State of Tennessee Wins the Injunction

[ThatVolGuy]

A good return? You have no idea what you're getting with a high-school player. There have been studies showing that half the top 100 prospects do not make a major impact in college, for various reasons. And there will be absurd bidding wars for some top prospects--maybe a lot of them--because nobody wants to get left out. There will be escalation---guaranteed. We've got fans of our women's BB program who say it doesn't recruit well because it's not spending enough money on bribes---aka--NIL offers. It's no different than the facilities wars in the SEC: One program upgrades its weight room or locker room, and the other major programs in the conference then HAVE to follow suit and build something better....and on and on it goes. Tennessee fans apparently have deluded themselves into thinking that NIL is this ticket to success. Uh, no: Of course we'll get into it whole hog if it becomes standard practice---but it's not going to change the pecking order in the conference. As soon as one school enriches a prospect or two who turn out to be good players who help that school win games, the pot-bellied boosters at other schools will stand around at gatherings, whiskey in hand--and say: "We gotta grow our NIL money." We're not going to outspend/out-bribe bama, georgia, texas and a&M, oklahoma and all the rest in other conferences and get better prospects. Everyone will get and lose their share. We might start beating bama because Saban is no longer in Tuscaloosa, but it won't be because of NIL. And that will be true for everybody, because all the fans/boosters at all the majors at bat-$hit crazy, and nobody's going to gain an advantage.

Okay, so it turns out this is just a new manifestation of Battered Vol Syndrome. Now that I've diagnosed it, your rants make much more sense.

Regarding the bolded part, what do you mean "we'll get into it whole hog"? Has your head been in the sand for the past few years? Spyre has been at the forefront of NIL dealings since the beginning.

 

[Jack Burton]

Basilio has been saying for two weeks Tennessee would likely lose per his sources. Wrong again....

It’s possible you’re misrepresenting his reporting. Marcos Garza was on the show and said it was 60/40 likely that TN would lose the TRO, which they did. Did you credit them for getting that right? Since then all the talk I heard was that the injunction could go either way, TN was likely to win the overall case, and that TN would fight any NOA that comes from the NCAA if it ever did.

His sources...both cheeks of his azz. Amirite @Jack Burton ?

Of course you would obsess over another man’s butt. Boom roasted

 

[ThatVolGuy]

Major capitalists supporter however I don’t think 17-18 year old kids need that kind of money given to them especially if they are coming from not having any money. Some will do fine and probably help their families out of financial woes and maybe be decently responsible with it. Most will not. A lot will get in trouble, develop unsustainable spending habits once the nil realizes that they are not the product worth being paid(as in disappointments) or some will develop attitudes that they don’t need to develop their craft better. You will have some that will have their parents or custodians taken advantage of them or even abusing them to get them in. It’s a huge mess and I talk to a few nfl and ex nfl players and they are worried about these issues. Again, I don’t want to or be told how much I can make, but these situations will arise and I don’t think most 17-20 year olds are ready for it

I once had a 45-year-old boss who was basically MIA for the better part of a year because, unbeknownst to his team, he started dabbling heavily in recreational drugs.

Since nobody can be trusted, maybe we need a Worthiness Council™ to determine how much every individual should be able to make?

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I think you keep missing the point here. Nothing is getting passed without some sort of profit sharing arrangement, it's not happening. There aren't going to be anywhere close to the votes for that, however Congress can legally pass a law amending it's own law if they can agree on something. The only thing that has a prayer to pass is something dictating that a substantial percentage of the TV money be shared with the players, and provided that it is shared the NCAA will have authority to enforce it's rules to promote fair competition and fund the non-revenue sports, (which are pretty much all women's sports and spring sports) while being immune from Antitrust suits. Ironically, it was initially argued that the Antitrust laws themselves were anti-capitalist. Certainly, if they did not exist (and the pure libertarian position would be that Congress should have never have passed them to begin with), the NCAA would have free reign here, so this capitalism argument rings kind of hollow in this context because government legislation has already created the current situation.

There's no way "revenue sharing" occurs without employee or shareholder status, IMO. Employee status makes "college athletics" into a pro league.

The current nightmare: it's neither fair nor legal for a big, lucrative (at some schools) business like college football and basketball to not compensate those players at market value AND have them provide the entertainment that allows schools to fund an athletics department.

The coming nightmare: treating those highly skilled players as employees and somehow dodging the lawsuits of other athletes at the same school who may very well look like employees legally and deserve compensation.

The best solution, IMO, for the big-time sports schools is to get out of the pro sports business and TRY to convince the courts they've seen the error of getting away from their educational mission by cancelling the lucrative media contracts, intentionally shrinking athletic revenue, forcing fans into "Pay per View" or butts in seats to see games, and stop treating their athletic departments like pro franchises.

It will be painful for fans and make coaching less lucrative, being a player less lucrative, being an AD less lucrative.

Repentance requires genuine thought about where your heart lies. Right now, UT's heart lies in athletic revenue in many ways.

 

[unfrozencvmanvol]

There's no way "revenue sharing" occurs without employee or shareholder status, IMO. Employee status makes "college athletics" into a pro league.

The current nightmare: it's neither fair nor legal for a big, lucrative (at some schools) business like college football and basketball to not compensate those players at market value AND have them provide the entertainment that allows schools to fund an athletics department.

The coming nightmare: treating those highly skilled players as employees and somehow dodging the lawsuits of other athletes at the same school who may very well look like employees legally and deserve compensation.

The best solution, IMO, for the big-time sports schools is to get out of the pro sports business and TRY to convince the courts they've seen the error of getting away from their educational mission by cancelling the lucrative media contracts, intentionally shrinking athletic revenue, forcing fans into "Pay per View" or butts in seats to see games, and stop treating their athletic departments like pro franchises.

It will be painful for fans and make coaching less lucrative, being a player less lucrative, being an AD less lucrative.

Repentance requires genuine thought about where your heart lies. Right now, UT's heart lies in athletic revenue in many ways.

Revenue sharing can happen without employee status if Congress says it can. It's Congress's call because it's their law being violated currently. Congress could dictate that a third of all TV money go to stipends for the players, health insurance for football related injuries, etc. I think every school in the SEC received a 51 million dollar disbursement from the TV contract this past year. 17 million annually is more than enough to take care of UT's players and leave plenty of money to keep the other sports up. In return the NCAA would be able to enforce rules (like uniform rules regarding the use of NIL as a recruiting inducement) because of the conditional exemption from antitrust.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Revenue sharing can happen without employee status if Congress says it can. It's Congress's call because it's their law being violated currently. Congress could dictate that a third of all TV money go to stipends for the players, health insurance for football related injuries, etc. for the players. I think every school in the SEC received a 51 million dollar disbursement from the TV contract done. 17 million annually is more than enough to take care of UT's players and leave plenty of money to keep the other sports up. In return the NCAA would be able to enforce rules (like uniform rules regarding the use of NIL as a recruiting inducement) because of the conditional exemption from antitrust.

I'm not an attorney but I'm not aware of a situation where "revenue sharing" occurs among non employees other than stockholders.

There's no way athletes obtain stockholder status nor any form of ownership in the programs, of course.

Do you know of an example where a business practices "revenue sharing" for labor with non-employees?

 

[Voltopia]

There's plenty of TV money to go around, will just have to prioritize their spending a little better. You imagine it will be better if football and basketball go independent and that money is no longer available at all to women's sports/spring sports?

Yeah, considering most athletic departments run at or near a deficit many years, and we're talking taking 5-7 percent of every program's revenue off the top, I don't think "prioritizing their spending a little better" is going to cut it. There's only a handful of programs that make any profit, and if you cut anywhere from 5-15 million of their TV money, well, good luck with that whole thing.

The only thing schools will be able to do is cut other sports and reduce the number of teams they field. Which everyone seems to be fine with, so, that'll probably be how they address the shortfall.

 

[Johnnyreb#VFL]

I read it as until yall get your sh** together and figure out definitive rules and regulations for NIL, you can’t do anything about it.

I don’t see it as the end of the NCAA.

Make players sign 2-4 year contracts to help with transfer portal issues. Problem solved

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I read it as until yall get your sh** together and figure out definitive rules and regulations for NIL, you can’t do anything about it.

I don’t see it as the end of the NCAA.

Make players sign 2-4 year contracts to help with transfer portal issues. Problem solved

"Make players sign contracts to play 2-4 years" but say they aren't employees, but students like others who can transfer at will? You like being sued, eh?

 

[unfrozencvmanvol]

I'm not an attorney but I'm not aware of a situation where "revenue sharing" occurs among non employees other than stockholders.

There's no way athletes obtain stockholder status nor any form of ownership in the programs, of course.

Do you know of an example where a business practices "revenue sharing" for labor with non-employees?

Associated real estate agents get revenue shared with them from sales without being employees of the broker in most states. The bottom line is it's Congress's law is being broken here and if a compromise can be worked out which gets the necessary votes, Congress can change the status quo by giving the NCAA an antitrust exemption in exchange for certain concessions. That's what the NCAA is hoping for (again many pages ago someone asked what the NCAA's goal was, that's what started this conversation). That's what their goal is. Not saying they will get the votes, but if they did, legally it could happen and alter the current landscape.

 

[butchna]

It’s possible you’re misrepresenting his reporting. Marcos Garza was on the show and said it was 60/40 likely that TN would lose the TRO, which they did. Did you credit them for getting that right? Since then all the talk I heard was that the injunction could go either way, TN was likely to win the overall case, and that TN would fight any NOA that comes from the NCAA if it ever did.



Of course you would obsess over another man’s butt. Boom roasted

You present yourself as "anti-pumper", yet you pump that man like you have stock in Philadelphia.

 

[unfrozencvmanvol]

I read it as until yall get your sh** together and figure out definitive rules and regulations for NIL, you can’t do anything about it.

I don’t see it as the end of the NCAA.

Make players sign 2-4 year contracts to help with transfer portal issues. Problem solved

Actually, they are saying you have no authority to figure out definitive rules and regulations for NIL because you are acting as a monopoly in violation of Antitrust. That's why the NCAA is going to run back to Congress with this ruling and say "we can't fix this, only you can".

 

[knox73]

This is a super analysis by Dave Hooker and attorney Jones. The NCAA powers/staff were brutally stupid to pick the NIL fight with the universities. Will their egos allow them to compromise or will they fall on their swords? Discussion from the Hooker show says it is like Blockbuster Video fighting Netflix and resistant to change. Anyway this discussion is quite good.

 

[unfrozencvmanvol]

Yeah, considering most athletic departments run at or near a deficit many years, and we're talking taking 5-7 percent of every program's revenue off the top, I don't think "prioritizing their spending a little better" is going to cut it. There's only a handful of programs that make any profit, and if you cut anywhere from 5-15 million of their TV money, well, good luck with that whole thing.

The only thing schools will be able to do is cut other sports and reduce the number of teams they field. Which everyone seems to be fine with, so, that'll probably be how they address the shortfall.

Again, you seem to think the situation will be better if football and basketball go independent and no portion of that money is accessible at all to the other sports, how does that work out in your mind? How is no portion of the 51 million dollars the football TV contract brought in last year going to fund other UT sports better than some of it?

 

[Voltopia]

Again, you seem to think the situation will be better if football and basketball go independent and no portion of that money is accessible at all, how does that work out in your mind?

I never said the situation would be better. I certainly don't think it will be "better." But the idea that departments can just "spend a little better" to make up millions of dollars is silly. They'll cut sports and cut programs. There is no other obvious alternative. College athletics programs are not the high profit engines people think they are.

 

[DaddyChad]

This is a super analysis by Dave Hooker and attorney Jones. The NCAA powers/staff were brutally stupid to pick the NIL fight with the universities. Will their egos allow them to compromise or will they fall on their swords? Discussion from the Hooker show says it is like Blockbuster Video fighting Netflix and resistant to change. Anyway this discussion is quite good.

No offense but I’m not watching anything with that buffoon Calhoun in it. I don’t endorse idiots that tear down the coach or program.

 

[unfrozencvmanvol]

I never said the situation would be better. I certainly don't think it will be "better." But the idea that departments can just "spend a little better" is silly. They'll cut sports and cut programs. College athletics programs are not the high profit engines people think they are.

The schools are reaching the point where they are not going to be able to avoid revenue sharing with the players, one way or another. I'm thinking they will ultimately decide a half a loaf of bread is better than no loaf and figure out a way to make the half a loaf work.

 

[Voltopia]

The schools are reaching the point where they are not going to be able to avoid revenue sharing with the players, one way or another. I'm thinking they will ultimately decide a half a loaf of bread is better than no loaf and figure out a way to make the half a loaf work.

I'm well aware they're on a crash course with some form of revenue sharing. I said athletic deparments are going to have to cut other teams and reduce the number of sports they support to cover the loss of revenue. That's how "half a loaf" is gonna work. And hey, that doesn't seem to bother a lot of people, so - full speed ahead.

 

[kckempf]

Is there any way a revenue sharing model, or any sort of salary cap, can work without both an antitrust exemption and a player union? The major leagues have these things because the teams are exempt from being classified as a non-competitive cartel, and the player engage in collective bargaining with the leagues and agree to the terms of the revenue sharing and salary cap.

 

[ddubb76]

I once had a 45-year-old boss who was basically MIA for the better part of a year because, unbeknownst to his team, he started dabbling heavily in recreational drugs.

Since nobody can be trusted, maybe we need a Worthiness Council™ to determine how much every individual should be able to make?

Ridiculous statement. Not saying we should control the amount of money people make. I am stating that young people are more apt to make bad choices otherwise there would be no need to parent them into their mid 20s nowadays. We could just let them discover whatever once they were eating on their own. I’m saying maybe let them make whatever but maybe make some of these people paying them put it into a trust of some sort so they can mature financially before they are just handed the keys. Most of you are forgetting the life lesson of college is a place of struggling and earning your way with ramen noodles and kool aid to be able to establish a hunger to succeed. Old school I guess but go ahead and get offfended that I think most young people are irresponsible and not capable of handling that type of money yet. You will probably be first in line to support them once they make bad decisions with more money they most make in a life time and squander it away on drugs parties cars and whatever else.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Ridiculous statement. Not saying we should control the amount of money people make. I am stating that young people are more apt to make bad choices otherwise there would be no need to parent them into their mid 20s nowadays. We could just let them discover whatever once they were eating on their own. I’m saying maybe let them make whatever but maybe make some of these people paying them put it into a trust of some sort so they can mature financially before they are just handed the keys. Most of you are forgetting the life lesson of college is a place of struggling and earning your way with ramen noodles and kool aid to be able to establish a hunger to succeed. Old school I guess but go ahead and get offfended that I think most young people are irresponsible and not capable of handling that type of money yet. You will probably be first in line to support them once they make bad decisions with more money they most make in a life time and squander it away on drugs parties cars and whatever else.

Who are you to say "this is what's best for all of them" with some kind of trust? Hendon Hooker did pretty good things with his NIL as has Arch Manning, I believe.

It's not your brush to paint with.

 

[TennesseeTarheel]

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

The NCAA needed a Closet Cleaning event. Going forward, the capacity they operate in and how much authority they have will be question. It will be hard to sign into membership with the NCAA because of their handling of this situation. What's more, their intent may have been to force the issue to get attention and visibility. They may have incorrectly assumed that they would gather support in the process for their existence. Instead, the bridges that they have burned may not be rebuilt.

When your only option is to go to Congress for clarity and support, then, lots of luck. Any Federal law by Congress years to come will be challenged by States.

It appears, the NCAA is seeking Federally Mandated power to oversee College Athletics.

Given what the Supreme Court has termed an illegal model, the NCAA isn't likely to get an anti-trust exemption.

 

[Matt2496]

Isn't it great that the good guys win for a change?

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

There's no way "revenue sharing" occurs without employee or shareholder status, IMO. Employee status makes "college athletics" into a pro league.

The current nightmare: it's neither fair nor legal for a big, lucrative (at some schools) business like college football and basketball to not compensate those players at market value AND have them provide the entertainment that allows schools to fund an athletics department.

The coming nightmare: treating those highly skilled players as employees and somehow dodging the lawsuits of other athletes at the same school who may very well look like employees legally and deserve compensation.

The best solution, IMO, for the big-time sports schools is to get out of the pro sports business and TRY to convince the courts they've seen the error of getting away from their educational mission by cancelling the lucrative media contracts, intentionally shrinking athletic revenue, forcing fans into "Pay per View" or butts in seats to see games, and stop treating their athletic departments like pro franchises.

It will be painful for fans and make coaching less lucrative, being a player less lucrative, being an AD less lucrative.

Repentance requires genuine thought about where your heart lies. Right now, UT's heart lies in athletic revenue in many ways.

Getting rid of TV money and contracts is never going to happen.