'22 TN RB Jordan James (Oregon commit)

[sjt18]

You believe college football has ever had equity? The “corruption” has always been here.

Are you the same person who argued for moral relativism a few weeks ago on this?

Murder has always happened and there is no "equity" in who gets caught and punished... therefore we should not have laws against murder that we attempt to enforce, right? OR should we try to enhance the laws and improve enforcement so there's less murder?

Political corruption has never been equitable and especially to those who play by the rules. So we should just accept it... right?

The fact that wrongs have been committed or gone unpunished is NOT a justification for accepting future wrongs.

 

[volinSmyrna]

I wouldn't limit the money except to say that a contract for NIL should have terms for delivery. If the player is going to get $100,000 per year then the company should have in writing what they will get in return. It should be verifiable.

It could be as simple as Hooker going to the local Toyota dealership for a big sales event and autograph signing. Product endorsements are going to be huge. Doing a subdivision grand opening.

My issue is that I don't want this to simply be a direct payment for playing football for a particular school. That is not what the ruling was about.

I really, really DON'T want bureaucrats from government or the NCAA in the business of setting or capping prices.

I 100% can agree with this.

 

[LouderVol]

LOL... That's been a HUGE problem when it comes to direct payment to players and the inequity that creates.

You obviously do not care that you are advocating a corrupt system that will destroy college sports in every way that matters. Competition will decrease with it becoming simply a war of whose alumni is willing to pony up more... or has the ability.

I am advocating nothing more than the legitimate rules in business that keep competition above board.

Except that's always been the case. It's just now done in the open.

If these businesses did the same thing for you, gave you a million bucks so they could hang your photo in their office, would you be corrupt? Would the system that allows that be corrupt?

If a business wants to hire you away from your current employer and offers you better money are they corrupt? Are you corrupt for taking more?

The corruption was keeping the money out of the kids hands. The system was built around keeping the money in the pockets of the schools and NCAA. That got rightly tore down. The only one at fault is the NCAA who fought tooth and nail instead of heading the issue off.

 

[Vol8188]

Are you the same person who argued for moral relativism a few weeks ago on this?

Murder has always happened and there is no "equity" in who gets caught and punished... therefore we should not have laws against murder that we attempt to enforce, right? OR should we try to enhance the laws and improve enforcement so there's less murder?

Political corruption has never been equitable and especially to those who play by the rules. So we should just accept it... right?

The fact that wrongs have been committed or gone unpunished is NOT a justification for accepting future wrongs.

You did a great job at rambling, but you never addressed the point. What’s the current problem? Inequity? That’s your issue?

I have no issue with the “inequity” of college football. Nor do 90% of the fans. Why should we?

You’ve not made any compelling arguments for that. I do not see “inequity” as a form of corruption nor have you stated why I should. Instead you’ve just accused me of accepting murder and corruption

 

[sjt18]

Except that's always been the case. It's just now done in the open.

The claim that it has always been the case and justifying past cheating... isn't a good basis for saying that something should be the way it is now.

If these businesses did the same thing for you, gave you a million bucks so they could hang your photo in their office, would you be corrupt? Would the system that allows that be corrupt?

If they wrote a contract stating that they could use my image for $1 million then no. They'd be stupid. Their investors would never accept it. It would make them uncompetitive. But that isn't a direct parallel.

NIL introduces a situation where you guys are giving a thumbs up to not just a table that is naturally unlevel due to fan support and interest... but is in fact corrupt where the best team is available purely to the highest bidder. That will destroy the game. You might as well take the top 20 richest alumni bases and create a professional league with those programs. Why even bother having them attend class? Going to class is a complete farce.

If a business wants to hire you away from your current employer and offers you better money are they corrupt? Are you corrupt for taking more?

Not even close to the same. If they did that then they would be expecting something of value in return. And that's what I'm saying about NIL. An NIL agreement should contain some "deliverable" on the part of the player.

The corruption was keeping the money out of the kids hands.

Nope. That narrative is and always has been false. The kids were amateurs who got a college education and expenses worth about $200K over 4 years PLUS the opportunity to show case their abilities for the NFL. No one forced them to sign the LOI. No one prevented them from going pro or playing in Canada or working at McDonalds. They were getting something with a DIRECT benefit of around $200K plus the residual benefit of a college degree that many other wise would not have had. The whole notion that they were cheated because college football makes money... is ludicrous. No one made them play... and if they chose not to play fans would have supported their replacement.

The system was built around keeping the money in the pockets of the schools and NCAA. That got rightly tore down. The only one at fault is the NCAA who fought tooth and nail instead of heading the issue off.

Nope. Not in the least. Not at all.

And NLI actually doesn't answer that particular question. It simply says that the NCAA and schools cannot prevent a person from selling rights to their name, image, or likeness. That is not the same as paying players out of the money made by schools and media.

 

[Vol8188]

The claim that it has always been the case and justifying past cheating... isn't a good basis for saying that something should be the way it is now.

If they wrote a contract stating that they could use my image for $1 million then no. They'd be stupid. Their investors would never accept it. It would make them uncompetitive. But that isn't a direct parallel.

NIL introduces a situation where you guys are giving a thumbs up to not just a table that is naturally unlevel due to fan support and interest... but is in fact corrupt where the best team is available purely to the highest bidder. That will destroy the game. You might as well take the top 20 richest alumni bases and create a professional league with those programs. Why even bother having them attend class? Going to class is a complete farce.

Not even close to the same. If they did that then they would be expecting something of value in return. And that's what I'm saying about NIL. An NIL agreement should contain some "deliverable" on the part of the player.

Nope. That narrative is and always has been false. The kids were amateurs who got a college education and expenses worth about $200K over 4 years PLUS the opportunity to show case their abilities for the NFL. No one forced them to sign the LOI. No one prevented them from going pro or playing in Canada or working at McDonalds. They were getting something with a DIRECT benefit of around $200K plus the residual benefit of a college degree that many other wise would not have had. The whole notion that they were cheated because college football makes money... is ludicrous. No one made them play... and if they chose not to play fans would have supported their replacement.


Nope. Not in the least. Not at all.

And NLI actually doesn't answer that particular question. It simply says that the NCAA and schools cannot prevent a person from selling rights to their name, image, or likeness. That is not the same as paying players out of the money made by schools and media.

Who are you to determine what a business values and did you have issues with the “inequity” before NIL?

 

[sjt18]

You did a great job at rambling, but you never addressed the point. What’s the current problem? Inequity? That’s your issue?

You do not want to see or except the problem.

Inequity is a part of life. UT has a more devoted fanbase than Vandy. So NLI's for UT will be better and bigger than those for Vandy. Bama has national appeal. You'll never see me argue for "equality" of outcome or even a goal of "parity" like what ruined the NFL for a long time.

My objection is to the idea that "rich" boosters can simply give a kid money to play for their favorite team using the NLI ruling as cover. The ruling literally says that the player has the right to sell use of their name, image, or likeness. It does not say that someone can corrupt college football by directly paying a player for nothing more than playing for a particular school.

Now do you see the difference and concern?

I have no issue with the “inequity” of college football. Nor do 90% of the fans. Why should we?

That's not your problem. Your problem is that you have no objection to a system that will completely corrupt college football. Why even pretend they're "amateurs" if what you're supporting is allowed without control? Why not forgo the whole idea that they're amateur athletes association with non-profit educational institutions... just create a minor league for the NFL and forget about academics.

You’ve not made any compelling arguments for that. I do not see “inequity” as a form of corruption nor have you stated why I should. Instead you’ve just accused me of accepting murder and corruption

No. I made the DIRECT and OBVIOUS comparison between your excuse that corruption has always existed and therefore should be tolerated. Were you really not able to understand that analogy?

 

[Vol8188]

You do not want to see or except the problem.

Inequity is a part of life. UT has a more devoted fanbase than Vandy. So NLI's for UT will be better and bigger than those for Vandy. Bama has national appeal. You'll never see me argue for "equality" of outcome or even a goal of "parity" like what ruined the NFL for a long time.

My objection is to the idea that "rich" boosters can simply give a kid money to play for their favorite team using the NLI ruling as cover. The ruling literally says that the player has the right to sell use of their name, image, or likeness. It does not say that someone can corrupt college football by directly paying a player for nothing more than playing for a particular school.

Now do you see the difference and concern?

That's not your problem. Your problem is that you have no objection to a system that will completely corrupt college football. Why even pretend they're "amateurs" if what you're supporting is allowed without control? Why not forgo the whole idea that they're amateur athletes association with non-profit educational institutions... just create a minor league for the NFL and forget about academics.


No. I made the DIRECT and OBVIOUS comparison between your excuse that corruption has always existed and therefore should be tolerated. Were you really not able to understand that analogy?

No I don’t see the difference or concern. It seems you’re trying to find fault in kids getting paid. If people want to pay players, let them. Why’s that a problem?

At no point have you stated what makes this corrupt. No all the institutions are nonprofit nor does that matter.

You continue saying I have no problem with the corruption of the sport but have yet to define how the sport is being corrupted.

How does a kid getting paid corrupt the sport?

 

[sjt18]

Who are you to determine what a business values and did you have issues with the “inequity” before NIL?

Yes. I have always had a problem with the failure of the NCAA to enforce the rules equally and even to punish schools in a comparable way when they got caught.

I am no one. I'm not even suggesting that anyone set the value. Only that there should be a legitimate deliverable other than playing for a particular team when a player signs an NIL deal.

The reason we have a Securities and Exchange Commission... and Anti-Trust and Monopoly Laws is because it is realized that competition has to occur within a set of rules that prevent corruption and unfair tactics. If you don't then in the end you destroy competition AND the free market itself.

A few years ago, the Chinese targeted US steel companies. They sold steel at prices below the cost of materials. Had they succeeded then the end result would have been ONE winner... and everyone going to them for steel at whatever price they chose to charge.

In CFB, you could see these big NIL deals ultimately create just a handful of teams capable of winning. Other programs will wither and die. Is that really what you want to see when some reasonable regulation would prevent it?

 

[Vol8188]

Yes. I have always had a problem with the failure of the NCAA to enforce the rules equally and even to punish schools in a comparable way when they got caught.

I am no one. I'm not even suggesting that anyone set the value. Only that there should be a legitimate deliverable other than playing for a particular team when a player signs an NIL deal.

The reason we have a Securities and Exchange Commission... and Anti-Trust and Monopoly Laws is because it is realized that competition has to occur within a set of rules that prevent corruption and unfair tactics. If you don't then in the end you destroy competition AND the free market itself.

A few years ago, the Chinese targeted US steel companies. They sold steel at prices below the cost of materials. Had they succeeded then the end result would have been ONE winner... and everyone going to them for steel at whatever price they chose to charge.

In CFB, you could see these big NIL deals ultimately create just a handful of teams capable of winning. Other programs will wither and die. Is that really what you want to see when some reasonable regulation would prevent it?

Are you incapable of replying to direct questions and in 500 words or less?

You mentioned inequality as created by NIL and then deflected to NCAA punishment. Try to stay on topic. There’s always been only a handful of schools capable of winning.

Did you have a problem with that pre NIL? If so what’s your problem with it?

 

[sjt18]

No I don’t see the difference or concern. It seems you’re trying to find fault in kids getting paid. If people want to pay players, let them. Why’s that a problem?

If you really can't understand by now... I just hope that rational people who care about the future of the sport and maintaining some level of competition NEVER listen to people like you.

What you are advocating will literally destroy the sport.

At no point have you stated what makes this corrupt. No all the institutions are nonprofit nor does that matter.

Yes. Repeatedly in multiple ways. You just don't want to see it.

You continue saying I have no problem with the corruption of the sport but have yet to define how the sport is being corrupted.

How does a kid getting paid corrupt the sport?

For one, they've always been paid... legally. A free education with expenses paid including tutoring and academic resources unavailable to others... is payment. It is not only a payment but one with HUGE residual dividends.

You are advocating a system that favors monopolies. Big schools with rich alumni will have all of the good players. They'll get the recruits that are perceived to be the best and then will get the ones they miss through the portal.

If that's what you want... why even associate it with a college? Why not just let those donors create a minor league for the NFL and forget about academics altogether?

 

[Vol8188]

If you really can't understand by now... I just hope that rational people who care about the future of the sport and maintaining some level of competition NEVER listen to people like you.

What you are advocating will literally destroy the sport.

Yes. Repeatedly in multiple ways. You just don't want to see it.



For one, they've always been paid... legally. A free education with expenses paid including tutoring and academic resources unavailable to others... is payment. It is not only a payment but one with HUGE residual dividends.

You are advocating a system that favors monopolies. Big schools with rich alumni will have all of the good players. They'll get the recruits that are perceived to be the best and then will get the ones they miss through the portal.

If that's what you want... why even associate it with a college? Why not just let those donors create a minor league for the NFL and forget about academics altogether?

The system has always favored monopolies. You’ve yet to proclaim why that is “corrupt”. So direct and to the point, in under 500 words, what is the “corruption” you’re talking about?

 

[sjt18]

Are you incapable of replying to direct questions and in 500 words or less?

It apparently takes FAR MORE than that to get you to understand very simple concepts.

You mentioned inequality as created by NIL and then deflected to NCAA punishment.

You asked a question to which I gave a DIRECT answer. No. I have NEVER liked the degree to which the best cheaters were more successful in CFB. Still don't.

Try to stay on topic.

LOL@U. You ask a question. I answer it. And I'm the one off topic?

There’s always been only a handful of schools capable of winning.

And those names have changed over time and not largely due to who had the most money or bought the best players. I don't have a problem with the rise and fall of programs. I have a problem with your suggestion that would make those names permanent... and worse. What you are supporting would put a ceiling on programs who are on the out now.

Again, if you want this then why even pretend it is college athletics? What value is associating it with academics at all?

Did you have a problem with that pre NIL? If so what’s your problem with it?

Already answered that question. Yes. I have a problem with a lack of "rule of law"... a set of rules that everyone has to compete under. Someone will always be better. That's no problem. Some coaches and athletic departments and fanbases will just be better. That's no problem. But the idea that a rich guy will just buy players under the guise of NIL while making a farce of the idea that it is a legitimate business arrangement is a BIG problem.

Do you understand the logic of the ruling? You really don't seem to. It was NOT so that guys could get paid by a 3rd party to play college football.

 

[sjt18]

The system has always favored monopolies. You’ve yet to proclaim why that is “corrupt”. So direct and to the point, in under 500 words, what is the “corruption” you’re talking about?

You are being dense. You really are. If you really, really don't understand the consequences of monopolies and why they're destructive... then I can't help you... and definitely not with LESS words.

Maybe if you actually read and tried to understand the first 500... you wouldn't be so confused and overwhelmed by the next 500? So far we've discovered that you don't understand why competition and fair rules governing all is a good idea. You don't understand analogies. You can't understand direct answers to your own questions.

Unless we can get past those obstacles... I'll just have to let you be the guy sawing on the limb he's sitting on. Oh, sorry. Forgot that you don't do metaphors or analogies.

 

[Vol8188]

You are being dense. You really are. If you really, really don't understand the consequences of monopolies and why they're destructive... then I can't help you... and definitely not with LESS words.

Maybe if you actually read and tried to understand the first 500... you wouldn't be so confused and overwhelmed by the next 500? So far we've discovered that you don't understand why competition and fair rules governing all is a good idea. You don't understand analogies. You can't understand direct answers to your own questions.

Unless we can get past those obstacles... I'll just have to let you be the guy sawing on the limb he's sitting on. Oh, sorry. Forgot that you don't do metaphors or analogies.

More rambling….got it. Thanks for playing.

 

[DarthVol1]

Can I suggest a place you all can take this to

 

[orangefloyd]

So has this kid found a home yet?

 

[Nashvegas31]

I don’t see why we don’t take a shot considering we are looking at portal backs but I guess staff is more interested in a vet that is more advanced in pass pro to add to room

 

[T2P_Priceless]

I don’t see why we don’t take a shot considering we are looking at portal backs but I guess staff is more interested in a vet that is more advanced in pass pro to add to room

We have plenty of young backs. They’re looking for an experienced/proven back to step into the rotation

 

[gorockytop98]

In CFB, you could see these big NIL deals ultimately create just a handful of teams capable of winning.

So nothing will change lol.

 

[peaygolf]

Hopefully this kid doesn’t go to UF

 

[LouderVol]

The claim that it has always been the case and justifying past cheating... isn't a good basis for saying that something should be the way it is now.

If they wrote a contract stating that they could use my image for $1 million then no. They'd be stupid. Their investors would never accept it. It would make them uncompetitive. But that isn't a direct parallel.

NIL introduces a situation where you guys are giving a thumbs up to not just a table that is naturally unlevel due to fan support and interest... but is in fact corrupt where the best team is available purely to the highest bidder. That will destroy the game. You might as well take the top 20 richest alumni bases and create a professional league with those programs. Why even bother having them attend class? Going to class is a complete farce.

Not even close to the same. If they did that then they would be expecting something of value in return. And that's what I'm saying about NIL. An NIL agreement should contain some "deliverable" on the part of the player.

Nope. That narrative is and always has been false. The kids were amateurs who got a college education and expenses worth about $200K over 4 years PLUS the opportunity to show case their abilities for the NFL. No one forced them to sign the LOI. No one prevented them from going pro or playing in Canada or working at McDonalds. They were getting something with a DIRECT benefit of around $200K plus the residual benefit of a college degree that many other wise would not have had. The whole notion that they were cheated because college football makes money... is ludicrous. No one made them play... and if they chose not to play fans would have supported their replacement.


Nope. Not in the least. Not at all.

And NLI actually doesn't answer that particular question. It simply says that the NCAA and schools cannot prevent a person from selling rights to their name, image, or likeness. That is not the same as paying players out of the money made by schools and media.

I thought you were arguing that pay for play was the next logical step. I agree it is.

The issue with your, and the NCAAs, amateur argument is that it was never defined or upheld consistently. Somehow they are both not deserving compensation as an amateur, but yet they receive 200k in benefits? Which is it? That doesnt sound like an amateur. They sign a contract with their school that goes far beyond scholarship value, that doesnt sound like an amateur.

And the point you are being too obtuse to recognize on the problem existing before is that it never effected your enjoyment before. So it was fine when they took money under the table, but now that it's over the table it's too much? Or you were fine with the school giving them 200k in value but not them getting NIL money for their amateur contribution?

And if the business gets an ROI on their payments is not a factor on if this should be considered legit or not. That's solely on the business. The market will correct that problem super fast. If the same business pays their own employees too much for them to cover that's on them. Same with marketing. And schools were already leveraging their huge support bases to attract kids. That was the entire argument for many, hey once you are done here are our Fortune 500 companies you can get a job at. But now that that connection is moved up, it's wrong?

 

[LittleVol]

He's a good RB.

Wouldn't mind seeing him in Orange.
Excited about Simpson and Williams though!

 

[CAVPUT]

Someone alert Freak that something isn't right with his website. I keep looking for news on Jordan James but keep finding myself in an online philosopy/ethics class. Odd.

 

[NighthawkVol]

Hope he ends up at Oregon if he’s not coming to Tennessee.