Started By
Message
1
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:36 pm to AwgustaDawg
quote:
Has nothing to do with a booster flying a prospect to town for a visit
A 'booster' (someone who has donated money to a university) can certainly make an NIL agreement with anyone they want (if that in fact actually happened).
And yes, he can certainly fly a recruit in for any reason whatsoever. He can then get the recruit to sign some autographs or something as recompense.
You're thinking like it's still pre-NIL.
As long as the University, itself, didn't fly him in, this is a nothing-burger.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:36 pm to paperwasp
I'm seriously so conflicted.
I've been saying for a while I thought the NCAA was at risk of having conferences/big schools calling their bluff and essentially saying "you need us waaaayyy more than we need you."
So in that sense this is cool.
Alternatively, Danny White sucks and seeing Tennessee get leveled would be entertaining.
I've been saying for a while I thought the NCAA was at risk of having conferences/big schools calling their bluff and essentially saying "you need us waaaayyy more than we need you."
So in that sense this is cool.
Alternatively, Danny White sucks and seeing Tennessee get leveled would be entertaining.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:37 pm to paperwasp
quote:
Which is probably the next logical step (employees), which will lead to players' unions and bargaining, which will finally end any semblance of amateurism and change all of college football as we know it.
Not to derail the thread but when, not if, players become employees and have a CBA right to work states (the entirety of the SEC and most of the ACC) will be at a SEVERE disadvantage in recruiting to the Big10 and most of whatever the frick has become of the PAC12. It is going to be really really interesting to see if being anti-union or pro college football is more important in the at will work states....
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:37 pm to DawginSC
quote:
expressly forbidden by the NIL rules
Yeah, obviously recruiting, and I believe it's technically illegal to offer a performance contract, but there are surprisingly few actual NIL "rules."
And complicating the matter is each state passing their own, differing legislation.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:37 pm to Smokeyone
quote:
So you want to do away with NIL?
No, I want to do away with pay to play.
NIL is not supposed to allow pay for play. You are not supposed to be able to pay a recruit to play football for your school.
If Zaxbys wants to sign an endorsement deal with Caleb Williams, he keeps that deal regardless if he's playing for Oklahoma or Southern Cal. That's what NIL was intended to be, and that's how it should be regulated by the NCAA.
I fully support the NCAA going after any and all schools for allowing NIL deals with their players that require them to attend their school, since that is in fact against the NIL rules. Even if the contracts are using loopholes in order to make the contracts legal while still being pay to play.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:40 pm to DawginSC
This argument literally makes no sense. Most NIL deals are regional. You would be restricting NIL to national brands/players only.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:40 pm to nicholastiger
quote:
100% did not pay their fr qb recruit $8 million dollars before he proves himself on college level
Florida said they were going to..
..and did not.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:41 pm to DawginSC
quote:
No, I want to do away with pay to play.
This is also hilarious. You don’t want to do away with pay for play. It has been going on for 60 years. You just want it to go back to being done in secret. I don’t really care if it’s now surfaced in public due to NIL, it was happening before now it’s happening legally.
This post was edited on 2/1/24 at 2:43 pm
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:41 pm to 3down10
quote:
The supreme court ruled in favor of NIL, not pay to play.
The ruling was that the NCAA did not have the authority to prevent NIL or limit it and Kavanaugh said any attempt in the future for the NCAA to prevent or limit it will get shot down.
They never said the NCAA could not enforce other rules. The issue here is that several UT posters are having trouble distinguishing between the two. Yes NIL can take place but can not have the university directly involved. The NCAA is not coming after UT because Nico is getting money they are going after UT trying to say a booster enticed him to play for UT by using said money.
The NCAA is trying to use old rules that have been in place and adapt them to the current situation to help deal/slow down NIL. They can not control NIL as long as they cannot connect the dots with the university.
As someone else mentioned the NCAA is probably targeting UT and not because of some BS conspiracy theory manifested by their fans that other SEC schools are out to get them but because they are currently dealing with a recent situation and feel they have enough information if they can prove it they can hit them hard. They need a big win and UT just happen to be in the crosshairs.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:43 pm to TideWarrior
quote:
Yes NIL can take place but can not have the university directly involved. The NCAA is not coming after UT because Nico is getting money they are going after UT trying to say a booster enticed him to play for UT by using said money.
Wrong, as always.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:44 pm to AwgustaDawg
quote:
players become employees and have a CBA right to work
It's going to be an absolute disaster, and not to be hyperbolic, it will end the sport, IMO.
There are so many things to consider about official employment when it comes to thousands of athletes on campus, I just can't see many programs having the wherewithal to go through with it.
At that point it's essentially an NFL G League, with no associated subsidy. (There would be no point for them to invest, because they're already getting player development for free.)
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:45 pm to Smokeys Howl
quote:
A 'booster' (someone who has donated money to a university) can certainly make an NIL agreement with anyone they want (if that in fact actually happened).
And yes, he can certainly fly a recruit in for any reason whatsoever. He can then get the recruit to sign some autographs or something as recompense.
You're thinking like it's still pre-NIL.
As long as the University, itself, didn't fly him in, this is a nothing-burger.
I am not a lawyer by any stretch but if the booster flew the recruit to Tennessee and already had a contract in place with the recruit there is nothing to that. The issue will be if the contract has any language in it that states the player has to play or sign with UT for the contract to be valid. It may not have any such language, if it exists, but it'd be a damned foolish thing to do if there is any money involved more than the cost of the flight. I have been flown to job interviews by prospective employers...that's legit. That employee somehow expecting that my flying on their dime means we have a contract other than me flying in and interviewing is not legit. I knew when I accepted the interview that there would be compensation IF I were to agree to an employment contract...hard to imagine a scenario where that is not pretty easily established, that the player expected compensation when he accepted the flight if he did indeed sign with Tennessee. If that is the case even a DUI lawyer can make it in court....
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:46 pm to LewEvansFan
quote:
Spyre did. In exchange for using his NIL.
The boosters in spyre to be more precise.
Did he meet with vol coaches on his little visit?
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:46 pm to Smokeys Howl
quote:
UT paid him 8 million? Really?
Explain. I mean, if your fingers (which are trembling at the prospect of facing Nico) can even type.
If your boosters are involved, and the payment is above market, then yes. Boosters have always been considered part of the school and the schools are responsible for their actions.
Do you think Alabama had anything to do with Albert Means directly? No, it was boosters.
Nobody gives a shite about your QB. You're obviously just a young punk who has no idea how slow the NCAA is. The odds of these things having an effect on the next season is pretty low, although the actions of your AD may have put it in gear, we'll see.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:47 pm to paperwasp
quote:
And complicating the matter is each state passing their own, differing legislation.
The NCAA doesn't care about state laws. The states handle legal claims.
All that the NCAA can do is enforce their rules through their enforcement procedures.
And there is only really one rule that is being obviously broken. NIL deals cannot be tied to playing for a particular school. They are endorsement deals, not payment for playing football.
I'm all for the NCAA coming down hard on enforcing that rule. I think doing so fixes the NIL mess.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:48 pm to Smokeys Howl
quote:
As long as the University, itself, didn't fly him in, this is a nothing-burger.
The something-burger appears to be the visit with vol coaches.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:48 pm to djsdawg
quote:
The boosters in spyre to be more precise. Did he meet with vol coaches on his little visit?
Spyre doesn’t meet with coaches or UT, dumbfrick.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:49 pm to 3down10
quote:
Nobody gives a shite about your QB. You're obviously just a young punk who has no idea how slow the NCAA is.
Be careful his girlfriend RobertaVol will be along shortly to jump in the fight for him.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:49 pm to TideWarrior
The NCAA is trying to redefine the collective itself (Spyre) as a booster, thus Nico being flown in on a booster private jet. Spyre is a collective, not a booster. That is what UT is arguing.
Page 4 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News