An interesting set of beliefs that seem to be articulated by the same people (read: athletic departments and coaches) is:
To be fair, he said a lot of stuff. I donât disagree with a lot of it.
My issue with a lot of his and similar analysis is that it treats the booster collective era as this unbroken continuation of something that was already happening. Which is bad history! And then his reaction is that anything to try to tamp down on that will fail spectacularly. Which then ignores the fact that about 5 million** will be distributed amongst the hoops team perfectly legally. And then they cite the wacky inflated salaries of this past offseason as some sort of benchmark instead of CAUSED BY the impending imposition of the settlement.
I mean, if this thing does work (which it probably wonât) and some softball lover wants to find a way to have softball players paid millions of dollars, all they have to is find some school and shower them with donations to crazily fund softball until they agree to give rev share to the softball player they like.
** which is many many multiples greater than any old school boosters were giving in the old system
Bring back old/school cheating. Incorporate drones in the cheating as well. That should settle things down.
Also AI and crypto. Thatâll keep us up to date.
To be fair, I think ADs are trying to claim that their own schools will have trouble raising money and everyone else will be blowing past the rev share caps.
https://x.com/bmarcello/status/1932207799058247724?s=46
I mean it sounds like some schools will have a Cody Campbell and some wonât. I donât think thatâs crazy to say tbh.
I am so confused. I thought Cavs Futures wasnât going to be allowed to supplement rev sharing and NIL was only going to be allowed via 3rd party deals? Sounds like TT is just operating as if the settlement doesnât matter.
Could be confidence that they can get these deals cleared or that some of those funds are going to cover department operational gaps that revenue sharing opened up.
My guess:
And to be clear, none of that means that TT or the collective or an individual wonât eventually sue to challenge the cap and/or try to skirt the cap. The above just seems to be what they can do within the bounds of the settlement.
GP should have stated it like that
https://x.com/rossdellenger/status/1932512297949208818?s=46
One question Iâve had about this all along and is exacerbated by the âsimilarly situated individualsâ thingâ how will fair market value for these athletes be taken into account with regards to the schools they play for? Will Notre Dame or Ohio State athletes be allowed to be paid more because of their larger reaches/fanbases?
Thatâs a great question, I hadnât even thought about that. Iâve been wondering about city size (the standard NBA issue), but if they consider size of fan base, or worse, something like how passionate those fans are, that would make things real uneven real fast.
Yes, to state an unwelcome truth: deals for Duke players will probably be worth more.
Then I need them to stop talking about âleveling the playing fieldâ
Idk Iâm starting to see the merits of the current terrible system
Also dovetails with my already existent âthis new system that allows tiny Catholic schools on the Acela corridor to massively overbid for talent against bigger universities due to an arbitrary all sports cap will destroy the mass appeal of the sport of college basketballâ take
Counterpoint: train accessible hoops is good! 
Now House starts to make sense if there is action in Congress.
In a letter Baker sent to members of Congress over the weekend obtained by The Athletic , the NCAA president pointed to the House settlement as needed progress, while asking for help on establishing antitrust protections, pre-empting state laws and keeping athletes from being employees.
Classic. Athletes canât be employees but we can share $20 mil/year with them per school becauseâŚgenerosity?
âkeeping athletes from being employeesâ is the heart of the problem. So much flows from there.