xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com> wrote:

The NOTBCS Guy <don.p.del.grande@gmail.com> wrote:

The NCAA just announced its punishment against Miami for having a booster
make NIL deals to a couple of players with cooperation from the head
coach (who served a 3-game suspension earlier in the season because of it). >>
The main thing to come out of it is a statement from the Committee on
Infractions along the lines of, "Thanks to a new bylaw that took effect
on 1/1, we now have the ability to order somebody offering NIL money to
disassociate themselves from the school." This shouldn't be that big of a
problem in most cases, as I am under the impression that most NIL comes
from "really big fans" who don't actually give money to the schools or
receive any benefits from them in return (other than putting out some
Damn Good Football/Basketball), but still, any donor who gives out NIL
runs the risk of having the players involved being declared ineligible -
not to mention a potential bowl/playoff/tournament ban.

UNC’s AD was in the New York Times bemoaning the fact that booster money that used to go to the school is now being spent on NIL deals.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/24/magazine/ncaa-nba-student-athlete.amp.html

I forgot to add: this ruling will now make that worse.

--
“I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian, liberal personality.” — Altie

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The NOTBCS Guy <don.p.del.grande@gmail.com> wrote:

The NCAA just announced its punishment against Miami for having a booster make NIL deals to a couple of players with cooperation from the head
coach (who served a 3-game suspension earlier in the season because of it).

The main thing to come out of it is a statement from the Committee on Infractions along the lines of, "Thanks to a new bylaw that took effect
on 1/1, we now have the ability to order somebody offering NIL money to disassociate themselves from the school." This shouldn't be that big of a problem in most cases, as I am under the impression that most NIL comes
from "really big fans" who don't actually give money to the schools or receive any benefits from them in return (other than putting out some
Damn Good Football/Basketball), but still, any donor who gives out NIL
runs the risk of having the players involved being declared ineligible -
not to mention a potential bowl/playoff/tournament ban.

UNC’s AD was in the New York Times bemoaning the fact that booster money
that used to go to the school is now being spent on NIL deals.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/24/magazine/ncaa-nba-student-athlete.amp.html

--
“I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian, liberal personality.” — Altie

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

UNC’s AD was in the New York Times bemoaning the fact that booster money that used to go to the school is now being spent on NIL deals.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/24/magazine/ncaa-nba-student-athlete.amp.html

I forgot to add: this ruling will now make that worse.

"Worse" and "for the worse" are two different things. Certainly the boosters already realized that "licensing" the players has some advantages, including making sure all of the money goes into the sport(s) they are interested in without Title IX getting
in the way (and that works both ways - supporting women's programs, and yes, there are people that do that, doesn't require a chunk of the money going into the men's sports). It's just that the "clean break" that I have been going on about is being
treated seriously by the NCAA, although I have a feeling each school is going to be given one opportunity to "clean house" after getting caught and being given a slap on the wrist penalty. (That's per school, not per school per sport. I have a feeling
that any Miami donors signing any football players to NIL now will result in, at the very least, a one-year bowl/playoff ban.)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, February 24, 2023 at 4:58:31 PM UTC-6, xyzzy wrote:

The NOTBCS Guy <don.p.de...@gmail.com> wrote:

The NCAA just announced its punishment against Miami for having a booster make NIL deals to a couple of players with cooperation from the head
coach (who served a 3-game suspension earlier in the season because of it).

The main thing to come out of it is a statement from the Committee on Infractions along the lines of, "Thanks to a new bylaw that took effect
on 1/1, we now have the ability to order somebody offering NIL money to disassociate themselves from the school." This shouldn't be that big of a problem in most cases, as I am under the impression that most NIL comes from "really big fans" who don't actually give money to the schools or receive any benefits from them in return (other than putting out some
Damn Good Football/Basketball), but still, any donor who gives out NIL runs the risk of having the players involved being declared ineligible - not to mention a potential bowl/playoff/tournament ban.

UNC’s AD was in the New York Times bemoaning the fact that booster money that used to go to the school is now being spent on NIL deals.

As a whole though, the schools love it.

NIL is a HUGE WIN for the schools because it goes *some of the way* in appeasing players and people who believe players
should be paid. The problem is none of the money for paying the players comes from where it should come from.....which is of course deals like the bigten just signed in terms of broadcasting rights.

*That* is what they don't want to spread around to the players....and so far they haven't had to. Sure they don't want some rich donor who gives 250k every year to the athletic dept to now give 125k to the athletic dept and 125k to their NIL fund, but
it sure as hell beats having the share the money they should be sharing to pay players.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/24/magazine/ncaa-nba-student-athlete.amp.html

--
“I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian, liberal personality.” — Altie

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, February 24, 2023 at 3:01:23 PM UTC-6, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:

The NCAA just announced its punishment against Miami for having a booster make NIL deals to a couple of players with cooperation from the head coach (who served a 3-game suspension earlier in the season because of it).

The main thing to come out of it is a statement from the Committee on Infractions along the lines of, "Thanks to a new bylaw that took effect on 1/1, we now have the ability to order somebody offering NIL money to disassociate themselves from the

school." This shouldn't be that big of a problem in most cases, as I am under the impression that most NIL comes from "really big fans" who don't actually give money to the schools or receive any benefits from them in return (other than putting out some
Damn Good Football/Basketball), but still, any donor who gives out NIL runs the risk of having the players involved being declared ineligible - not to mention a potential bowl/playoff/tournament ban.

lol.....of course the schools are involved with NIL and the boosters. Like Auburn for example now has 14 million or so in it's NIL fund. Who
the rsfck do you think is deciding what players get the money? It's hugh freeze of course....the fact that that may be illegal just means that it will have to not have a direct paper trail.

It's the same with how there is a rule against NIL not supposed to be used to recruit high school players. 90% of NIL is that very thing now lmao....

NIL has *very little* to do with advertising likeness, marketing, etc.....it has nothing to do with "oh, now players can use their name to profit by advertising for the local dealership or pizza joint" lol. NOTHING. And everyone knew that....it's pay
for play.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

lol.....of course the schools are involved with NIL and the boosters. Like Auburn for example now has 14 million or so in it's NIL fund. Who
the rsfck do you think is deciding what players get the money? It's hugh freeze of course....the fact that that may be illegal just means that it will have to not have a direct paper trail.

That's not what is illegal. The NCAA just wants to make sure none of that money that goes to the players comes from Auburn. The Miami problem was that the person giving the money was a donor to the school, which is considered a "representative of the
school's athletic interests" - and even at that, what the panel really wanted was just for the school to disassociate themselves from him. Nothing stops Freeze from making public statements touting certain recruits that are actually coded messages to the
people with the NIL money.

It's the same with how there is a rule against NIL not supposed to be used to recruit high school players. 90% of NIL is that very thing now lmao....

Somebody forgot to tell the California Interscholastic Federation about this mysterious "rule."
I'll start believing the NCAA might care about this when Florida gets investigated over Jaden Rashada.

UNC’s AD was in the New York Times bemoaning the fact that booster money that used to go to the school is now being spent on NIL deals.

As a whole though, the schools love it.

NIL is a HUGE WIN for the schools because it goes *some of the way* in appeasing players and people who believe players
should be paid. The problem is none of the money for paying the players comes from where it should come from.....which is of course deals like the bigten just signed in terms of broadcasting rights.

There are two main reasons for this.
1. The NCAA is still trying to prevent the schools from "buying" players.
2. If a school starts giving money to athletes, half of it had better go to women (well, except maybe at VMI and The Citadel). Like I said before - Title IX doesn't apply to boosters. If a big enough chunk of the money that would have gone to the schools
but are now going to NIL deals would have been used to pay the players anyway, doesn't that just leave out the middleman?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, February 24, 2023 at 9:58:28 PM UTC-6, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:

lol.....of course the schools are involved with NIL and the boosters. Like Auburn for example now has 14 million or so in it's NIL fund. Who
the rsfck do you think is deciding what players get the money? It's hugh freeze of course....the fact that that may be illegal just means that it will have to not have a direct paper trail.

That's not what is illegal. The NCAA just wants to make sure none of that money that goes to the players comes from Auburn.

This is the point - people like bobby lowder and jimmy rane are the 'powers that be' at Auburn. They are the ones who play the biggest role in the hiring and firing of coaches for example. People like them(those sorts will be the heavys and then there
will be a group below them of course contributing too) will be buying the players. Freeze will communicate to the lowders and ranes of the world who he wants the offers going to and at what dollar priority level.

I don't know if you call that "coming from auburn or not". But thats what is going to happen. The ncaa can make up laws that
can be gotten around easier than trae young trying to get around a screen, but it means nothing and is all just for show.

That's where we are now....the sec and the bigten and the major players in those conferences(of which auburn is one) run the show. And people like Rane and Lowder form part of the power structure(along with administration and HC there) that controls
Auburn football. This is where the power is........whether or not the SEC and Bigten(and by extension programs like auburn and then following along with that people like Rane and Lowder) decides to let the NCAA pretend to serve any superficial or
pretend regulatory role in college football is entirely up to them. But at this point, that's all it will be.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

lol.....of course the schools are involved with NIL and the boosters. Like Auburn for example now has 14 million or so in it's NIL fund. Who
the rsfck do you think is deciding what players get the money? It's hugh freeze of course....the fact that that may be illegal just means that it will have to not have a direct paper trail.

That's not what is illegal. The NCAA just wants to make sure none of that money that goes to the players comes from Auburn.

This is the point - people like bobby lowder and jimmy rane are the 'powers that be' at Auburn. They are the ones who play the biggest role in the hiring and firing of coaches for example. People like them(those sorts will be the heavys and then there

will be a group below them of course contributing too) will be buying the players. Freeze will communicate to the lowders and ranes of the world who he wants the offers going to and at what dollar priority level.

I don't know if you call that "coming from auburn or not".

That's just it. The money is coming out of the pockets of the boosters - not from Auburn's athletic (or other) budget. Freeze et al. can call the plays from the bench as it were, but when it comes down to it, the players - in this case, the boosters -
execute the play. That's what I mean by "none of the money comes from Auburn." The schools still need to keep a gap between themselves and the boosters spending the money. Even something like hosting a dinner for them could result in the boosters being declared "athletics interests" and the players subsequently being declared
ineligible - and to make this worse for the schools, the "remain bowl/playoff eligible while appealing the decision" option is no longer there (they can appeal, but the punishment is not delayed during the appeal any more).
The NCAA also needs to try to make sure that money coming from coaches to athletes (or their parents) to get them to come to their school isn't being laundered under the guise of NIL.
However, as long as that gap exists, not only will the NCAA not do anything about it, the Supreme Court made it quite clear that it can't.

Next time you hear about an earthquake in the San Francisco area, it's Father John Lo Schiavo turning in his grave...

That's where we are now....the sec and the bigten and the major players in those conferences(of which auburn is one) run the show. And people like Rane and Lowder form part of the power structure(along with administration and HC there) that controls

Auburn football. This is where the power is........whether or not the SEC and Bigten(and by extension programs like auburn and then following along with that people like Rane and Lowder) decides to let the NCAA pretend to serve any superficial or pretend
regulatory role in college football is entirely up to them. But at this point, that's all it will be.

You make it sound like this is happening only at the football and men's basketball levels, although of course this is where most of the NIL money is going. It's probably only a matter of time before a group of UCLA men's volleyball boosters get together
to funnel NIL money to athletes just to keep them out of USC.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, February 25, 2023 at 9:39:08 AM UTC-6, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:

lol.....of course the schools are involved with NIL and the boosters. Like Auburn for example now has 14 million or so in it's NIL fund. Who
the rsfck do you think is deciding what players get the money? It's hugh freeze of course....the fact that that may be illegal just means that it will have to not have a direct paper trail.

That's not what is illegal. The NCAA just wants to make sure none of that money that goes to the players comes from Auburn.

This is the point - people like bobby lowder and jimmy rane are the 'powers that be' at Auburn. They are the ones who play the biggest role in the hiring and firing of coaches for example. People like them(those sorts will be the heavys and then

there will be a group below them of course contributing too) will be buying the players. Freeze will communicate to the lowders and ranes of the world who he wants the offers going to and at what dollar priority level.

I don't know if you call that "coming from auburn or not".

That's just it. The money is coming out of the pockets of the boosters - not from Auburn's athletic (or other) budget. Freeze et al. can call the plays from the bench as it were, but when it comes down to it, the players - in this case, the boosters -

execute the play. That's what I mean by "none of the money comes from Auburn."

which is an irrelevant distinction in this case, since the football program likes it that way anyways. And the relevant part of
it all is deciding who gets offered and how much(which freeze is playing a part in). thus the football program is calling the shots(which of course is what the NIL program wants...they are doing this FOR THEM).

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

I don't know if you call that "coming from auburn or not".

That's just it. The money is coming out of the pockets of the boosters - not from Auburn's athletic (or other) budget. Freeze et al. can call the plays from the bench as it were, but when it comes down to it, the players - in this case, the boosters -

execute the play. That's what I mean by "none of the money comes from Auburn."

which is an irrelevant distinction in this case, since the football program likes it that way anyways.

You made two mistakes there; one, it's very relevant, as in this case, the NCAA can't do anything about it, and two, the football program LOVES it that way, as it also gets around the problem of having to pay anything to, say, the women's volleyball team.

And the relevant part of it all is deciding who gets offered and how much(which freeze is playing a part in). thus the football program is calling the shots(which of course is what the NIL program wants...they are doing this FOR THEM).

The "relevant" part is making sure that the money comes from the boosters who, in turn, do not get any benefits from the school that they would not have gotten had they not given NIL money to the players, but besides that, exactly - as I said, the plays
are coming in from the sideline, but you don't see the coaching staff actually out on the field handling the ball.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, February 25, 2023 at 12:37:22 PM UTC-6, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:

I don't know if you call that "coming from auburn or not".

That's just it. The money is coming out of the pockets of the boosters - not from Auburn's athletic (or other) budget. Freeze et al. can call the plays from the bench as it were, but when it comes down to it, the players - in this case, the

boosters - execute the play. That's what I mean by "none of the money comes from Auburn."

which is an irrelevant distinction in this case, since the football program likes it that way anyways.

You made two mistakes there; one, it's very relevant, as in this case, the NCAA can't do anything about it, and two, the football program LOVES it that way, as it also gets around the problem of having to pay anything to, say, the women's volleyball

team.

And the relevant part of it all is deciding who gets offered and how much(which freeze is playing a part in). thus the football program is calling the shots(which of course is what the NIL program wants...they are doing this FOR THEM).

The "relevant" part is making sure that the money comes from the boosters who, in turn, do not get any benefits from the school that they would not have gotten had they not given NIL money to the players, but besides that, exactly - as I said, the

plays are coming in from the sideline, but you don't see the coaching staff actually out on the field handling the ball.

We are talking on different wavelengths here.....when I use the words irrelevant/relevant, I am referring to the power behind the transaction itself. Ie who has the power, the 'juice' there, etc......the decision is coming from freeze and Auburn
football over who to offer and how
much to offer. That's what I mean by relevance.

You're so bogged down in obsessing over meaningless ncaa rules that you thought I was talking about the relevance as to how it applies
to the rule lmao. Freeze and Auburn will know the rule; they'll make sure to hopscotch it without any difficulty, and still maintain the relevant aspects of being able to buy players. That's what *I* meant by relevance.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

You're so bogged down in obsessing over meaningless ncaa rules that you thought I was talking about the relevance as to how it applies
to the rule lmao.

You won't be laughing so loudly, or thinking they're so meaningless, when some Alabama associate AD gets caught paying somebody behind Sabin's back for giving NIL money to a player and Alabama gets a 2-year playoff ban as a result (that's the going rate,
based on what happened to USC).

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, February 25, 2023 at 12:23:10 PM UTC-8, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:

You're so bogged down in obsessing over meaningless ncaa rules that you thought I was talking about the relevance as to how it applies
to the rule lmao.

You won't be laughing so loudly, or thinking they're so meaningless, when some Alabama associate AD gets caught paying somebody behind Sabin's back for giving NIL money to a player and Alabama gets a 2-year playoff ban as a result (that's the going

rate, based on what happened to USC).

Which then starts the breakaway, especially in football.

Mike

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, February 24, 2023 at 5:01:12 PM UTC-8, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:

"Worse" and "for the worse" are two different things. Certainly the boosters already realized that "licensing" the players has some advantages, including making sure all of the money goes into the sport(s) they are interested in without Title IX

getting in the way (and that works both ways - supporting women's programs, and yes, there are people that do that, doesn't require a chunk of the money going into the men's sports). It's just that the "clean break" that I have been going on about is
being treated seriously by the NCAA, although I have a feeling each school is going to be given one opportunity to "clean house" after getting caught and being given a slap on the wrist penalty. (That's per school, not per school per sport. I have a
feeling that any Miami donors signing any football players to NIL now will result in, at the very least, a one-year bowl/playoff ban.)

Which could lead to quite another "Clean Break" -- Euro Super League style...

Mike

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, February 24, 2023 at 6:25:28 PM UTC-8, michael anderson wrote:
.

lol.....of course the schools are involved with NIL and the boosters. Like Auburn for example now has 14 million or so in it's NIL fund. Who
the rsfck do you think is deciding what players get the money? It's hugh freeze of course....the fact that that may be illegal just means that it will have to not have a direct paper trail.

And who do you think was involved with the boosters when it was cash in bags or casino cards loaded up for $Cam, etc., and the like? LMAO indeed, and I don't often agree with your "LMAO"'s.

It's the same with how there is a rule against NIL not supposed to be used to recruit high school players. 90% of NIL is that very thing now lmao....

That'd actually be an IMPROVEMENT vis-a-vis the recruiting of high schoolers. This just brings the age-old process out in the open.

NIL has *very little* to do with advertising likeness, marketing, etc.....it has nothing to do with "oh, now players can use their name to profit by advertising for the local dealership or pizza joint" lol. NOTHING. And everyone knew that....it's pay

for play.

DUH

Mike

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, February 25, 2023 at 2:23:10 PM UTC-6, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:

You're so bogged down in obsessing over meaningless ncaa rules that you thought I was talking about the relevance as to how it applies
to the rule lmao.

You won't be laughing so loudly, or thinking they're so meaningless, when some Alabama associate AD gets caught paying somebody behind Sabin's back for giving NIL money to a player and Alabama gets a 2-year playoff ban as a result (that's the going

rate, based on what happened to USC).

And nobody affiliated with USC paid Reggie Bush a penny!

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, February 25, 2023 at 2:23:10 PM UTC-6, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:

You're so bogged down in obsessing over meaningless ncaa rules that you thought I was talking about the relevance as to how it applies
to the rule lmao.

You won't be laughing so loudly, or thinking they're so meaningless, when some Alabama associate AD gets caught paying somebody behind Sabin's back for giving NIL money to a player and Alabama gets a 2-year playoff ban as a result (that's the going

rate, based on what happened to USC).

lol.....a lot of ridiculous assumptions there:

1) Alabama will know the rules as it pertains to this
2) USC was a while ago now....the NCAA has even *much less* power over college football now. If one of the sec's giants(Bama, georgia, etc) does get threatened with such a thing by the NCAA, do you actually think the SEC(and it's the sec and the bigten
who hold all the power now) will say "ok, do whatever you want in trying to mess with our flagshig programs? Rsfck no........the sec would tell the ncaa to back the rsfck off. And if the ncaa didn't, the sec and bigten would just say "well fuck you, we'
ll take our ball and go.....good luck with things".

Why do you think Harbs is basically telling the ncaa to go fuck themselves now? Because he can.......

You speak of the ncaa as if they are a major power broker in college football now. It's just not the way things are now, and it's certainly
moving even more away from that in the future.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)