'24 MO WR Ryan Wingo (Texas commit)

#1,751
#1,751
Jackcrevol said:
if issues with Wingo and Waneri is they can get paid sooner. it seems fairly simple we can get this law changed in TN. like that shouldnt be something we allow to hold us back as a state university
Click to expand...
It's an in-state thing. It's a law built to benefit the University of Missouri by trying to keep the top in-state guys home thru NIL
 
#1,756
#1,756
MarcoVol said:
But they WANT IT NOW
Click to expand...
I tell ya what…I think a lot of us here are older where the concept of money promised now or in 6 months isn’t THAT big of a difference, but I’d argue for a HS kid it’s a big deal. These kids getting the money while still in HS all the sudden are driving cool cars and having cool stuff in front of their HS friends. If they have to wait that status bump is gone forever. Laugh all you want but I’m the eyes of some of these HS kids that’s a big deal. It’s not like many of these kids are going to invest it. Lol
 
#1,757
#1,757
allvolrecruiting said:
It's an in-state thing. It's a law built to benefit the University of Missouri by trying to keep the top in-state guys home thru NIL
Click to expand...

If I was a poor team I would reject NIL and have MY state pass a law that all players are free to collect NIL money and be on a roster but not participate on the field of play if the other team has none that do.

I think I understood that money could not be tied to performance. He could still sell cookies or chicken.
 
#1,758
#1,758
BADGER_VOL said:
I tell ya what…I think a lot of us here are older where the concept of money promised now or in 6 months isn’t THAT big of a difference, but I’d argue for a HS kid it’s a big deal. These kids getting the money while still in HS all the sudden are driving cool cars and having cool stuff in front of their HS friends. If they have to wait that status bump is gone forever. Laugh all you want but I’m the eyes of some of these HS kids that’s a big deal. It’s not like many of these kids are going to invest it. Lol
Click to expand...

I’m not talking about the HS kids wanting it now. I’m talking about Vol fans who are complaining bc the state of Missouri has a better setup to get HS kids paid.
 
#1,759
#1,759
MarcoVol said:
I’m not talking about the HS kids wanting it now. I’m talking about Vol fans who are complaining bc the state of Missouri has a better setup to get HS kids paid.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t replying to you just the concept that some think it shouldn’t be a big deal when a kid gets paid but I think I’m some of their eyes it is a bigger selling point than some of us older people might think. I just called myself “older”… 🤮
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarcoVol
#1,764
#1,764
Much like NWaneri, Ryan Wingo could benefit from the change in law at Missouri. He got a prediction there last week but some people we have spoken to feels like Texas and Tennessee continue to have the most pull here. If he isn’t deciding until late the Tigers “pay them before they get here” approach definitely loses its advantage with Wingo able to make money when he arrives on any campus in January.
Click to expand...
-VQ
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ryno14, InVOLuntary, densojb3 and 26 others
#1,766
#1,766
MarcoVol said:
Perhaps the staff doesn’t share your assessment of their abilities or value. Also, thought you didn’t care about other programs? Also also, we beat Bama last year without having the same type of dudes. Who says we can’t beat UGA without them?

Overspending out of desperation - which is exactly what you are campaigning for here bc “we don’t have these type of players like Bama and UGA do” - is never a smart strategic play. It’s what programs like Mizzou have to do to land a player or 2 each cycle.

Have some faith in Heup. Enjoy the show.
Click to expand...
You overpay for recruit X, they come in. Word gets through the locker room. Players D, F, H, L, P and Q start taking issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, Dadof2Vols, mrmax86 and 1 other person
#1,769
#1,769
BlinghamptonVol said:
Do you think this will happen here with Nico?
Click to expand...
Did NIL overpay for Nico? Serious question, as I don't know what was paid, nor the going rate for a top 2-3 QB in the nation.

But if NIL paid 8 mil over time for him, and he plays like a scrub, then I see it potentially causing issues, at least until he transferred for playing time. Otherwise, if he comes in and lives up to expectations, I suspect there being little issues with paying big NIL for the best available in the nation, at the most important position on the team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Volunteer821, Dadof2Vols, BlinghamptonVol and 1 other person
#1,772
#1,772
DukeDaisySam said:
Ohhhh, yes he does.
Click to expand...

Ohhhh, no he doesn’t but I get your point.

But what happens if he doesn’t live up to whatever expectations you’re placing on him? Heupel starts a different QB and the NIL market will have corrected itself moving forward.
 
Last edited:
#1,774
#1,774
MarcoVol said:
Bc some who hold states rights views are now advocating for national laws that govern NIL, thus removing the issue from individual states.
Click to expand...
It really doesn't have much to do with state's rights in any traditional sense. The Supreme Court ruled in essence that the NCAA's business structure violated the federal Anti-Trust laws, which were made by Congress. So only Congress can fix it, because it's Congress's law. It's a bad situation to be in to look to Congress for help, but the NCAA's problem stems from a law Congress made, and only Congress can give them an exemption from it.

As far as State's rights, as a legal matter, the business of college football is really indisputably in the realm of interstate commerce and Congress is empowered to regulate interstate commerce by the Constitution, so there is no real question under nearly 250 years of precedent that the original Antitrust legislation is valid and that Congress power to change it. "State's rights" has popped up as a political issue in history most often when there is some sort of legitimate dispute over whether the federal government has the power to regulate in a certain area, here there isn't any doubt about Congress's authority to act. Again, if not for Congress acting in the first place (to pass the Antitrust statutes originally) the NCAA could do what they want (and have always done) anyway, and the Supreme Court wouldn't stop them because the Supreme Court's problem with the NCAA is based on the Supreme Court's opinion that the NCAA's business structure violates Congress's Antitrust law(s).
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top