Started By
Message
1
Posted on 2/2/24 at 5:51 am to ForeverEllisHugh
quote:
Scott Woodward needs to take notes
Regarding the upcoming gambling scandal, or is there something else in the works?
Posted on 2/2/24 at 6:20 am to jonnyanony
quote:
This doesn't mean anything. Simply paying players doesn't fix the problem here - competing interests in a collective meaning selective, inconsistent, and sometimes targeted enforcement of members.
Player contracts would include a NIL component. The bigger names could still do deals but they would need league approval.
Posted on 2/2/24 at 6:45 am to paperwasp
Jeremy Pruitt must be enjoying this
Posted on 2/2/24 at 6:47 am to RelentlessTide
quote:
Jeremy Pruitt must be enjoying this
If the NCAA goes away he can be the next Bama DC.
Posted on 2/2/24 at 7:41 am to Saskwatch
quote:
@AD_DannyWhite
Quote
Saskwatch...What do you expect from an idiot with a PhD from Ole Miss?
Posted on 2/2/24 at 7:53 am to paperwasp
Danny sure does have bigger balls than Scotty
Posted on 2/2/24 at 8:16 am to paperwasp
quote:
It's like a speed trap where every car is flying by doing 70 in a 35, and they're just sitting there trying to decide who they want to pop.
Looks like they for the moment have decided focus on those private jets flying recruits across the country instead of the cars doing a mere 70 mph on the interstate.
Posted on 2/2/24 at 8:19 am to Smokeyone
quote:
Player contracts would include a NIL component. The bigger names could still do deals but they would need league approval.
The simplest way for the NCAA to fix this is to make all scholarships 3 year binding agreements. Nothing about that restricts a player from making all the coin they can through NIL.
Patrick Mahomes isn't allowed to jump from team to team to team, and he seems to do pretty well with NIL.
Posted on 2/2/24 at 8:30 am to madmaxvol
quote:
Saskwatch...What do you expect from an idiot with a PhD from Ole Miss?
That's Dr. Idiot to you... Peon
Posted on 2/2/24 at 8:32 am to paperwasp
Good. As much as I dislike Tennessee, the NCAA is awful.
The refused to be proactive let this get out of control.
I also think he is correct that every, or nearly every, big time school is breaking some NCAA rule regarding NIL. It’s obvious once you look at what NIL was meant to be and what it actually is.
It’s past time for the major conferences to tell the NCAA to frick off and form a new organization better suited to manage college athletics in the modern era.
The refused to be proactive let this get out of control.
I also think he is correct that every, or nearly every, big time school is breaking some NCAA rule regarding NIL. It’s obvious once you look at what NIL was meant to be and what it actually is.
It’s past time for the major conferences to tell the NCAA to frick off and form a new organization better suited to manage college athletics in the modern era.
Posted on 2/2/24 at 8:34 am to BamaGradinTn
quote:
The simplest way for the NCAA to fix this is to make all scholarships 3 year binding agreements.
I think enforcing the prohibition against pay to play is the simplest fix.
If players get their NIL money regardless of what school they choose to attend, collectives will stop paying players to come to their school. If that QB is going to get 8 million even if he transfers after 1 season, the only entities who'll offer that kind of deal will do so only if they don't care what school he attends.
That's what was originally intended for NIL. Name, image and likeness. It's about endorsements and advertising, not paying a player to come to your university.
Posted on 2/2/24 at 9:10 am to DawginSC
quote:
I think enforcing the prohibition against pay to play
Who was paid to play?
Explain.
Posted on 2/2/24 at 9:13 am to DawginSC
quote:
That's what was originally intended for NIL. Name, image and likeness. It's about endorsements and advertising, not paying a player to come to your university.
I have some oceanfront property in Arizona for sale if you are interested
This post was edited on 2/2/24 at 9:16 am
Posted on 2/2/24 at 9:20 am to VFL1800FPD
quote:
have some oceanfront property in Arizona for sale
You do understand that part of what the NCAA is going after Tennessee for is that their NIL contracts have pay to play elements.
The NCAA hasn't brought sanctions on this to date, but that's what they're starting to do now and they're starting with the VOLS.
Enforcing the only NIL restriction (can't be pay for play) is a new step. It's also a good one as if the NCAA is successful it fixes most of the issues NIL has. This is why the state of Tennessee is suing the NCAA to make Pay for Play acceptable in NIL deals. They realize they're going to get sanctioned for it.
Has it been happening at most schools? Yep. Does it suck for UT that they're the one getting targeted for it? Yep. Is it a good thing for college football if the NCAA punishes UT for pay to play if it happened? Absolutely.
"Everyone is doing it" doesn't get you off the hook for rule breaking.
Posted on 2/2/24 at 9:24 am to DawginSC
You are proposing a system in which schools sign players and then negotiate NIL amounts after that. Tennessee is suing the NCAA because that is horizontal price fixing and it violates antitrust laws. The NCAA can try and do whatever they want, but the courts have the ultimate authority, and the NCAA has not had much luck there lately.
This post was edited on 2/2/24 at 9:25 am
Posted on 2/2/24 at 9:31 am to DawginSC
quote:
You do understand that part of what the NCAA is going after Tennessee for is that their NIL contracts have pay to play elements.
You literally just love to make shite up.
Posted on 2/2/24 at 9:35 am to VFL1800FPD
quote:
You are proposing a system in which schools sign players and then negotiate NIL amounts after that.
Nope.
There is one rule about NIL on the NCAA books. NIL contracts cannot be worded to "provide an inducement" to enroll in or remain enrolled in a school.
Players have to disclose NIL deals to the school within 30 days of enrollment. If a NIL deal breaks the above lone rule, the school has to suspend the player. If the school fails to do so, they can be sanctioned by the NCAA.
Players can sign whatever deal they want. But if the NIL deal has an inducement in it, the player can't participate in NCAA sports. If the school lets them, they're on the hook.
That's the existing system today. It just hasn't been enforced yet. The NCAA has been issuing "guidance" to schools warning them about it for the last 2 years.
Enforcement is starting now. This is a positive for college football. There is no time limit on when deals can be negotiated or signed. It simply requires that the deal have nothing in it that can be viewed as an inducement to play for a particular school.
Now the IMPACT of enforcing this rule will make it much less likely that an organization seeking to reward players for attending a particular school would give contracts to players that haven't signed with a school yet. But the legal impact is putting LESS restrictions on the player (they can transfer and keep their contract), which is what the courts seem to be most interested in protecting.
It means less money for high school recruits, but more protections from restrictive contracts for the same individuals. That's a win/win that solves the biggest issues with NIL/Pay to Play while making the contracts LESS restrictive by giving the player the freedom to transfer.
Posted on 2/2/24 at 9:41 am to DawginSC
Again, you are talking about the NCAA. The NCAA is not an extra-legal body. The NCAA has no teeth to enforce their rules if the rules break antitrust laws. The court will enjoin the NCAA from enforcing this rule, like they have with almost every other NCAA rule that has been brought to court.
This post was edited on 2/2/24 at 9:45 am
Posted on 2/2/24 at 9:43 am to RelentlessTide
quote:
Jeremy Pruitt must be enjoying this
Page 14 of 16
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News