madkat7

They remove all NIL restrictions then act surprised when it becomes a free for all....say it isn't so. That toothpaste is out of the tube I'm afraid. It's going to take a lot of coordinated effort to repack some of this and I'm not sure that they'll find enough people who feel it's in their financial best interest to do it.

Gets old

"ESPN reportedly has its Adam Schefter of college football, according to the New York Post’s Andrew Marchand. Pete Thamel will leave Yahoo! Sports for ESPN, and he’ll be doing what he does best for the company — breaking news. " He breaks news all right. Pete Thamel does not equal Adam Schefter. The apocalypses is truly upon us. I remember this journalistic wannabe from the Newton days. I assume he's still hiding the bag man somewhere within his vast empire. I'm not a fan.

Happy to help a person in need! I am glad she appreciated it!

PM Sent.

I tried to soft switch back to recruiting by mentioning both...so to make it more firm, our recruiting is very poor right now. Here's an example of our National / SEC standings in recruiting for the last 12 years. Rather precipitous drop over the last 2 years. Unless AU is really effective at exploiting the transfer portal, I expect a worse than average SEC performance for the next 2 to 4 years.

College football is headed for an unrestricted free-for-all pay-to-play mess. Unfortunately, we seem to be behind the curve in how we handle NIL and recruiting. I'd rather be out front but JABA is working against us. *EDIT* Just looked at SEC 2022 recruiting rankings on 247 and Rivals which have us firmly at 13th in the conference. We're getting curbed by Vanderbilt, Missoury, MooSt. Arky, UK, and USCe. If that isn't enough to make you sick, I don't know what is.

Sorry to derail, but these look fun! Couple of questions. 1. What temp target of smoker? 2. Do you cook them in log form and slice after, or slice before cooking?

I see a team improving week to week. I see coaches making effective adjustments on O and D. That's something I haven't seen in a bit at AU! WDE!

I fail to see the incentive of the Thanksgiving day games below the 2 #1 seed matchup semi-final for SEC crown. These would seemingly fall into meaningless "bowl game" context where some athletes may opt to sit out since there is nothing to gain. Am I missing something?

Hmmm...I hope not.

And for services provided.....Attend BYU and play football. PAY FOR PLAY IS HERE, IN THE OPEN, UNRESTRICTED, AND GLORIOUS!!!!

If true, regardless of outcome, won't this set off another mega-conference arms race? You certainly don't want to be last to that party.

This attitude is part of the problem. The strength of prior infection immunity is debatable. The vaccine immunity data is solid. If we could hit 70-80 percent, we could dramatically reduce Covid as an issue worldwide, reducing the probability of further mutation and transmission. Most wouldn't argue with an airline pilot if told to return to seats but so many do when life saving vaccines are readily available. To refuse a vaccine is a personal choice, but also a selfish one. I get there are a few people that legitimately cannot take the vaccine, but most of the reasons for refusal are just willful ignorance that can and will result in preventable suffering. I sincerely hope those that elect to go without the vaccine don't find this out first hand, but they certainly are rolling the dice with lesser odds. It boggles the mind how a public health issue has become so political and polarizing.

The guidelines are: Deals cannot serve as recruiting inducements. Athletes cannot receive benefits without services given. Agents or representation are allowed for NIL benefits. Schools cannot be involved in creating opportunities for their athletes. Players cannot promote alcohol, legal drugs like cannabis, tobacco products, adult entertainment or gambling. I've got nothing against the kids making $$ but I can't fathom any way to monitor the above "guidelines" to keep the playing field even remotely level. 1. Prove that the kid got that sponsorship as part of an inducement deal and/or that the school was involved. We already know this shady stuff went on with the outmoded amateurism rules. Now it will be applied even more liberally. 2. Services given...this is wildly vague and open to broad interpretation. 3. Agents will be necessary for any serious athlete. It's not just their likeness they are representing, they are also de-facto representatives of the institution they play for. Someone has to look out for the interests of the institution and the athlete. We'll see how this plays out. 4. See #1 5. How can they outlaw this but allow anything else. If the athlete is 21, so what if they promote a Vodka? This seems like more of the same crap that started all this to begin with. Someone will lobby / sue to change this. There's too much money at stake. The below is a hypothetical, but given what I've seen it could happen... Boosters pool resources and funnel through a business to "sponsor" desired student athletes. They agree to pay exorbitant sums to these athletes for "services given" should they "decide" to attend the local preferred university. The student attends. The athletes do an appearance once per month for an hour at the business for a substantial payout. This would be so easy to coordinate between the School and boosters with zero paper trail and plausible deniability. In this scenario the schools with the richest willing boosters and that can work this system will get the premium athletes. Smaller schools may be able to field teams, but they will not be competitive due to a lack of resources. I'm not saying this will happen, but what's to stop it?