Lens

explains that the NCAA is “a member-led organization consisting of over 1,000 colleges and

universities” (6). Because of the surplus amount of colleges and universities that are considered

part of the legislation, Lens also demonstrates that “the NCAA does not notoriously lack rules”

(7). Lens incorporates a few rules in his writing, but focuses on more prominent changes to

college athletics. To also establish ethos, Lens further explains the implementation of the transfer

portal in October of 2018 and NCAA rule changes regarding athlete transfers and NIL

compensation in 2021. He demonstrates that in October of 2018, the NCAA allowed for

collegiate athletes the right to transfer to another university, and since then, almost a hundred

thousand athletes across all divisions (I, II, and III) have utilized this portal. In addition to this,

he also acknowledges that in 2021, the NCAA granted collegiate athletes the right to transfer

universities more than once without penalty, on top of allowing them to profit off their name,

image, and likeness. Ever since the introduction of NIL deals, college sports have become more

of a money laundering game, especially in football. Through his inclusion of the NCAA as a

governing body and the changes they’ve brought in recent years, Lens establishes ethos in his

publication.

In addition to ethos, Lens also formulates logos in his publication when he argues about

NCAA rule enforcement. Due to the recent risk of legal consequences and a shortage of

resources, the NCAA has faced real challenges in both its capability and willingness to

effectively enforce certain restrictions. Lens uses logos to explain how these specific restrictions

can be placed on the recruitment of athletes by certain universities and NIL booster groups. He

also demonstrates that, “the increasing commercialization of the college athletics… can come at
 Ferris 3

the cost of adhering to the NCAA’s restrictions, however” (Lens 1). This is where tampering

comes in. Although his publication is mostly objective, Lens also includes pathos when he

elaborates on the potential consequences of tampering on coaches and universities. However,

“coaches are not alone in facing accusations of violating NCAA rules by tampering with athletes

enrolled at other universities” (Lens 4). In the context of sports, Lens acknowledges that

tampering refers to any unauthorized or improper interference within the rules or regulations

related to that sport, universities and coaches can be caught (or very few times self-report)

unlawfully giving athletes money at universities, and NIL booster groups are caught trying to

unethically recruit athletes. Lens acknowledges that all of these previously stated situations result

in recruiting violations. He appeals to his audience’s emotions when he explains how recruiting

violations put certain schools at a competitive disadvantage, and will impact the landscape of

college athletics in the near future. When doing this, Lens includes a hasty generalization (logical

fallacy) in his writing. His fallacy appears when he explicitly says that if more universities

self-reported violations, it would be easier for the NCAA to give out punishments. This argument

is flawed because if more universities self-report violations, it’s actually the university itself

self-imposing punishments, with the NCAA agreeing to them. The NCAA might have some say

in the punishment, but the NCAA does not extensively look for violations when universities

self-report them. Through using logos and pathos, Lens demonstrates how tampering goes hand

in hand with violating NCAA rules, but is hard for the NCAA to crack down when universities

don’t self-report violations.

Moving on from rhetorical appeals, Lens uses a formal and complex tone when

explaining the significance of the information in his publication. This is true as Lens uses words

and phrases like "case of first impression… and tortious interference with contractual relations
 Ferris 4

claim" (1). Using words like tortious and contractual calls for a strong vocabulary, so one

constraint for his tone is that some of his audience doesn’t understand some of his words and

phrases. For example, when reading this, I didn’t know what tortious meant, so I had to look it

up. Another constraint is Lens’ audience. Because he uses a complex vocabulary and very

specific examples of recent changes, there are some people who won’t understand and be able to

follow if they aren’t up to date with collegiate sports, especially football. With Lens explaining

tampering, the impact of NIL deals on the transfer portal that’s already been updated, and the

violations that have come from the NCAA to boosters who provide the compensation to athletes,

it can get complex and confusing. Because of the depth and complexity that Lens goes into, some

readers may be restricted in fully understanding the message Lens is trying to relay.

Moving on from constraints, Lens follows a consistent and rational structure in his

writing, as he begins with an introduction to the changes in college athletics, then progresses to

the challenges in rules enforcement, and concludes with the potential legal implications of

tampering. Because we usually write in the same structure (introductory paragraph, bodies, then

conclusion), it’s easy for his audience to follow his laid out, specific sections. Also, throughout

his publication, Lens repeats words and phrases like “transfer portal... NIL booster collectives”

(1) to stress their role in tampering, and how it’s impacting the structure of collegiate athletics.

His use of simple language, followed by his explanation of the importance of it, helps the

audience fully understand what he’s trying to demonstrate.

In essence, Lens effectively combines ethos, logos, and pathos, writes with a complex

tone and simple structure, as well as constraints throughout his publication, to help reveal that

"NIL Tampering" presents a compelling argument about the potential challenges posed by
 Ferris 5

tampering in college athletics recruiting, and the nuances in the NCAA's rules enforcement

process.

III. Analysis of Second Artifact

In a YouTube video, Adam Breneman sits down with the head football coach for the

University of Pittsburgh, Pat Narduzzi, to discuss how the transfer portal is ruining college

football. Breneman has a history with football as he coached and played at several schools, and

Narduzzi has a history with football as he’s been coaching since 1990. This video was posted in

September, but was recorded before since September marks the beginning of the college football

season. The primary audience for this video is anyone who cares a lot about college football

and the path it’s now going down because of the chaotic transfer portal and NIL regulations,

whereas the secondary audience is anyone who watches college football and is unsure of their

opinions on the route college football is going. The purpose of this video was to pick the brain of

an active college head football coach, how he views the transfer portal, NIL, and their effect on

college football, and to inform the audience how the NCAA’s recent decisions to allow students

to transfer multiple times without penalty and profit off their name, image, and likeness (NIL), is

ruining college football.

As soon as the video starts, we see Breneman establish ethos in his interview with Pat

Narduzzi. As I’ve explained previously, both have had a long history in college football and have

seen the progression of it in their time coaching and playing, which correlates to ethos being

established from the jump. Breneman used to play tight end at Penn State and Massachusetts

before becoming the tight ends coach at Arizona State, and Narduzzi has coached since 1990 at

different schools, but most notably Cincinnati, Michigan State, and Pitt. In addition to their

football history, ethos is also established through Narduzzi’s personal experience with the
 Ferris 6

transfer portal and NIL. Narduzzi talks with Breneman and explains the story of Jordan Addison,

as well as talks about several players who have transferred out of Pitt to transfer back after one or

two years. Narduzzi explains that Addison was a wide receiver for him for three years and won

an award for the best receiver in college football, but transferred to the University of Southern

California (USC) due to the NIL they offered him. Addison signed a deal with United Airlines

which was estimated to be about $3.5 million, and started the transfer wave for countless other

student athletes. Also, Narduzzi names off players that transferred out of Pitt just to transfer

back: MJ Devonshire, Brandon George, and Nate Temple. Other athletes transferred before these

athletes because of compensation, but at that time, Addison was the most notable name. Finally,

Narduzzi goes on to acknowledge that Addison’s transfer led to other notable college football

superstars transferring like Caleb Williams, Jayden Daniels, Cam Ward, Dante Moore, Dillon

Gabriel, and many others.

On top of ethos, pathos is also established when Breneman and Narduzzi discuss the

transfer portal and NIL in college athletics. Narduzzi brings up people who get divorced and

remarry, as well as people who struggle with their own issues. The divorce and remarry comment

Narduzzi makes can provoke certain feelings in specific people who have watched this video.

For example, kids who have had to witness their parents split, and spend different weekends in

different places because of that split, definitely thought of their personal experiences and felt a

certain way. Also, for the people who have been through divorce themselves who are watching

this video felt a certain way too. Moving on to the comment about people going through their

own issues, he’s right in the sense that everyone goes through things and looks for certain paths

to help themselves out. For example, athletes who come from poor areas look to make the most

money possible to help their family out, which was a certain decision they chose to make. With
 Ferris 7

his comments dealing with divorce and certain hardships, Narduzzi provoked certain emotions in

his audience, perhaps guilt, anger, sadness, and a lot more.

Finally, logos is the last appeal that’s evident in this video. Relating to the notable

transfer portal names I mentioned earlier, Kenny Pickett is another name that Breneman and

Narduzzi discussed that surrounded the transfer portal when he played collegiately. Narduzzi

demonstrates for his audience that Pickett was his quarterback for five years, and a few stellar

seasons as the sheriff of that offense, including a Heisman Trophy runner-up campaign. Because

of his success, Breneman explained that even if Pickett didn’t plan on transferring, he could’ve

still entered the portal to see the amount of compensation he’d receive from opposing schools

and if it was enough, potentially transfer. Pickett didn’t do this, but Breneman and Narduzzi

touch on the fact that some athletes do make this decision, and sometimes end up transferring

due to the money thrown at them. Because of the recent decisions the NCAA has allowed,

college sports has essentially turned into professional sports the way athletes can negotiate

financial compensation.

Moving on from rhetorical appeals, let’s look at tone, visual elements, language and a call

to action. Because of the sit down conversation between them, it gives off an informal tone,

which helps make their message more persuasive in my opinion. Because of the informality and

conversation aspect of this video, it’s easier for their audience to understand and relate to what

they’re talking about, since this topic is very relevant in today’s world in college athletics. No

visual elements are included in this video, but Breneman and Narduzzi are sitting in a room

surrounded by football items and gear, which reinforces the message about college athletics,

specifically football. In relation to tone, the language and diction are the same: informal and

conversation-like. Because of the conversation that Breneman and Narduzzi are having, it’s easy
 Ferris 8

for the audience to understand, relate, and recall the college athletes they touch on throughout

their conversation. Finally, their call to action is that the NCAA is trying to fix the issue they

created, but it’s difficult. Narduzzi acknowledges that it’s hard for the NCAA to fix what’s going

on because of how chaotic things have gotten, inconsistent punishments, and with college sports

always changing.

IV. Comparison Between Artifacts

Recalling on the thorough analysis of both artifacts, it’s clear they both explain how NIL

deals and the transfer portal are ruining college football, however, they do this through different

rhetorical strategies. Josh Lens created a factual and statistical publication, in which he discussed

how the transfer portal and NIL were ruining college football through court cases, tampering,

and organizational structure. Compared with Lens’, Adam Breneman and Pat Narduzzi sat down

in a podcast-like environment and discussed how the transfer portal and NIL were ruining

college football through real world examples and prior experience. In Lens’ publication, he used

more analysis of specific events, specific explanations, and violations, which constitutes to logos,

ethos, and pathos. In Breneman and Narduzzi’s sit down conversation, they used more real world

examples and prior experience, which constitutes to logos, ethos, and pathos, as well as a call to

action. Both artifacts establish logos, ethos, and pathos in similar ways, but where they differ is

in their tone, language, and visual elements.

Throughout his publication, Lens uses a very formal and informative tone, which

explains his in-depth analysis of specific court dates, events revolving around the transfer portal

and NIL, and more. In comparison to Lens, Breneman and Narduzzi use a very informal and

conversational tone, which has beneficial effects to their audience. Because of his formal tone,

the major constraint in Lens’ publication is that his audience can get lost and not understand
 Ferris 9

what he’s trying to convey. However, with Breneman and Narduzzi, their conversational tone

allows their audience to understand and follow their call to action because of the informality and

simplicity of their conversation. Although both have had long careers in football, Breneman and

Narduzzi keep the conversation short, simple, and easily understandable for someone who may

not follow college sports.

In addition to tone, Lens differs from Breneman and Narduzzi in the way he speaks

throughout his publication. Because of the formal tone and the analysis of specific events, Lens

uses a strong vocabulary and complex sentence structure. In addition to these aspects of his

language, he also writes to a very specific audience: one that follows college football closely.

Moving to Breneman and Narduzzi, their language is very simple. They use a basic vocabulary

in a very informal, conversational environment. The foundational vocabulary and easy

conversation make it easier to follow and understand, even without it in writing. Finally,

Breneman and Narduzzi talk to a very broad audience: people who do and don’t follow college

sports, and anybody who just wants to learn about what’s changing in college sports.

V. Conclusion

The landscape of collegiate sports is changing quickly, substantially, and primarily in

division one. Because of the recent changes to the transfer portal and the recent permission for

student athletes to be able to profit off their name, image, and likeness, college sports are taking

a turn for the worse. Because of their recent chaotic decisions, the NCAA has received major

backlash, but has also backed into a corner they cannot escape. Even though they explained their

opinions in different ways, Lens, Breneman, and Narduzzi all have the same goal: reduce the

amount of NIL compensation given out to student athletes, and limit athletes to one transfer per

academic career. In order to make their call to actions clear, both appeal to logos, ethos, and
 Ferris 10

pathos, as well as speak in specific tones and languages to audiences that fit their type of

publication. The bottom line is, specific universities will control all division one collegiate sports

if the NCAA doesn’t move to rescind their new policies soon.

VI. Works Cited

Lens, Josh. “Nil Tampering.” SSRN, 27 Feb. 2023,

deliverypdf.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=8871040960000890881050160291210640070590

140460140060780090990250670741200060150891101260011001200330590050120760

060740280081150160490640530670930261191220700130940060080530541000060680

30106102025074125068116008091000107023109071098113089068005122017024&E

XT=pdf&INDEX=TRUE.

Breneman, Adam. “Pat Narduzzi on Why the Transfer Portal Is Ruining College Football.”

YouTube, YouTube, 3 Aug. 2023, www.youtube.com/watch?v=isP3NSRXFXw.