|
NIL money
Jan 23, 2024 16:00:29 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by slxpress on Jan 23, 2024 16:00:29 GMT -5
SMU’s most serious punishments were for repeated infractions. All the main schools using under the table money to compete in football in the area - OU, Oklahoma State, and Texas A&M - all faced serious penalties. TCU turned themselves in under a new coach and was crippled for it. Bill Yeoman had to resign after an illustrious career at UH (father of the triple option and broke the color barrier in the state) for impermissible benefits. It’s not like SMU was singled out. Their problem wasn’t that they were caught. Their problem is that they were caught, admitted to it, said they’d stop, and then kept going. You’re whitewashing the behavior a bit. I certainly wasn’t alive when all that happened so I don’t doubt you recap. My knowledge is narrowly confined to the Pony Express 30 for 30. SMU was just the most obvious example from the past that college football recruiting has been paying players for years and things have been thing way under the table well before Reggie got punished. The under the table money went way up after World War II. Every military installation had their own football team. Ringers were common so the base general could field a winning team. After the war was over the most talented players could earn good money playing for universities. That’s when the NCAA first established an enforcement division. The practice also played a significant role in the Ivy League choosing to go a different route post WWII. There was another increase in under the table payments with the breaking of the color barrier in the 60s and 70s. The success of teams who did so was a major inducement for SMU to follow their lead. For me SMU doesn’t feel like much of an example, but I understand why it would for you. It’s certainly a notorious example. Eric Dickerson driving his maroon Trans Am paid for by Texas A&M alumni to SMU to play for the Mustangs will never not be funny to me.
|
|
|
Post by stevehorn on Jan 23, 2024 16:07:35 GMT -5
SMU’s most serious punishments were for repeated infractions. All the main schools using under the table money to compete in football in the area - OU, Oklahoma State, and Texas A&M - all faced serious penalties. TCU turned themselves in under a new coach and was crippled for it. Bill Yeoman had to resign after an illustrious career at UH (father of the triple option and broke the color barrier in the state) for impermissible benefits. It’s not like SMU was singled out. Their problem wasn’t that they were caught. Their problem is that they were caught, admitted to it, said they’d stop, and then kept going. You’re whitewashing the behavior a bit. I certainly wasn’t alive when all that happened so I don’t doubt your recap. My knowledge is narrowly confined to the Pony Express 30 for 30. SMU was just the most obvious example from the past that college football recruiting has been paying players for years. Things have been this way, only under the table, well before Reggie got punished. The 30 for 30 might as well been written by the SMU PR department. The intent was more to make a case for how SMU was so badly mistreated because the program was shut down for 2 years. The statement above is correct. SMU probably got off lightly the first time by agreeing to stop and make changes to ensure it wasn't cheating. Then the people involved said they couldn't do that "because they had a payroll to meet" and the administration just said "OK" and took no steps to stop them.
|
|
|
Post by stevehorn on Jan 23, 2024 16:17:09 GMT -5
I certainly wasn’t alive when all that happened so I don’t doubt you recap. My knowledge is narrowly confined to the Pony Express 30 for 30. SMU was just the most obvious example from the past that college football recruiting has been paying players for years and things have been thing way under the table well before Reggie got punished. The under the table money went way up after World War II. Every military installation had their own football team. Ringers were common so the base general could field a winning team. After the war was over the most talented players could earn good money playing for universities. That’s when the NCAA first established an enforcement division. The practice also played a significant role in the Ivy League choosing to go a different route post WWII. There was another increase in under the table payments with the breaking of the color barrier in the 60s and 70s. The success of teams who did so was a major inducement for SMU to follow their lead. For me SMU doesn’t feel like much of an example, but I understand why it would for you. It’s certainly a notorious example. Eric Dickerson driving his maroon Trans Am paid for by Texas A&M alumni to SMU to play for the Mustangs will never not be funny to me. Yeah, SMU was just so obvious when it started paying. Not only Dickerson, but they also signed Craig James and Charles Waggoner who were the three best running backs in the state. SMU had been a bottom feeder in the conference since the Doak Walker days and usually passed more than anyone in the conference, then it signs the three best RBs in the state. Talk about drawing a bullseye on your own back. Funny thing about SMU is that it only involved a few boosters. Most money people at SMU didn't care that much about football. I remember going to the Texas-SMU game at Texas Stadium in 81 or 82 and Texas still had something like 75% of the crowd.
|
|
|
NIL money
Jan 23, 2024 16:26:27 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by slxpress on Jan 23, 2024 16:26:27 GMT -5
The under the table money went way up after World War II. Every military installation had their own football team. Ringers were common so the base general could field a winning team. After the war was over the most talented players could earn good money playing for universities. That’s when the NCAA first established an enforcement division. The practice also played a significant role in the Ivy League choosing to go a different route post WWII. There was another increase in under the table payments with the breaking of the color barrier in the 60s and 70s. The success of teams who did so was a major inducement for SMU to follow their lead. For me SMU doesn’t feel like much of an example, but I understand why it would for you. It’s certainly a notorious example. Eric Dickerson driving his maroon Trans Am paid for by Texas A&M alumni to SMU to play for the Mustangs will never not be funny to me. Yeah, SMU was just so obvious when it started paying. Not only Dickerson, but they also signed Craig James and Charles Waggoner who were the three best running backs in the state. SMU had been a bottom feeder in the conference since the Doak Walker days and usually passed more than anyone in the conference, then it signs the three best RBs in the state. Talk about drawing a bullseye on your own back. Funny thing about SMU is that it only involved a few boosters. Most money people at SMU didn't care that much about football. I remember going to the Texas-SMU game at Texas Stadium in 81 or 82 and Texas still had something like 75% of the crowd. The SMU crowds were anemic. Like 15k per game. All the SWC crowds were really. Even A&M didn’t have the following they do now because they were just transitioning from a relatively small all male ROTC school. Before the growth of pro football, the crowds were great for the SWC teams but the Cowboys and Oilers took all the attention from the local programs. Even now it’s kind of funny to drive by that huge football stadium on the Rice University campus, built before the NFL was a thing.
|
|
|
Post by stevehorn on Jan 23, 2024 16:44:48 GMT -5
Yeah, SMU was just so obvious when it started paying. Not only Dickerson, but they also signed Craig James and Charles Waggoner who were the three best running backs in the state. SMU had been a bottom feeder in the conference since the Doak Walker days and usually passed more than anyone in the conference, then it signs the three best RBs in the state. Talk about drawing a bullseye on your own back. Funny thing about SMU is that it only involved a few boosters. Most money people at SMU didn't care that much about football. I remember going to the Texas-SMU game at Texas Stadium in 81 or 82 and Texas still had something like 75% of the crowd. The SMU crowds were anemic. Like 15k per game. All the SWC crowds were really. Even A&M didn’t have the following they do now because they were just transitioning from a relatively small all male ROTC school. Before the growth of pro football, the crowds were great for the SWC teams but the Cowboys and Oilers took all the attention from the local programs. Even now it’s kind of funny to drive by that huge football stadium on the Rice University campus, built before the NFL was a thing. Yeah, I thought it was odd when I was a kid that Rice had the biggest stadium in the conference.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Jan 30, 2024 13:09:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
NIL money
Jan 30, 2024 13:23:05 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by slxpress on Jan 30, 2024 13:23:05 GMT -5
Thanks for the article. I’m ecstatic to see the NCAA trying to do something, but I found the penalties in the Florida State case anemic, and I suspect something similar with Tennessee, especially if the Vols fight it tooth and nail, which they appear to be doing in the early going.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Jan 30, 2024 13:30:27 GMT -5
Thanks for the article. I’m ecstatic to see the NCAA trying to do something, but I found the penalties in the Florida State case anemic, and I suspect something similar with Tennessee, especially if the Vols fight it tooth and nail, which they appear to be doing in the early going. The NCAA initially created this problem by abandoning (or technically, putting in abeyance) enforcement actions, citing the uncertain legal situation. I'm wondering if this shift back is also meant to try to create some pressure for some type of legislative solution. Some states have passed legislation that attempts to blunt the NCAA's enforcement reach, but neither Florida nor Tennessee have that, asfaik.
|
|
|
NIL money
Jan 30, 2024 13:39:29 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by slxpress on Jan 30, 2024 13:39:29 GMT -5
Thanks for the article. I’m ecstatic to see the NCAA trying to do something, but I found the penalties in the Florida State case anemic, and I suspect something similar with Tennessee, especially if the Vols fight it tooth and nail, which they appear to be doing in the early going. The NCAA initially created this problem by abandoning (or technically, putting in abeyance) enforcement actions, citing the uncertain legal situation. I'm wondering if this shift back is also meant to try to create some pressure for some type of legislative solution. Some states have passed legislation that attempts to blunt the NCAA's enforcement reach, but neither Florida nor Tennessee have that, asfaik. There’s no question they’re seeking every avenue they can for legislative action - especially at least limited antitrust protection. I personally don’t think Congress is anywhere close to a place where there’s going to be any relief. Eventually something is going to be done because the model is unsustainable. But I have no idea what the timing will be or what it will eventually look like. But I am heartened they’re at least movjbg forward with investigations. I have no real hope anything is going to come of them, but even an investigation is its own kind of deterrent. Certainly moreso than no investigations whatsoever would provide.
|
|
|
Post by stevehorn on Jan 30, 2024 14:19:55 GMT -5
Thanks for the article. I’m ecstatic to see the NCAA trying to do something, but I found the penalties in the Florida State case anemic, and I suspect something similar with Tennessee, especially if the Vols fight it tooth and nail, which they appear to be doing in the early going. The NCAA initially created this problem by abandoning (or technically, putting in abeyance) enforcement actions, citing the uncertain legal situation. I'm wondering if this shift back is also meant to try to create some pressure for some type of legislative solution. Some states have passed legislation that attempts to blunt the NCAA's enforcement reach, but neither Florida nor Tennessee have that, asfaik. It's quite possible this one will end up in court. The state of Tennessee amended its NIL law last year to allow schools to work with their NIL collective and to assist in fundraising. The NCAA rules prohibit this. If this is the reason for the investigation, would be shocked if this doesn't end up in court.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Jan 30, 2024 14:28:38 GMT -5
The NCAA initially created this problem by abandoning (or technically, putting in abeyance) enforcement actions, citing the uncertain legal situation. I'm wondering if this shift back is also meant to try to create some pressure for some type of legislative solution. Some states have passed legislation that attempts to blunt the NCAA's enforcement reach, but neither Florida nor Tennessee have that, asfaik. It's quite possible this one will end up in court. The state of Tennessee amended its NIL law last year to allow schools to work with their NIL collective and to assist in fundraising. The NCAA rules prohibit this. If this is the reason for the investigation, would be shocked if this doesn't end up in court. I think the NCAA would win that one in court. The Supreme Court decision is fundamentally opposed to the NCAA (or it’s members) being involved in what student-athletes do in the labor market.
|
|
|
Post by Friday on Jan 30, 2024 17:25:48 GMT -5
It's quite possible this one will end up in court. The state of Tennessee amended its NIL law last year to allow schools to work with their NIL collective and to assist in fundraising. The NCAA rules prohibit this. If this is the reason for the investigation, would be shocked if this doesn't end up in court. I think the NCAA would win that one in court. The Supreme Court decision is fundamentally opposed to the NCAA (or it’s members) being involved in what student-athletes do in the labor market. https://www.instagram.com/p/C2vNwlFu7dL
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Jan 30, 2024 17:34:59 GMT -5
Proving the case is one thing, but the NCAA always made clear that they might “retroactively” enforce NIL violations. And whether a state or state law can prevent the NCAA from enforcing its own rules is another (legal) issue altogether.
|
|
|
NIL money
Jan 30, 2024 18:16:59 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by slxpress on Jan 30, 2024 18:16:59 GMT -5
I continue to believe evidence comes out. - and the investigation of Tennessee is another example - of how remote some kind of “solution” to NIL and the way college athletics is currently conducted really is.
And in the meantime if your favorite school does not have some kind of robust NIL program it will be competing with one arm tied behind its back.
|
|
|
NIL money
Jan 30, 2024 18:56:33 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by mervinswerved on Jan 30, 2024 18:56:33 GMT -5
Just pay the players and the collectives go away.
|
|