I agree but thought that was interesting. I think what Tennessee, the AG would be arguing is that The Volunteer Club is a collective of boosters. That limits what/when/where a student athlete can be in contact.
It's sound like to me the NCAA says you can do NIL you just have to do it after the player signs with a university so it can't be a factor in which school the SA chooses. That's a very weak argument in my opinion. It's a chicken or egg type of thing.
Nico: "I hear there's a great NIL marketing company in Knoxville, TN. I think I'll visit them to see what opportunities that exist."
Nico: "This Spyre thing is very appealing, I think I'll sign with them."
Nico: "I wonder if there is a university close by that I could play football that would best prepare me for the NFL, life in general, and increase my brand?"
Nico: "The University of Tennessee is there, I like everything about Knoxville and the University, I think I'll sign there."
The NCAA can't limit a person from signing with any sports agency at any time. Whether that's in high school, college, whatever. That's already been adjudicated in court. If there is a separation between the university and the and the sports agency and there is in this case, there's nothing the NCAA can do. I think that's where the lawsuit is headed.
I would think,
@LA Vol can confirm, if the NCAA does come after the UT AD, I would think the University would file it's own lawsuit independent of the AG's lawsuit. I definitely think that the NCAA is about to get hit from many angles. The NCAA may just be litigated into obscurity.
Another thing, I saw another YouTube video where the guy was asking another lawyer if teams could just pull out of the NCAA. He said yes but he wouldn't expect it. Said at the conference level it was much more likely. He mentioned that if Sankey decided to just pull the trigger that that would end the NCAA in one fail swoop.
I know this is a long post but I've always thought the NCAA has multiple times overstepped their bounds. The stuff at Penn State comes to mind. While that stuff was abhorrent and the people that made that stuff possible deserved whatever they got and probably more. I never understood how the NCAA had any jurisdiction in that case. It had nothing to do with the AD with the exception of it was a crime on university property. That should have been only prosecuted criminally and civilly. I don't see how the NCAA had any business in there. JMO