Story Poster
Photo by USA TODAY Sports
Oklahoma State Football

Here We Go, NCAA May Create Chaos in Cracking Down on NIL Boosters in Recruiting

May 3, 2022
2,731

STILLWATER – We wrote in our story on Monday (May 2) that we would love to be a fly on the wall at the Big 12 Spring Meetings in Scottsdale, Ariz. The conference athletic directors are there along with the head coaches in football, men’s basketball, and women’s basketball; and that includes the three new schools (Cincinnati, Central Florida, and Houston) that are hoping to negotiate their way to an early exit from the American Athletic Conference and with independent BYU join the Big 12 early. We knew the topics would include NIL, transfer portal, and all the recent changes that are rocking major college athletics. Today’s news may be trending college football and all of it’s major schools toward that new entity of a Power Five league that would include the top schools and could be not just football, but all sports. Taking those major schools out of the NCAA.

This afternoon here came a report from Sports Illustrated and Ross Dellinger on how the NCAA, which has a task force of member administrators looking into many of these same topics. For those that thought the NCAA had been neutered and was incapable of policing it’s landscape anymore. There is news for you as the latest tampering case in the NCAA Transfer Portal with Pittsburgh wide receiver and Biletnikoff Award winner Jordan Addison going in the portal with alleged promises of a multimillion-dollar NIL deal from USC connections may have helped prompt some of this. We know it prompted Pitt head coach Pat Narduzzi to contact USC head coach Lincoln Riley and make threats.

USA TODAY Sports
NCAA

That might be fun to be a fly on the wall for. The news is that the NCAA taskforce is saying they are close to having new guidelines and rules with regard to NIL. Those new guidelines will clarify that boosters and booster-led collectives are to steer completely clear of recruiting. The SI report also states that schools with boosters that overstepped into using NIL and NIL collectives to put money in the hands of recruits, both high school and transfer portal entries, could be punished for their actions. The guidelines are still in draft form, but they clearly outline outline that booster-backed collectives should be prohibited from associating with high school prospects and college transfers. The NCAA wants boosters and their money to stay out of the recruiting process.

That is the way it has always supposed to have been, but we know over the years booster have been up to their elbows in cheating, some were caught (SMU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Miami (Fla.), Mississippi, Texas A&M, and more) and some were never caught.

The wild, wild west that has been going on since NIL was instituted last summer could make the process easier as boosters and their collectives have openly bragged about their involvement.

This new pursuit of recent rule breakers could really cause a lot of work for lawyers, both those for schools and boosters, and for the NCAA representatives to try to improve their batting average in the legal system.

Mark J. Rebilas-USA TODAY Sports
Dr. Shrum, Gundy, and Weiberg on the same page with NIL. Slow and careful.

Oklahoma State should be completely clear on this one. Athletic director Chad Weiberg has been cautious and diligent in moving the Cowboys and Cowgirls forward in NIL.

“We are moving very deliberately on this,” Weiberg told me this spring. “We have two collectives that we will debut, one will be for profit (Unbridled) and the other will be for charity (Pokes with a Purpose). We want to give our athletes every opportunity, but we are going to do it within the rules.”

“I think Chad Weiberg, our athletic director, has done a very good job of being guarded about this initially, because different people like Texas and Florida have done some interesting things and it has been like the wild, wild west,” Darren Schrum, husband of OSU President Dr. Kayse Shrum recently told Pokes Rpeort. “Who knows when the NCAA may come out and put more rules and regulations in regarding NIL.”

Exactly, it looks like that time may be very soon. Oklahoma State head football coach Mike Gundy has been supportive of NIL with his players, but under the guideline of Oklahoma State University and within the spirit of the “Cowboy Culture” in the football program.

“What direction it's going to go from now moving forward, who's going to police it, what the mandates will be, I'm not sure,” Gundy added while confirming that OSU is close to having a finalized collective that will pay each of the student-athletes money. “We're just living day to day with this. So, myself, Chad Weiberg, and Dr. Shrum and some others are coming together to come up with what we're creating and calling a model of consistency here. We're close here to finalizing our model of what our athletic department and our administration and myself feel like as best. We could be within a month, and the companies that we have and working with them to try to weed through all this. NIL that would allow us to do the things that we feel like are important to enhance the student-athletes opportunities when they're in school competing and get an education. But they're not going to be tied contractually to anything we're doing to keep them from doing a separate NIL deal.”

Things are heating up with this and in Scottsdale there will be talk. Oklahoma State and others like Kansas State, Iowa State, even Oklahoma have done things right so far by NIL, but others have not. Rather than face NCAA scrutiny and possible punishment could this tremor move the power schools to that eventual major college sports league that would include Notre Dame and the Power Five schools with possibly a few others. They would leave the NCAA and create their own organization and police and govern themselves. It would be a “best case” development financially for Oklahoma State and the Big 12 members. The Pac-12 and ACC would also come out on the high side financially.

Discussion from...

Here We Go, NCAA May Create Chaos in Cracking Down on NIL Boosters in Recruiting

2,661 Views | 78 Replies | Last: 11 days ago by CaliforniaCowboy
rcfb
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yea, Good luck with proving that "Boosters" did those things.
TUSKAPOKE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The NCAA Task Force will be like peeing on a wild raging forest fire with how far NIL has already gone. The NCAA was inept once more by having nothing in place for when the court ruled against their position. It is time for the NCAA to go away and for the major sports be run by an entirely new group. Screw the NCAA! Maybe they will hire Bowlsby to complete their demise.
Joe Khatib
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TUSKAPOKE said:

The NCAA Task Force will be like peeing on a wild raging forest fire with how far NIL has already gone. The NCAA was inept once more by having nothing in place for when the court ruled against their position. It is time for the NCAA to go away and for the major sports be run by an entirely new group. Screw the NCAA! Maybe they will hire Bowlsby to complete their demise.
This x 1000, if the NCAA can't even differentiate between the violations in basketball between what Kansas did and Oklahoma State then this collection of idiots will never get this business right. If Kansas skates in Basketball over their violations, which includes pay for play (thanks Addidas), then this bunch needs to be trashed and the Power 5 Conferences need to part ways with this organization and start with something new and one that will enforce rules fairly!
LS1Z28
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's too bad that these rules weren't in place before LSU bought Jarrick Bernard-Converse. It's a really dirty move to recruit off of someone else's roster.

I would love to see every company that has made donations to a school be prohibited from offering NIL deals. That's the only way to know for sure that they aren't recruiting players. I doubt that the NCAA has that level of reach though. They might not even be able to get this done.
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I think I'll steer clear of this thread since the responses all seem to be based on emotion and not on facts.

GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I actually believe if the NCAA comes out with specific dos and donts, and threats of sanctions in the event of a violation(s), most schools will strive to adhere with communication to their boosters. Yeah, there will be violators, but the public nature of many of the NIL deals will effectively limit cheating.

One rule I'd like to see is - no NIL payments can be made until an athlete has completed one year of school/competition.
thetruth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

I actually believe if the NCAA comes out with specific dos and donts, and threats of sanctions in the event of a violation(s), most schools will strive to adhere with communication to their boosters. Yeah, there will be violators, but the public nature of many of the NIL deals will effectively limit cheating.

One rule I'd like to see is - no NIL payments can be made until an athlete has completed one year of school/competition.
You can't restrict a persons ability to make a living. That's what this has been about all along.
CowboyKip
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Truth,

That is correct, as long as they are being paid by a "for profit" business. The Court was not talking about boosters paying athletes to play at their school, and this is what NIL is becoming. The Court was addressing the right of an athlete (any athlete) to sell his/her NIL rights to Nike or Adidas, or Rawlings. These are "for profit" businesses which are deriving monetary value from these NIL agreements. The Court was not addressing the Univ of Texas Pancake club (a charity) giving each lineman $50K to play at UT.
NJAggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
thetruth said:

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

I actually believe if the NCAA comes out with specific dos and donts, and threats of sanctions in the event of a violation(s), most schools will strive to adhere with communication to their boosters. Yeah, there will be violators, but the public nature of many of the NIL deals will effectively limit cheating.

One rule I'd like to see is - no NIL payments can be made until an athlete has completed one year of school/competition.
You can't restrict a persons ability to make a living. That's what this has been about all along.
No you can't, and I think the NCAA is taking the best tack here. By sticking with a long term rule of no boosters in recruiting and simply restricting contact regarding NIL until the kids are on campus it really clears up most of the issues. UT may have tons of NIL, but they can't tailor it to lure a kid, or harass his parents until they cave.

Still dependent on being turned in, but I'd see that happening.

The same reason they're staying away from pay to play as that can get very technical. Boosters contacting off campus is pretty clear and has never been challenged so it's a good place to start.

I do think schools want this so it'll pass, and they'll bring their boosters in line. No one likes this. There seem to have been instances of boosters signing kids to NIL, that the school didn't want. So everyone wants to get back in control of this.
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So, no rules whatsoever? Just a total fee-for-all? If it's only and just about the right to earn a living, let's just ask T Boones estate for $50mm bucks and go buy Alabamas roster.
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
NJAggie said:

thetruth said:

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

I actually believe if the NCAA comes out with specific dos and donts, and threats of sanctions in the event of a violation(s), most schools will strive to adhere with communication to their boosters. Yeah, there will be violators, but the public nature of many of the NIL deals will effectively limit cheating.

One rule I'd like to see is - no NIL payments can be made until an athlete has completed one year of school/competition.
You can't restrict a persons ability to make a living. That's what this has been about all along.
No you can't, and I think the NCAA is taking the best tack here. By sticking with a long term rule of no boosters in recruiting and simply restricting contact regarding NIL until the kids are on campus it really clears up most of the issues. UT may have tons of NIL, but they can't tailor it to lure a kid, or harass his parents until they cave.

Still dependent on being turned in, but I'd see that happening.

The same reason they're staying away from pay to play as that can get very technical. Boosters contacting off campus is pretty clear and has never been challenged so it's a good place to start.

I do think schools want this so it'll pass, and they'll bring their boosters in line. No one likes this. There seem to have been instances of boosters signing kids to NIL, that the school didn't want. So everyone wants to get back in control of this.


Agree.
Joe Khatib
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Power 5 Conferences are about to tell the NCAA to go pound sand! If what Robert was talking about on his show this morning coming out of these conference meetings in Arizona is accurate, it may be sooner than later that the Big Schools go their own way and form a new organization to govern their athletic apparatus.
NJAggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Joe Khatib said:

Power 5 Conferences are about to tell the NCAA to go pound sand! If what Robert was talking about on his show this morning coming out of these conference meetings in Arizona is accurate, it may be sooner than later that the Big Schools go their own way and form a new organization to govern their athletic apparatus.
I know Robert loves that sports reporter dream. The reality is that two conferences have already separated, and they don't need a single school that's not already in them.

USC and 3 from the PAC would probably be welcome by the B1G. The rest of us are where we are.

The NCAA structure has no say in how things are. Its about conferences because that's where the TV money is. The B1G and SEC don't need us to make big money, and we and other schools don't offer anything equal or game changing. The conference structure is what matters as teams are tied to conferences and the GoR's.

About the only big move would be if say USC, Washington, Oregon, and UCLA went to the B1G and the remaining PAC schools merged with the Big XII. That might be worth being #3 right now and be in say the $60M range.

The Big XII is an unknown but has the opportunity to make a big break. We just need leadership to get the right TV package, and then go out and win football games. We may take a hit this time around, but the next one should be better. The league in quality is number 3 and has great tier 2 content. We just need to make sure we have enough tier 1 content to get a slot on network TV every week.
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I think you're WAAAY overestimating the "independent" value of the SEC and B1G. Without the other 39 P5 programs, or 100 other FBS teams, their media value is no where near (less than 50%?, 60%?) of what it is with all 130 FBS teams chasing the same trophy. Who is gonna watch just the SEC and B1G compete in their own league? Me? NFW. You? OSU fans? Other B12 fans? Any market not in SEC or B1G country?

I do think RA may be too optimistic. While I think a new non-ncaa league could work, it would take all the current P5 programs (and maybe a few more) to generate enough money to make it economically attractive and viable. But I think it's a long putt. Not because the money won't be there, but because the Alabamas and Texas of the world will want too big a piece of pie thus not realistically allowing the OSUs of the world enough media money to compete with the bigger takers. Not to mention what an unregulated NIL market will do to the imbalance.
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
NJ.... I think you forgot about the ACC.... Clemson, Fl St, Miami, would be more welcomed than Oregon, Washington and some of those other 12PAC schools that you mentioned.

I would seem to me that there are a few more "viable" schools than you included in your analysis
NJAggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I never said they were going to a new organization. I think they stay where they are and just let the money separate them. Let the rest of us be tackling dummies for their OOC games and let us be the fluff in the playoffs with us taking less playoff money. Totally agree they need other schools they can beat regularly in the field or they'll wind up in trouble. It would kill interest and move them all towards a .500 league avg.

I agree that a small breakaway is deadly for those breaking away. UT loves talking about having to carry the deadweight, but that deadweight is what they built their empire off of. They didn't beat other Blue Bloods at a 10 to 1 ratio. And they're about to find that out as they struggle in the SEC.
NJAggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Didn't forget them at all. They're stuck in the ACC until 2035, and by then there probably won't be anyplace for them to go other than the Big XII.

And, I'm not sure those schools are really worth $100M a year in TV rights. Clemson is a new name, and we'll see if they bounce back or float down to the ACC avg. FSU has been a loser for over a decade now, and no end in sight.

You've got to have a lot of pull to make it right now. USC is really the only school that makes that mark not named Notre Dame. UW, UCLA, & Oregon would just be included to have a pod out there for scheduling ease and to generate a late scheduling point. Also those bring in big cable numbers, well CA does at least, for the B1G network. No one else begins to match them. The ACC schools are borderline and who knows what things look like in 12 years,
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
nobody is stuck anywhere.... don't let contracts cloud your judgement.

if the NCAA breaks up and reforms, then the ACC will be in play, contract or no contract. There is no way in hell they could enforce a contract when the entire landscape of college football changed.
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CaliforniaCowboy said:

nobody is stuck anywhere.... don't let contracts cloud your judgement.

if the NCAA breaks up and reforms, then the ACC will be in play, contract or no contract. There is no way in hell they could enforce a contract when the entire landscape of college football changed.


Here we go again - contracts are irrelevant. SMH
NJAggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sure they can, those schools pledged to stay and gave their broadcast rights up to the conference. They'll have to pay to go, and they're not going to get the schools being left behind to agree to just let them go.

And, the NCAA is not breaking up. No one is talking about it at any level where such decisions could be made. The breakaway 40 is only out there in sports opinion and message boards. Conferences and their contracts are the real world of CFB, and the big boys know they need to have the A3 and the G5 for a backdrop for themselves. They've got the money, they've got the broadcast slots, why do they need to leave the NCAA?

The SEC & B1G have created a 30 team top tier without doing anything other than sticking with the conference formula. They don't care if anyone else is hurt by the gap, and why would they risk the turmoil of a nasty breakup with schools in those conferences would gain them nothing. Beating Indiana or Old Miss is as good as beating Iowa State or FSU.

If someone can beat them with half the money they'll live with it happening once every 10-15 years.
Joe Khatib
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I hate to be the one that bursts your bubble, but Robert is much more connected to what the Power Brokers are thinking the YOU or I will ever be because of his daily interaction with Coach Gundy, Pres Shrum,and AD Weiberg, not to mention his media connections both locally and Nationally, but hey we all have our opinions on these subjects!
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
anything can happen... but your scenario seems preposterous (PAC schools joining super leagues)

These 4 teams are going to travel over the Rockies to play other teams? On a routine basis? Doubtful.

and if those leagues do form like that, the it automatically changes everything for all other schools... automatically. The other leagues won't support that. There will have to be an expanded playoff, or too many teams will be excluded simply because they're in the super conf's. Who do you suppose votes on the playoffs?

the NCAA will collapse and form as something else first.... at "best", there would be Div 1-AA, Div1-A, and Power A leagues.

anything can happen.... but some of these scenarios are more fiction and desire than likely.

anyway.... nothing any of us can do but sit back and observe while every program fends for their own self interests. It's no longer about education or sport.
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
NJAggie said:


And, the NCAA is not breaking up. No one is talking about it at any level where such decisions could be made.

except they are ..... If AD's and prominent coaches are talking about it, the President's are listening.


Ohio State AD Pitches Break-Up Between College Football and NCAA
https://www.si.com/nfl/video/2022/05/04/ohio-state-break-up-college-football-ncaa

Bob Stoops: "Maybe we need to have a new league of Power Five teams that have their own league, with their own whatever it be commissioner, or governing board. "
https://www.foxnews.com/sports/bob-stoops-says-the-ncaa-has-really-failed

CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

CaliforniaCowboy said:

nobody is stuck anywhere.... don't let contracts cloud your judgement.

if the NCAA breaks up and reforms, then the ACC will be in play, contract or no contract. There is no way in hell they could enforce a contract when the entire landscape of college football changed.


Here we go again - contracts are irrelevant. SMH

dude, what is your problem and why are you always trying to start fights?

NOBODY has ever said that contracts are irrelevant, you make crap like this up all the time, and you are always wrong. You flat made that up. You're just trying to start yet another fight. That's all you do. Nobody in this thread or in any thread has said that.

Contracts simply are not an immovable impediment, and they could become void if the conditions upon which the contract was based become moot or nonexistent.

What Happens If Contracts Are Broken?

Contracts can be broken, but it's not always a bad thing. In some cases, it can be a way for both parties to come to an agreement that's better for both of them. In other cases, it can be a way for the party that breaks the contract to be given a financial penalty.
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CaliforniaCowboy said:

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

CaliforniaCowboy said:

nobody is stuck anywhere.... don't let contracts cloud your judgement.

if the NCAA breaks up and reforms, then the ACC will be in play, contract or no contract. There is no way in hell they could enforce a contract when the entire landscape of college football changed.


Here we go again - contracts are irrelevant. SMH

dude, what is your problem and why are you always trying to start fights?

NOBODY has ever said that contracts are irrelevant, you make crap like this up all the time, and you are always wrong. You flat made that up. You're just trying to start yet another fight. That's all you do. Nobody in this thread or in any thread has said that.

Contracts simply are not an immovable impediment, and they could become void if the conditions upon which the contract was based become moot or nonexistent.

What Happens If Contracts Are Broken?

Contracts can be broken, but it's not always a bad thing. In some cases, it can be a way for both parties to come to an agreement that's better for both of them. In other cases, it can be a way for the party that breaks the contract to be given a financial penalty.



Financial penalty, heh? You mean like 14 years of media rights an ACC team would forfeit if they left the ACC?

I'll reiterate what every person on this board or with any lucid understand of conference realignment would say - an ACC will not participate in conference realignment for at least another 10+ years.
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GumbyFromPokeyLand said:




Financial penalty, heh? You mean like 14 years of media rights an ACC team would forfeit if they left the ACC?

I'll reiterate what every person on this board or with any lucid understand of conference realignment would say - an ACC will not participate in conference realignment for at least another 10+ years.
Dude, you do NOT need to reiterate anything with me, not ever. The "financial penalty" was from a DEFINITION of breaking a contract, not my words or opinion, go ague with the freaking dictionary some more.

If you were capable of comprehensive thought, you would have already realized what I'm talking about and what every person on this board already understood the first time... if the NCAA folds, or the playoff picture changes, the ACC will NOT be able to hold those teams, and a settlement WILL be reached. The ACC CANNOT FORCE any team to remain in a situation that they do not wish to remain.

If they want to leave (obviously the whole freaking league will be folding LIKE I SAID in my analysis) there is no force on Earth that can make them or anybody stay.

Any person with even 2 healthy brain cells to rub together can understand that there is no financial penalty that would keep one of those teams from bailing on a failed (current and future failure) contract at the risk of being left out of some super restructuring. Their boosters would pay any price in a heart beat to not be left our of a major restructuring.

you're just wrong again, you're always wrong.



GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CaliforniaCowboy said:

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:




Financial penalty, heh? You mean like 14 years of media rights an ACC team would forfeit if they left the ACC?

I'll reiterate what every person on this board or with any lucid understand of conference realignment would say - an ACC will not participate in conference realignment for at least another 10+ years.
Dude, you do NOT need to reiterate anything with me, not ever. The "financial penalty" was from a DEFINITION of breaking a contract, not my words or opinion, go ague with the freaking dictionary some more.

If you were capable of comprehensive thought, you would have already realized what I'm talking about and what every person on this board already understood the first time... if the NCAA folds, or the playoff picture changes, the ACC will NOT be able to hold those teams, and a settlement WILL be reached. The ACC CANNOT FORCE any team to remain in a situation that they do not wish to remain.

If they want to leave (obviously the whole freaking league will be folding LIKE I SAID in my analysis) there is no force on Earth that can make them or anybody stay.

Any person with even 2 healthy brain cells to rub together can understand that there is no financial penalty that would keep one of those teams from bailing on a failed (current and future failure) contract at the risk of being left out of some super restructuring. Their boosters would pay any price in a heart beat to not be left our of a major restructuring.

you're just wrong again, you're always wrong.






FYI, the ncaa is not a party to the ACCs tv contract, or CFP tv contract.

FYI2 - the ACCs GOR remains in place even if their TV contract terminates or is renegotiated.

FYI3 - the NCAA disbanding does not in and of itself eliminate conferences or void existing tv contracts.

FYI4 - to NJs point, the SEC and B1G aren't disbanding or walking away from their tv contracts for a less lucrative deal, thus there's nowhere for the ACC to go.
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GumbyFromPokeyLand said:





FYI, the ncaa is not a party to the ACCs tv contract, or CFP tv contract.

FYI2 - the ACCs GOR remains in place even if their TV contract terminates or is renegotiated.
Everybody knows that, and it adds ZERO to the discussion.

why don't you just quit trying to start fights all the time.

NJ made a comment, which in my opinion excluded some of the biggest names in college football, which I simply pointed out. He replied that he had not considered those teams because he did not expect the NCAA to fold and that nobody significant was talking about such an event. I posted where AD's and other prominent coaches were in fact making those types of forming a new governing structure... so those teams should be included in such a future discussion.

Then you derail the thread once again with silly argument about your inability to understand contracts.

Nobody cares what you think about the ACC contract. Nobody cares. IT IS NOT RELEVANT.

I was having a discussion with NJ about his realignment, it had nothing to do with you. You just wanted to start another fight.

Every time there is a thread derailed on this forum, it is because of you "trying to prove somebody wrong" (using your words).


GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CaliforniaCowboy said:

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:





FYI, the ncaa is not a party to the ACCs tv contract, or CFP tv contract.

FYI2 - the ACCs GOR remains in place even if their TV contract terminates or is renegotiated.
Everybody knows that, and it adds ZERO to the discussion.

why don't you just quit trying to start fights all the time.

NJ made a comment, which in my opinion excluded some of the biggest names in college football, which I simply pointed out. He replied that he had not considered those teams because he did not expect the NCAA to fold and that nobody significant was talking about such an event. I posted where AD's and other prominent coaches were in fact making those types of forming a new governing structure... so those teams should be included in such a future discussion.

Then you derail the thread once again with silly argument about your inability to understand contracts.

Nobody cares what you think about the ACC contract. Nobody cares. IT IS NOT RELEVANT.





Now we're back to contracts are irrelevant. SMH
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GumbyFromPokeyLand said:





Now we're back to contracts are irrelevant. SMH
you have to be able to understand the thread and the context...... unless you're just trying to fight some more (which is most likely)

I already pointed out that NOBODY SAID THAT. What I just said was that the ACC contract was not relevant as an impediment, as I've said previously. Their contract (if it even holds up - e.g., the members can vote to disband), only represent the starting point for discussing potential financial penalty.

you're just wrong about relevance, you're wrong about everything.
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So the ACC Bylaws are not an impediment to breaking up the conference, or, enforcing the GOR?

That's some good stuff Capn Kangaroo.
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

So the ACC Bylaws are not an impediment to breaking up the conference, or, enforcing the GOR?

That's some good stuff Capn Kangaroo.
NO, those are not something that could prevent a team from leaving, they are simply the contextual terms for establishing the terms of exit.

and LIKE I SAID.. if the ACC disbans, then there is no ACC nor any bylaws. Nor is there a GOR.

they cease to exist, and they cannot impede anything, much less prevent.

Money changes everything. EVERYTHING. Even conference alignments, bylaws and GORs.

move on... you're simply wrong. this stuff is not hard to understand, Mr. Greenjeans.

NJAggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Well the many have nots in the ACC are not going to agree to dissolution for the benefit of 1 or 2 teams. The NCAA is not really a factor in what happens its all about conferences. There is not going to be a wiping out of conferences and reorganizing.

The B1G and SEC can basically do what they want and the rest of us are going to sit and watch. That's reality, not a coming 64 team NFL style organization. Too many contracts to break, too many law suits to deal with.

Sure two or three have said they think, or it might be best, but no one is working on it, because there is no one to work with on such a sports writers dream organization.

The Big XII and PAC (particularly if they are raided by the B1G) might be able to figure out a way to get closer to the big 2, but the ACC is locked into growing obscurity and irrelevance.

The TV networks don't care about a super organization. They've put their money in the conferences, and right now we have ESPN putting most of their money into the SEC, and FOX doing the same with the B1G. So neither of them has any incentive to break up the current situation, and in fact would be 2 of the parties suing if anyone tries to set up such an organization.

So all evidence, contracts, and efforts are against such a move, but yeah you found 3 or 4 people that said it was a good idea.
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
could be, we shall see.

All I said was that anything is possible, and that it's more probable that the NCAA folds and top conferences reorganize, than it is for those four 12PAC teams to join the B1G.

there is only one way to know.... we wait for it.
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
NJAggie said:

Well the many have nots in the ACC are not going to agree to dissolution for the benefit of 1 or 2 teams. The NCAA is not really a factor in what happens its all about conferences. There is not going to be a wiping out of conferences and reorganizing.

The B1G and SEC can basically do what they want and the rest of us are going to sit and watch. That's reality, not a coming 64 team NFL style organization. Too many contracts to break, too many law suits to deal with.

Sure two or three have said they think, or it might be best, but no one is working on it, because there is no one to work with on such a sports writers dream organization.

The Big XII and PAC (particularly if they are raided by the B1G) might be able to figure out a way to get closer to the big 2, but the ACC is locked into growing obscurity and irrelevance.

The TV networks don't care about a super organization. They've put their money in the conferences, and right now we have ESPN putting most of their money into the SEC, and FOX doing the same with the B1G. So neither of them has any incentive to break up the current situation, and in fact would be 2 of the parties suing if anyone tries to set up such an organization.

So all evidence, contracts, and efforts are against such a move, but yeah you found 3 or 4 people that said it was a good idea.


Totally agree.

If the NCAA folds, or the playoff picture changes, the ACC will not get out of their TV contract and will not lose any teams, and no settlement to that end WILL be pursued. The ACC WONT HAVE TO FORCE any team to remain in a situation that they do not wish to remain, simply because the penalties to leave will be financially impossible to overcome.
Last Page
Page 1 of 3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.