Article backing up what I've been saying about House settlement

[Coach34]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/other/kentucky-basketball-reportedly-derailed-sec-s-plans-to-cap-nil-spending-per-sport/ar-AA1GewRr?ocid=msedgntp&pc=ASTS&cvid=76b8d626abb2409e8fc21b1ecb6ba18a&ei=66



not really affecting anything on SEC sports to level the playing field. They dont want it leveled. Kentucky dont want basketball NIL capped. LSU and UPig doesnt want baseball NIL capped. It's still an arms race- all this does is help us vs G5 and lower P4

[Coursesuper]

All the more reason we pushed up our commitment to baseball. Gotta compete in baseball and basketball, survive in football to stay at the big table and draw that big check.

[HoopsDawg]

I think you misinterpreted that article. It's just stating that schools have discretion on how to allocate their rev share.

For Msu, I would go 75% football. 15% men's basketball. 5% baseball. 5% everything else.

[Coach34]

I think you misinterpreted that article. It's just stating that schools have discretion on how to allocate their rev share.

For Msu, I would go 75% football. 15% men's basketball. 5% baseball. 5% everything else.

I did not. The big take from the article is that NIL will not be limited. So the rest of that shit doesnt matter.

[sack07]

For NIL, anything over $600 will go before a committee to be scrutinized for fair market value. The legality will be challenged, I think. Will be interesting to see how it all settles. Still just beginning.

[Coach34]

For NIL, anything over $600 will go before a committee to be scrutinized for fair market value. The legality will be challenged, I think. Will be interesting to see how it all settles. Still just beginning.

If you think NIL is going to be limited I got some beach property over here in Shreveport for ya. Cheap. That article just told you what is going to happen

[sack07]

If you think NIL is going to be limited I got some beach property over here in Shreveport for ya. Cheap. That article just told you what is going to happen

As has been stated, that article is not talking about NIL. Some schools wanted a standardized process for splitting the revenue that is being shared from schools. The article simply states that it will be up to each school on how to divvy up that pie. Some schools have put that info out there (UGA and TTech) in the article.

While technically true that there will be no limit to what can be earned by third parties, the settlement at least establishes a place for enforcement of any deals over $600 to be scrutinized. I admit I that I am not sure how that will look.

[sack07]

I will also add that I believe (I do not pretend to have any insider info) part of the reason we were able to pull OConnor is that we will commit a bigger portion of our revenue share to baseball than many other schools.

It will be interesting to watch. Will Gonzaga become even more of a power in CBB because they are not giving the majority to a football team? Will the best basketball coaches in the SEC move to Big East non-football schools where they can take the majority of the pie? Will Mark Stoops and Mark Pope fight publicly over the how it is all divided at Kentucky?

[basedog]

I will also add that I believe (I do not pretend to have any insider info) part of the reason we were able to pull OConnor is that we will commit a bigger portion of our revenue share to baseball than many other schools.

It will be interesting to watch. Will Gonzaga become even more of a power in CBB because they are not giving the majority to a football team? Will the best basketball coaches in the SEC move to Big East non-football schools where they can take the majority of the pie? Will Mark Stoops and Mark Pope fight publicly over the how it is all divided at Kentucky?

Pretty interesting what u posted.

[Coach34]

Holy shirts and pants

Kentucky just said **** you to limited NIL spending. Do you not understand what that means????

[basedog]

Holy shirts and pants

Kentucky just said **** you to limited NIL spending. Do you not understand what that means????

It's interesting what he said 34. Out the bottle down it's all good. LOL

[sack07]

Holy shirts and pants

Kentucky just said **** you to limited NIL spending. Do you not understand what that means????

They did not say that. That is not what that article is saying. Once more, the House settlement has established that schools that opt in will have up $20.5M to share with athletes that comes from the revenue generated by the schools. Some schools wanted to standardize how that $20.5M will be split up. Kentucky wanted to spend a bigger share on MBB than the percentage being discussed. It was decided that each school could divide it as they see fit. Conceivably, Kentucky could give all $20.5M to MBB and Alabama would give all $20.5M to FB. That is all that article is saying.

I do not post much but I read enough to know that you will not give in. I bow out in trying to convince you of anything else. But to anyone else that does not want to click the link, I hope I have succinctly summarized what the article actually states.

[basedog]

They did not say that. That is not what that article is saying. Once more, the House settlement has established that schools that opt in will have up $20.5M to share with athletes that comes from the revenue generated by the schools. Some schools wanted to standardize how that $20.5M will be split up. Kentucky wanted to spend a bigger share on MBB than the percentage being discussed. It was decided that each school could divide it as they see fit. Conceivably, Kentucky could give all $20.5M to MBB and Alabama would give all $20.5M to FB. That is all that article is saying.

I do not post much but I read enough to know that you will not give in. I bow out in trying to convince you of anything else. But to anyone else that does not want to click the link, I hope I have succinctly summarized what the article actually states.

Hang around sack, things get interesting sometimes. LOL.

[Cooterpoot]

As soon as an NIL deal is denied by the clearinghouse, a lawsuit will blow it all up

[Coursesuper]

As soon as an NIL deal is denied by the clearinghouse, a lawsuit will blow it all up

Like a stick of dynamite.

[Coach34]

They did not say that. That is not what that article is saying. Once more, the House settlement has established that schools that opt in will have up $20.5M to share with athletes that comes from the revenue generated by the schools. Some schools wanted to standardize how that $20.5M will be split up. Kentucky wanted to spend a bigger share on MBB than the percentage being discussed. It was decided that each school could divide it as they see fit. Conceivably, Kentucky could give all $20.5M to MBB and Alabama would give all $20.5M to FB. That is all that article is saying.

I do not post much but I read enough to know that you will not give in. I bow out in trying to convince you of anything else. But to anyone else that does not want to click the link, I hope I have succinctly summarized what the article actually states.

But as Cooter posted- the NIL part will eventually be separate and have nothing to do with the $20MM- the extra money will be what separates schools from others. I'm not sure why you guys arent understanding this

[HoopsDawg]

But as Cooter posted- the NIL part will eventually be separate and have nothing to do with the $20MM- the extra money will be what separates schools from others. I'm not sure why you guys arent understanding this

You are the one who referenced the article. Say it slowly with me, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH NIL. You are drunk.

[HoopsDawg]

As soon as an NIL deal is denied by the clearinghouse, a lawsuit will blow it all up

That or back to under the table cash.

If this were to actually be enforced with a competent governing body and no lawsuits, we would actually have a level playing field.

[Coach34]

You are the one who referenced the article. Say it slowly with me, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH NIL. You are drunk.

wow ok

It literally has everything to do with NIL

[sack07]

But as Cooter posted- the NIL part will eventually be separate and have nothing to do with the $20MM- the extra money will be what separates schools from others. I'm not sure why you guys arent understanding this

The NIL part is currently separate from the $20.5M. I am not sure anyone stated otherwise. I think I even stated that you were correct in that earnings from third parties has not been capped. I even stated Cooter?s point that the legality of striking down deals will be challenged. But that has nothing to do with the article you posted.

On other interesting notes, Deloitte who will be working with this enforcement arm, has stated that 90% of current deals with public companies would be upheld. However, 70% of current deals with collectives would be struck down. We probably will not see it settled into a final form for several more years as there will definitely be legal challenges.

[HoopsDawg]

The NIL part is currently separate from the $20.5M. I am not sure anyone stated otherwise. I think I even stated that you were correct in that earnings from third parties has not been capped. I even stated Cooter?s point that the legality of striking down deals will be challenged. But that has nothing to do with the article you posted.

On other interesting notes, Deloitte who will be working with this enforcement arm, has stated that 90% of current deals with public companies would be upheld. However, 70% of current deals with collectives would be struck down. We probably will not see it settled into a final form for several more years as there will definitely be legal challenges.

Collectives could and should be severely limited to actual NIL instead of pay for play.

[confucius say]

The NIL part is currently separate from the $20.5M. I am not sure anyone stated otherwise. I think I even stated that you were correct in that earnings from third parties has not been capped. I even stated Cooter?s point that the legality of striking down deals will be challenged. But that has nothing to do with the article you posted.

On other interesting notes, Deloitte who will be working with this enforcement arm, has stated that 90% of current deals with public companies would be upheld. However, 70% of current deals with collectives would be struck down. We probably will not see it settled into a final form for several more years as there will definitely be legal challenges.

My hope is that when the denials of NIL deals are challenged, Judge Wilken's Order approving the House settlement is relied upon to say that athletes bargained for this system and, therefore, Deloitte's findings are binding. We will see.

[BrunswickDawg]

My hope is that when the denials of NIL deals are challenged, Judge Wilken's Order approving the House settlement is relied upon to say that athletes bargained for this system and, therefore, Deloitte's findings are binding. We will see.
But, athletes did not bargain for this system. There is no collective representation of the players - like a union- in this process. Yes, players had a hand in the lawsuits that created this mess, that is not the same as collective bargaining. When they do decide to sue, we are going to see more things tossed because of this lack of collective bargaining.

[confucius say]

But, athletes did not bargain for this system. There is no collective representation of the players - like a union- in this process. Yes, players had a hand in the lawsuits that created this mess, that is not the same as collective bargaining. When they do decide to sue, we are going to see more things tossed because of this lack of collective bargaining.

I think the argument is that the players were represented. Just like a plaintiff in any lawsuit that results in a settlement. The plaintiff bargained for the settlement.
The question to me is whether the current players are bound by the Plaintiffs' agreement in the House settlement. If they are, they have already agreed to the Deloitte clearinghouse.

[CaptainObvious]

This was never truly about Name, Image and Likeness. It was always about Pay For Play.

If it were, it would have to include regular students as well. When they show a promotion of the school's academic success and research and on campus activities, they use videos and photos of students. Those students Images and a likeness are used to "promote" the value just like athletes are used to promote their sport.

I still think there will eventually be huge repercussions for valuation of the male athletes higher than the female athletes. Sure, there are specific instances of star females getting high payouts for promoting the school due to their high profile recognition.

[Homedawg]

For NIL, anything over $600 will go before a committee to be scrutinized for fair market value. The legality will be challenged, I think. Will be interesting to see how it all settles. Still just beginning.

Uh huh. And I've got some land I'd like to sell you.

[Coursesuper]

Uh huh. And I've got some land I'd like to sell you.

The rich are going to get richer and the poor are going to be worse off.

[sack07]

Uh huh. And I've got some land I'd like to sell you.

The reading comprehension in this thread is laughable. Are you disputing that NIL deals will go through a clearinghouse? Or are you disputing that the clearinghouse will have any teeth to enforce anything? (Hint: If it is the latter, I stated as such in the post you quoted and in other posts.)

[Coursesuper]

The reading comprehension in this thread is laughable. Are you disputing that NIL deals will go through a clearinghouse? Or are you disputing that the clearinghouse will have any teeth to enforce anything? (Hint: If it is the latter, I stated as such in the post you quoted and in other posts.)

Hey sack o shat, do you really think that the haves are going to give up any advantage that they currently hold? Especially in this political environment. If you do I?ve got a bridge to go with that land Home is selling you.

[EdwardDrayton]

It truly is unfortunate we have arrived at this place. An evolving business model is overtaking the purity of amateur athletics of yesteryear. Such a shame. We will forevermore reminisce of the days gone by.

[Coach34]

Hey sack o shat, do you really think that the haves are going to give up any advantage that they currently hold? Especially in this political environment. If you do I?ve got a bridge to go with that land Home is selling you.

sacko still doesnt understand. The article talked about how certain SEC schools said their NIL was not going to be limited so the SEC scrapped plans to do so. The rich of the SEC have had an advantage for about 75 years now and they arent going to give it up. They do not want parity. They do not want to be capped. And they wont be

[sack07]

Hey sack o shat, do you really think that the haves are going to give up any advantage that they currently hold? Especially in this political environment. If you do I?ve got a bridge to go with that land Home is selling you.

Very juvenile of you. But here I am on a message board, what else did I expect?

I am still not sure what you are disputing. I have not once tried to play this off as trying to level the playing field or anything. I just tried to interpret the original article. I have only stated facts from the House settlement and some conjecture on how the after effects of the settlement might play out. I think it will be interesting to watch. The House settlement has never tried to cap NIL. A myriad of people are writing articles and discussing this. It is really not that hard to be just a little informed.

[Coursesuper]

sacko still doesnt understand. The article talked about how certain SEC schools said their NIL was not going to be limited so the SEC scrapped plans to do so. The rich of the SEC have had an advantage for about 75 years now and they arent going to give it up. They do not want parity. They do not want to be capped. And they wont be

If they try to rule against them they are just going to sue and do what they want to do.

[sack07]

sacko still doesnt understand. The article talked about how certain SEC schools said their NIL was not going to be limited so the SEC scrapped plans to do so. The rich of the SEC have had an advantage for about 75 years now and they arent going to give it up. They do not want parity. They do not want to be capped. And they wont be

Dang it, I let you draw me back in. The article talks about the House settlement. House never tried to cap NIL from third parties. If you are referring to revenue sharing from the schools as NIL, it is capped at $20.5M.

I know you have a problem with being wrong, but I have not once said you were wrong. I agree NIL from third parties will not be capped. I have only said you lack reading comprehension as your point had nothing to do with the article.

[Coach34]

for all thats holy- the article talked about SEC teams refusing to be limited on NIL- the mf'ing thing I've been saying all along. From the mf'ing article:

"You’re not going to be surprised by this, but Kentucky did not — and some others too — but Kentucky Basketball specifically was a pretty big voice in the room to make sure that those standards weren’t set as a policy because Kentucky, obviously, wants to spend more [in basketball].”

Dellenger used South Carolina women’s basketball and Arkansas and LSU baseball as examples of other programs that didn’t want caps. There was so much dissent that the plans were shelved — for now."

That was what the damn thing was about. Hell- even the title of the article is:

Kentucky Basketball reportedly derailed SEC’s plans to cap NIL spending per sport


How the **** am I the with reading comprehension problems?????

[sack07]

for all thats holy- the article talked about SEC teams refusing to be limited on NIL- the mf'ing thing I've been saying all along. From the mf'ing article:

"You’re not going to be surprised by this, but Kentucky did not — and some others too — but Kentucky Basketball specifically was a pretty big voice in the room to make sure that those standards weren’t set as a policy because Kentucky, obviously, wants to spend more [in basketball].”

Dellenger used South Carolina women’s basketball and Arkansas and LSU baseball as examples of other programs that didn’t want caps. There was so much dissent that the plans were shelved — for now."

That was what the damn thing was about. Hell- even the title of the article is:

Kentucky Basketball reportedly derailed SEC’s plans to cap NIL spending per sport


How the **** am I the with reading comprehension problems?????

Once again, they will not cap how much a school can give to each sport from the total $20.5M that school?s will hand out from sharing revenue with the athletes. It even goes on to state how different schools have publicly stated how they will divvy it all up. That?s what the article is talking about. If that is what you meant by your original statement, I have wasted too much time here with you.

[Coach34]

Once again, they will not cap how much a school can give to each sport from the total $20.5M that school?s will hand out from sharing revenue with the athletes. It even goes on to state how different schools have publicly stated how they will divvy it all up. That?s what the article is talking about. If that is what you meant by your original statement, I have wasted too much time here with you.

but what u arent getting is that I dont care at all about the 20.5MM that the school does. Neither does any SEC school. It has nothing to do with NIL which will be the difference in programs moving forward. I dont understand why you cant comprehend that. The article points out that the schools DGAF about all that and will do what they want in NIL

The 20.5 shit is irrelevant

[confucius say]

It could be that the clearinghouse has much more teeth than y'all think. It appears the current players agreed to this system and to be subject to the clearinghouse as part of the House settlement. If true, they have already agreed to abide by the rulings of the clearinghouse.

[Coach34]

It could be that the clearinghouse has much more teeth than y'all think. It appears the current players agreed to this system and to be subject to the clearinghouse as part of the House settlement. If true, they have already agreed to abide by the rulings of the clearinghouse.

you cant be that delusional

Texas and Bama gonna give up their advantage so that Mississippi State can beat them regularly? Please tell me u arent that stupid????

[confucius say]

you cant be that delusional

We shall see. I'm simply saying the legal argument is there now. Until now, every NIL ruling has gone off on antitrust grounds. If current and future players through 2035 (which is who the class is made up of) bargained for this settlement and the clearinghouse, the antitrust concerns should go away.

[Cooterpoot]

The $20.5MM is more like a salary and the NIL is the bonus. NIL will never get limited. Until there's a union and collective bargaining agreement, which will also eliminate a number of P4 schools, none of this really changes.

[HoopsDawg]

The $20.5MM is more like a salary and the NIL is the bonus. NIL will never get limited. Until there's a union and collective bargaining agreement, which will also eliminate a number of P4 schools, none of this really changes.

Agree. It's impossible to put the toothpaste back in the tube on NIL without collective bargaining. The committee couldn't stop a booster from buying 100k jerseys of a player we wanted.

I wonder about the negative unintended consequence of revenue sharing beyond the obvious.

[Brobi-wan]

I think most of us might love NIL if we were benefiting from it and winning NCs on the regular.

I imagine over time some parity will return when things are divided up. I don?t see how lower tier teams can contribute in any meaningful way to football at this point. I don?t think MSU is a lower tier team. Just a bottom of the rung upper tier.

I have seen some on here say they wish MSU would be left out of a super conference and play against the NIUs of CFB. I can?t imagine anyone really believes that would benefit MSU in any real way, and it would basically be an abortion on all of our other athletic programs. Including the much beloved baseball program.

[confucius say]

The $20.5MM is more like a salary and the NIL is the bonus. NIL will never get limited. Until there's a union and collective bargaining agreement, which will also eliminate a number of P4 schools, none of this really changes.

A settlement is collectively bargained. I don't think people understand that current players (and players through 2035) are the plaintiffs in House.

Now I don't know how aggressive the clearinghouse will be in rejecting NIL deals, but players have already agreed to be bound by the clearinghouse decision, or if they are unhappy with a decision, to submit it to arbitration instead of a lawsuit.

I do think under the table money like the old days will resurface more.