re: What kind of penalty will Aggies get?

quote:

---

Yet when t.u. offers lineman 50,000 to go play for them, he, like the rest don’t say a damn thing. Their bias is comical. When you ask them if offering lineman 50,000 is an inducement, they stay quiet.

---

That's a violation as well.

quote:

---

Look Sidewalk, I get what you are saying. But is the NCAA (which is basically being pushed out at this point) really going to "sanction" A&M, Texas, Oregon, Tennessee, and Miami for starters?

All have arguments against them for NIL. Let's not even talk about tOSU and Alabama openly begging their boosters for NIL help

---

Who knows if anything will actually come of it, to pretend it isn't a violation is simply foolish at this point though.

And it's literally on video, I haven't seen any other blatant evidence of violations at those other places besides the $50k lineman thing at Texas.

So Sarah was right

quote:

---

I could show you more from Texas, but this site won't show images hosted by Amazon. Believe me it is out there. Just like Saban, all it takes is the snap of a picture from a cell phone, or the record button

---

Speaking about what an existing player on the team is getting isn't technically a violation.

Different story altogether when you start talking about what a recruit is going to get.

quote:

---

This is the so-called amaterism bylaw. This is literally the portion of the NCAA's rules that were turned upside down by the Supreme Court case.

The NCAA can no longer disqualify players from playing just because someone pays them money.

Also, you should dog into what constitutes a promise of pay. Hint: an off-hand comment from a recruiter to a group of recruits is not a promise of pay.

A promise of pay would be an agreement between a school and an athlete that says "it's against the rules to pay you whole you're here. But if you play for us, we'll pay you X dollars when you're done."

---

You are severely misinformed.

quote:

---

You are severely misinformed.

---

I have read the NIL rules. I have seen the video. I know the basics of contract law regarding offer and acceptance.

I see no offers made. Nothing accepted. And no actions by a coach or booster that violate any NCAA rules.

If a booster were to do what the coach did. That would be an NIL violation.

If the coach were to actually reference a specific deal to one or more players, ge would be acting on behalf of a booster, and that would be a violation.

What was shown in the video? No violation.

Prove me wrong if you're so sure you know better than me.

quote:

---

You're looking at this like a legal issue, where there's an actual burden of proof.

That's not how it works with the NCAA.

---

1. I have not mentioned anything about burden of proof.

2. The fact you think I'm talking about burden of proof shows me that your understanding of the issues at hand is limited at best.

3. In the current era where the NCAA is being challenged by the legal system to the point where their very purpose for existing is being called into legimimate question, every issue regarding the NCAA and any action they may or may not take against a school, player, or any other involved entity, is properly examined through a legal lense. Because any move the NCAA makes from here out against anyone, especially if there's money involved, WILL be challenged via the courts. It's a new era amigo.

quote:

---

Because any move the NCAA makes from here out against anyone, especially if there's money involved, WILL be challenged via the courts. It's a new era amigo.

---

Then why is LSU in trouble?

None. Cheating has been rampant for the last decade, and nothing is done about it. At its current pace, the NCAA takes 5 years to make a decision on anything.

NCAA won’t be around it 3 years much less 5