SoKnoxVol19
Active Member
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2022
- Messages
- 41
- Likes
- 251
Agents make money on transactions. The larger the amount of the transaction, the more $$$ they make. Agents latch on to players with initial promises of NIL deals, but are looking for MLB contract negotiation pay day.That's good info. I assumed it was the typical family member pushing their own interests.
If its the agents, well, that's the world we're in now.
Just to be clear, Alston wasn’t about a constitutional issue — it was about statutory antitrust law. And it doesn’t stand for this proposition: No one has the right to tell anyone in this country that they can’t make money when someone is willing to pay them for their services or likeness. There is a sense in which that is true, I suppose, but there are plenty of circumstances in which one party does have the ability to require that another person not accept certain payments for services, etc. (For instance, any old employer could require as a condition of employment that their employees (in many roles, anyway) not also be getting paid to provide services to a competitor.)
In any case, it isn’t a constitutional issue (and nobody is or can be forced to play college sports), so it seems plenty fair to discuss college sports NIL as a public policy issue.
Years ago agents got 10% sure it's more now,that's pretty good for talking on phone and hyping your client up to teams.Agents make money on transactions. The larger the amount of the transaction, the more $$$ they make. Agents latch on to players with initial promises of NIL deals, but are looking for MLB contract negotiation pay day.
Going after Amick makes me think maybe Burke is on the way out as well
Another interesting point Evan brought up was that this is two straight seasons Burns has been moved to the pen.
He was sent there when Tidwell returned last season, as well, and then presumably promised a return to the starting lineup this season.
Then he gets pushed to the pen again with presumably a promise to return to the starting lineup, again, next season.
There is a good chance that, right or wrong, he has lost trust in this staff to keep their word. And in that sense, I kind of sympathize with his position a little more if that is the case. I don't think Tony V is a distrustful person, necessarily, and the situations dictated the moves to the pen. They weren't personal decisions. Burns just seems to have been caught up in the middle of it two years running, and his feelings are hurt. That reminder of it happening last year makes his position a little more understandable.
No doubt the moves made were in the immediate best interest of the team. However, Burns does have some self-interest at stake, so I am trying to see both sides of his decision-making process.It just reeks of Burns and his camp not having self-awareness. I get they want him to start. But last season, it was like clockwork that he started to struggle starting in the 6th inning. Same thing happened against ND in the final game, and TV tried to show confidence by keeping him in when ND was teeing off on him.
This year, he struggled all around, and the move paid off. TV made the correct call for the player and the team by moving him halfway through the season. It turned the season around.
I loved watching him pitch, and I am a positive person. But frankly, if Burns didn’t see all of this, then good riddance. They were the correct coaching moves for the program’s sake.
So I’m assuming you have heard Chase Burns say out of his own mouth that he does not like Coach Anderson. That would be interesting.It is starting to sound like there's probably less than 1% chance he returns. It apparently isn't about money...we've made an extremely generous offer. It is allegedly about him simply being unhappy. Unhappy with Frank Anderson's coaching style, unhappy about his move to the bullpen. Money isn't likely to change that, and he's got a foot out the door. I wouldn't bank on him returning.
Not implying this is the case with Burns, however sometimes there are philosophical disagreements. For example, perhaps player wants to develop his off-speed pitches so he can be a starting pitcher at the next level, but coaches want him to stick with his fastball and slider since it’s been working. Player gets scolded for shaking off said fastball or slider during games. Agent tells player that he’s not getting a fair shake, however team X will allow him to fully develop his pitching arsenal as a starter. Agent tells him it will be worth million$ more in his MLB contracts. Player enters portal. (Illustrative purposes only).It just reeks of Burns and his camp not having self-awareness. I get they want him to start. But last season, it was like clockwork that he started to struggle starting in the 6th inning. Same thing happened against ND in the final game, and TV tried to show confidence by keeping him in when ND was teeing off on him.
This year, he struggled all around, and the move paid off. TV made the correct call for the player and the team by moving him halfway through the season. It turned the season around.
I loved watching him pitch, and I am a positive person. But frankly, if Burns didn’t see all of this, then good riddance. They were the correct coaching moves for the program’s sake.
It is a constitutional issue. The Supreme Court granted cert. Their role is to determine if statutory law conflicts with our constitution. If it’s not a constitutional issue, SCOTUS can’t hear the matter.
You’re correct that the exact ruling didn’t say No one has the right to tell anyone in this country that they can’t make money when someone is willing to pay them for their services or likeness, because the ruling was limited by the scope of the issues before the court, but the language/dicta in the ruling (Kavanaugh’s concurrence specifically) was a shot across the bow that, in other contexts, the anti-trust ruling would still hold. The message to the NCAA was loud and clear that their practices were anti-trust violations.
No doubt the moves made were in the immediate best interest of the team. However, Burns does have some self-interest at stake, so I am trying to see both sides of his decision-making process.
Not implying this is the case with Burns, however sometimes there are philosophical disagreements. For example, perhaps player wants to develop his off-speed pitches so he can be a starting pitcher at the next level, but coaches want him to stick with his fastball and slider since it’s been working. Player gets scolded for shaking off said fastball or slider during games. Agent tells player that he’s not getting a fair shake, however team X will allow him to fully develop his pitching arsenal as a starter. Agent tells him it will be worth million$ more in his MLB contracts. Player enters portal. (Illustrative purposes only).
And I'm assuming you overlooked the word "allegedly" in my post. Also interesting.So I’m assuming you have heard Chase Burns say out of his own mouth that he does not like Coach Anderson. That would be interesting.
Please reference both. My understanding is Burns is quite and private and this is not what you would expect him to be saying. His interview on National TV there was nothing to indicate any issues when Anderson was standing behind him with the team.I don't see anywhere that the poster said Burns personally dislikes Anderson. He did say he didn't like his coaching style and was unhappy about the move to the pen.