Shout-out to Donde Plowman

[Volfan2012]

Can’t even pretend like I know what goes on with NIL, but I came across this on Twitter.
View attachment 616680

You can't actually have NIL if any player is not allowed to test their value to any college. The college wants him or her for their athletic ability not their academic prowess. This being true then the NCAA is trying to restrict the rights of any athlete to find the best deal for them because the only way they can do this is inquire of several schools and the NCAA is saying you can't do that and the schools can't answer. Looks like the NCAA is going to lose easily because you can't restrict the earning rights to anyone persons name and likeness because they own it not the NCAA.

 

[mudcat1973]

Can’t even pretend like I know what goes on with NIL, but I came across this on Twitter.
View attachment 616680

You have your orange tinted sunglasses off.
Good point.
I like to see all NIL deals made published if its-
Tied to a athlete going to a University.

 

[Volfan2012]

State law overrides the NCAA and if schools are following their state laws on NIL the NCAA has no power.

 

[mudcat1973]

I read somewhere last week a suggestion that universities would have to make student athletes an 'employee' of the university to get around the NIL caps and other stuff like that. Not sure about the legal side of this. Others will legal knowledge will need to add.

The Players Association And NFL share TV money so it has been done.

 

[LexVol71]

"Plowman’s role as chancellor includes oversight of Tennessee Athletics, an operation approaching $200 million, to which she has provided decisive and timely leadership. In 2020 she was selected by her peers in the Southeastern Conference to represent the SEC as a member of the NCAA Presidential Forum, and in 2023 she was elected vice president of the SEC Executive Committee."

Here's the link. About the Chancellor - Office of the Chancellor

Since she has served on the NCAA Presidential Forum, it's my guess that Chancellor Plowman not only knows those people at the NCAA headquarters but also has a pretty good understanding of how to deal with them. The steps she and the University and the State of Tennessee have taken with this matter wasn't just some knee-jerk reaction. After reading her professional CV, I've no doubt she had all her ducks in a row before doing anything. Now it should be fun to sit on the sidelines and watch the fireworks.

 

[Volfan2012]

Can’t even pretend like I know what goes on with NIL, but I came across this on Twitter.
View attachment 616680

I don't believe the part totally about the teams with the most money will just buy championships cause all the power teams have money and still will only be able to afford only a certain amount of players. There are enough players to cause parity especially among the power five schools. The mid- majors may suffer bigtime, but to have NIL players have to be free to bargain and that is what a lot of state laws are saying and think the Supreme Court came out that way as well.

 

[glv98]

What a stinking but inevitable mess. Maybe this is an opportunity to tear whatever structure exists down and start over with something sane. Certainly no one should be punshed for violating rules that didn't exist and weren't articulated if they did. Also I think it's time for the beast that football has become to break off and leave the others alone as far as governance. Keep giving us money tho!

I read somewhere last week a suggestion that universities would have to make student athletes an 'employee' of the university to get around the NIL caps and other stuff like that. Not sure about the legal side of this. Others will legal knowledge will need to add.

I read that universitites were strongly resisting this bc making them employees means you're legally responsible for everything they do on your watch plus it would entitle them to full workers rights, plus unionization. Understandably, players are all for this.

Spyre said in their statement yesterday that the deal they made with Nico was made under Cal. law and was therefore legal. So appears they did their homework on this.

They also said his contract did not specify that he had to enroll at Tennessee. Says that's part of all their contracts? What? I thought Spyre was "our" collective. Does Spyre represent any college athletes who go to any other schools? Do folks who donate to Spyre know they may be bankrolling an Alabama player's NIL?? IMO at best this stipulation is a nod nod wink wink of course you're going to the school associated with this collective.

Just an example of how effing crazy this all is. Good for Donde P for standing up, she's been a good un for a while. They gotta get this sh*t worked out though. Recruiting has to be truly seperate fm NIL. IMO, a handful of college athletes, mostly football players, are going to look back at this Wild West era before any regulation and realize how lucky their timing was.

 

[mudcat1973]

State law overrides the NCAA and if schools are following their state laws on NIL the NCAA has no power.

States laws
cannot force NCAA to let schools play in bowl or championships.
That High court area.

 

[mudcat1973]

Since she has served on the NCAA Presidential Forum, it's my guess that Chancellor Plowman not only knows those people at the NCAA headquarters but also has a pretty good understanding of how to deal with them. The steps she and the University and the State of Tennessee have taken with this matter wasn't just some knee-jerk reaction. After reading her professional CV, I've no doubt she had all her ducks in a row before doing anything. Now it should be fun to sit on the sidelines and watch the fireworks.

Are Tennessee boosters / sponsorships safe from a ban from Tennessee like NCAA got Florida state.
That is the question will a Tennesse booster or sponsorships get a three year ban like Florida state booster got.


Just my take NCAA will try to get some one

at Tennesse if they can.

bank on it.

 

[Majors]

Spyre said in their statement yesterday that the deal they made with Nico was made under Cal. law and was therefore legal. So appears they did their homework on this.

It’s a non issue…Spyre was ahead of the NIL game for a reason.

 

[Dadof2Vols]

NFL shares a certain % of their tv contact money with players get set %
Not sure about tickets sales sharing % if they do that.
Not follow NFL close for a while.
But do remember when free agency started.
NFL teams one spot teams could kept but has to pay equal money.five or ten in the NFL for Quarterbacks RB WR OL TE kicker or whatever positions the team puts a franchise tag on.
The NFL sets their salary Cap department on TV contact and other money the owners and players agree to share.

It works in the NFL each team has a maximum amount to speed.
Did know what % the owners got and the player's got.
I think players got around 63% know for sure it was 50% plus.

But that is all their pay it has nothing to do with their NIL and what they make off the field. That is all they can make And league has no say on what they make off their NIL.

 

[Volfan2012]

NCAA should've stuck to follow state law on NIL cause that is what it is going to be anyway. Unless Congress passes a law for the entire country individual state laws will prevail in court. NCAA making rules are not worth the paper they are written on if a state law is in place for NIL activity.

 

[Voluble2]

Can’t even pretend like I know what goes on with NIL, but I came across this on Twitter.
View attachment 616680

Trying to enforce such a rule would be an anti-trust violation. The NCAA would lose, and lose big on that point. They can't interfere with a person's right to profit off their NIL and they can't regulate the activities of private entities. Their trying to force collectives to not offer kids of a certain age, or before they sign with a university will absolutely not fly in court because they will have used their monopoly power to try to reduce the ability and opportunities of an athlete to earn money from NIL. If the NCAA has an argument that will work, it won't be that one.

UT's problem is that they want an injunction to stop the process before it gets started. But usually to get an injuction you have to have suffered some sort of harm. The NCAA has not issued charges or even given official notice yet so it is harder to get a court to issue an injunction under those circumstances. It is a Catch-22 timing wise.

This is all compounded by the fact that every school out there is doing the same thing due to NCAA guidance or lack of guidance, so selectively picking a few for punishment will also be hard for them to defend. There is a principle in law known as acquiesence which might come into play here as well.

The long and the short of it is that what/when an athlete is paid for NIL is completely outside the purview of the NCAA, and the only "who" they can regulate is the universities themselves. I think the booster stuff is going away because the first time the NCAA interferes with a kid receiving money they will be on the hook for what he would have been paid and boosters have every right to invest in or give to collectives which have a legal and constitutionally protected purpose. I think it was Nico's lawyer who said the NCAA would be facing a suit the day after they tried something like that. It looks like he knew what he was talking about.

I will also add that the lawsuit makes it very difficult for the NCAA to proceed here. Every statement any of their representatives/investigators make, and everything they do while "investigating" UT will be evidence that can show up in court. There is nothing but downside for them here. If they are smart they will back off and live to fight another day by coming at the issue another way because this is an existential threat to them. Before I read a little about the issue I thought that was an exaggeration, but it really isn't.

 

[mudcat1973]

NCAA should've stuck to follow state law on NIL cause that is what it is going to be anyway. Unless Congress passes a law for the entire country individual state laws will prevail in court. NCAA making rules are not worth the paper they are written on if a state law is in place for NIL activity.

Seen a YouTube or somewhere schools or official wants Congress help on passing a law.
If keeps getting a bigger mess.
Could see Congress looking into it in a non election year.

 

[mudcat1973]

But that is all their pay it has nothing to do with their NIL and what they make off the field. That is all they can make And league has no say on what they make off their NIL.

they could regulate boosters Who are tied to the University if they shared TV money with players. But players who have deals with shoesdrinks or something else. They couldn't stop that.

Just depends if Tennessee University and others are willing to share profit-share money. And made players employees.

 

[Volfan2012]

Seen a YouTube or somewhere schools or official wants Congress help on passing a law.
If keeps getting a bigger mess.
Could see Congress looking into it in a non election year.

Would be the best because some states have bad NIL laws and other like Tennessee have very good ones. So going by state law creates and uneven playing field for some schools with bad laws. So the NCAA made a rule that they say every school agreed to abide by except they kept changing along the way until now one knew how to comply. Looks like Tennessee started going back to abiding by state NIL laws. This creates violations of the last NCAA rule, but 0 violations of Tennessee state law. So the NCAA is telling Tennessee you agreed to abide by our rule and not state rules. Tennessee is saying we couldn't figure out what your rules were so we abided by state rules. If it goes to court very huge change Tennessee wins and then the NCAA will be voided.

 

[Voluble2]

States laws
cannot force NCAA to let schools play in bowl or championships.
That High court area.

Courts can say the NIL remuneration is completely outside the NCAA's purview, and no less august an entity than the Supreme Court has said so. And that decision was 9-0.

It is like if the NCAA wanted to punish any school who had a booster or athlete who voted a certain way, had a certain job, followed a particular religion, made a certain amount of money etc... All of these things are rights that people have. The NCAA has no say in them. Theoretically the NCAA could use its monopoly power as the gateway to professional sports to pressure or prevent people from exercising those rights but for the existence of anti-trust laws.

Which is why the very first thing the UT lawsuit mentions is the Sherman Act.

 

[turbovol]

You can't actually have NIL if any player is not allowed to test their value to any college. The college wants him or her for their athletic ability not their academic prowess. This being true then the NCAA is trying to restrict the rights of any athlete to find the best deal for them because the only way they can do this is inquire of several schools and the NCAA is saying you can't do that and the schools can't answer. Looks like the NCAA is going to lose easily because you can't restrict the earning rights to anyone persons name and likeness because they own it not the NCAA.

When did this idea develop that prospective student-athletes deserve deals--deserve to be paid? The problem is that NIL has been corrupted so that recruiting--for football and basketball, and to a lesser degree other sports--has just become a bribery contest. Some say high-school prospects have a right to find the best deal for themselves. I say it just turns recruiting into bribery--and it CLEARLY is turning some, if not many prospects into money-grubbing mercenaries. "Who gonna pay me the most?" THIS is what we want college athletics to become? Not me. And it's turning a lot of colleges into saps, because they'll throw money at a lot of players who won't even pan out in college. Half the top 100 football prospects every year, on average, do not become top college players--or even regular starters.

Why would any NCAA member below the major-college level support NIL has it's being used now--to bribe prospects? It only benefits the major problems that have the most rich, crazy boosters who've got nothing better to do with their lives then fret about college games. Hence we see Texas A&M making a laughingstock of itself by agreeing to pay $76 million to its football coach as part of the process of sacking him. Crazy (seriously crazy) booster will cover most of that cost, I'm sure--AND they'll pony up millions more to hire the next coach and pay the buyout to his current school. So we're talking about an outlay of about $100 million because your coach didn't win as many games as you--the boosters and the AD--wanted him to win. It's insane. Absurd. Ridiculous.

If college athletics continues along this no-integrity path, then college athletic departments should be privatized and split completely from their colleges as they really have no relation to college and amateurism anymore. And of course fans are part of the problem. Most in some of these states-and Tennessee is one--didn't go to college and so have no appreciation for the totality of the college experience, which would include--yea, that's right---academics, as even football and basketball players are--surprise--full-time students on full scholarships--scholarships worth a LOT of money, by the way, at least $250K over four years. So this notion that football players are some poor, put-upon souls is utter nonsense.

NIL was conceived to get //existing// student-athletes a cut of any merch that uses their name, image or likeness--or for promotional appearances, etc. That's fine. But it's been corrupt and turned into a tool for bribing prospects--and to me that is not fine. It's making a mockery of what is supposed to be college. As I say, if you want to make college players professionals, then private and professionalize college football/basketball, split it from the colleges and give it a new name.

 

[Volfan2012]

When did this idea develop that prospective student-athletes deserve deals--deserve to be paid? The problem is that NIL has been corrupted so that recruiting--for football and basketball, and to a lesser degree other sports--has just become a bribery contest. Some say high-school prospects have a right to find the best deal for themselves. I say it just turns recruiting into bribery--and it CLEARLY is turning some, if not many prospects into money-grubbing mercenaries. "Who gonna pay me the most?" THIS is what we want college athletics to become? Not me. And it's turning a lot of colleges into saps, because they'll throw money at a lot of players who won't even pan out in college. Half the top 100 football prospects every year, on average, do not become top college players--or even regular starters.

Why would any NCAA member below the major-college level support NIL has it's being used now--to bribe prospects? It only benefits the major problems that have the most rich, crazy boosters who've got nothing better to do with their lives then fret about college games. Hence we see Texas A&M making a laughingstock of itself by agreeing to pay $76 million to its football coach as part of the process of sacking him. Crazy (seriously crazy) booster will cover most of that cost, I'm sure--AND they'll pony up millions more to hire the next coach and pay the buyout to his current school. So we're talking about an outlay of about $100 million because your coach didn't win as many games as you--the boosters and the AD--wanted him to win. It's insane. Absurd. Ridiculous.

If college athletics continues along this no-integrity path, then college athletic departments should be privatized and split completely from their colleges as they really have no relation to college and amateurism anymore. And of course fans are part of the problem. Most in some of these states-and Tennessee is one--didn't go to college and so have no appreciation for the totality of the college experience, which would include--yea, that's right---academics, as even football and basketball players are--surprise--full-time students on full scholarships--scholarships worth a LOT of money, by the way, at least $250K over four years. So this notion that football players are some poor, put-upon souls is utter nonsense.

NIL was conceived to get //existing// student-athletes a cut of any merch that uses their name, image or likeness--or for promotional appearances, etc. That's fine. But it's been corrupt and turned into a tool for bribing prospects--and to me that is not fine. It's making a mockery of what is supposed to be college. As I say, if you want to make college players professionals, then private and professionalize college football/basketball, split it from the colleges and give it a new name.

The Supreme court said it 9 to 0 that they could market their name and likeness to anyone willing to listen. Nobody has to pay them anything that is unwilling to do so, but they have the right to market their value to anyone willing to listen. No one owns a person they own themselves and that is the premise behind NIl. If they are out there and they get offers from ten different sources they are in a free country, which we still are at this point, allowed to look at and negotiate those offers from the schools, or whomever to use their talents for pay. So if someone wants to pay someone 100 million to walk around the block they are free to do so and of course the person is free to accept. It is all about value and what someone else perceives your value to be. They have a talent and should be paid for that talent as much as they can get and that is where it will be for now on going forward.

 

[tn4elvis]

The Supreme court said it 9 to 0 that they could market their name and likeness to anyone willing to listen. Nobody has to pay them anything that is unwilling to do so, but they have the right to market their value to anyone willing to listen. No one owns a person they own themselves and that is the premise behind NIl. If they are out there and they get offers from ten different sources they are in a free country, which we still are at this point, allowed to look at and negotiate those offers from the schools, or whomever to use their talents for pay. So if someone wants to pay someone 100 million to walk around the block they are free to do so and of course the person is free to accept. It is all about value and what someone else perceives your value to be. They have a talent and should be paid for that talent as much as they can get and that is where it will be for now on going forward.

 

[Majors]

The Supreme court said it 9 to 0 that they could market their name and likeness to anyone willing to listen. Nobody has to pay them anything that is unwilling to do so, but they have the right to market their value to anyone willing to listen. No one owns a person they own themselves and that is the premise behind NIl. If they are out there and they get offers from ten different sources they are in a free country, which we still are at this point, allowed to look at and negotiate those offers from the schools, or whomever to use their talents for pay. So if someone wants to pay someone 100 million to walk around the block they are free to do so and of course the person is free to accept. It is all about value and what someone else perceives your value to be. They have a talent and should be paid for that talent as much as they can get and that is where it will be for now on going forward.

90’s NCAA video games and jersey sales coming home to collect

 

[turbovol]

Yes---and so you've got the absurd reality of crazy major programs, with their crazy boosters, opting to try and outbid their crazy
major rivals for top prospects, because they're exceedingly crazy about the idea of winning college football games. The pros don't even
do this: The NFL holds an orderly draft--and then the clubs pay their draft picks within a predetermined salary range according to the draft
number. There is no chaotic bidding among 32 teams for any and all players.

I just talked to a friend in Florida who said two high-school students were suing the state---or some entity--for NIL money. It's all got stupid.

Why would schools want to get into bidding contests anyway? You've got to dun (crazy) boosters and contributors for even more money so
you can try and outbid Auburn, Florida and Ole Miss for some pimply 18-year-old who may or may not be any good. It completely complicates recruiting. If the schools were smart, they'd all just quietly stop with the NIL idiocy and go back to recruiting as it was--sell your coaches, tradition, facilities, academics, environment, etc. Programs are stupid to engage in NIL recruiting. Not to mention the fact that NIL means two-thirds of the teams in the country will have no chance of ever landing a top prospect again, because they don't have a bunch of crazy old men willing to empty their bank accounts to pay some kid a pile of money to sign.

What's more, you are paying big money to some prospects--and they can ditch your program after a year and go somewhere else--and of course many players have been doing exactly this. There are a bunch of top QB prospects from the last 2, 3, 4 years that have transferred two/three times. So you've ponied up a half million dollars for some dude who wakes up unhappy one day and decides to transfer. The players have no loyalty to the schools they first signed with. The programs are being totally stupid to engage in NIL recruiting.

 

[lvocd]

But... yeah... Donde Plowman is a rock star among university chancellors. She very well could be viewed in the future as one of the key figures, if not THE key figure, in bringing about a sea change in the landscape of college athletics. She's OUR warrior! *grinning with pride*

 

[mudcat1973]

Yes---and so you've got the absurd reality of crazy major programs, with their crazy boosters, opting to try and outbid their crazy
major rivals for top prospects, because they're exceedingly crazy about the idea of winning college football games. The pros don't even
do this: The NFL holds an orderly draft--and then the clubs pay their draft picks within a predetermined salary range according to the draft
number. There is no chaotic bidding among 32 teams for any and all players.

I just talked to a friend in Florida who said two high-school students were suing the state---or some entity--for NIL money. It's all got stupid.

Why would schools want to get into bidding contests anyway? You've got to dun (crazy) boosters and contributors for even more money so
you can try and outbid Auburn, Florida and Ole Miss for some pimply 18-year-old who may or may not be any good. It completely complicates recruiting. If the schools were smart, they'd all just quietly stop with the NIL idiocy and go back to recruiting as it was--sell your coaches, tradition, facilities, academics, environment, etc. Programs are stupid to engage in NIL recruiting. Not to mention the fact that NIL means two-thirds of the teams in the country will have no chance of ever landing a top prospect again, because they don't have a bunch of crazy old men willing to empty their bank accounts to pay some kid a pile of money to sign.

What's more, you are paying big money to some prospects--and they can ditch your program after a year and go somewhere else--and of course many players have been doing exactly this. There are a bunch of top QB prospects from the last 2, 3, 4 years that have transferred two/three times. So you've ponied up a half million dollars for some dude who wakes up unhappy one day and decides to transfer. The players have no loyalty to the schools they first signed with. The programs are being totally stupid to engage in NIL recruiting.

I said pay a player equal same over four years.
That way can't leave with a sign ING bonus

You have good points.
In what you said