So weâre basically a prisonerâs dilemma / game theory type problem where the non-rule followers are currently benefitting because CSC doesnât go into effect until every school signs.
And UVA, as one of the vocal rule followers that has signed CSC is going to get screwed until equilibrium is reached either by everyone agreeing to CSC or it going away entirely.
This sucks for this coming year, but hopefully should be only be temporary
There is no evidence of schools paying money outside of the CSC. Even the players involved in the Nebraska case havenât gotten the money.
Like the big âevidenceâ of schools breaking the rules is that LSU is committing 30 million to football. If 16 of that is rev share and everyone in that state and the governor is dedicated to getting LSU good to me itâs not implausible they got 14 in outside NIL
Also worth noting. Arizona (final four basketball) and Georgia (SEC champions football) both have publicly signed it, and no one is saying those schools âarenât serious about competingâ or whatever people on this board say. Also of note we have not publicly stated that we have signed it (though I presume we have)
Yup, I suspect that accounts for a lot of the noise around this stuff.
Player X gets $5 mil could mean player x gets 1 mil rev share and 4 mil that will be held up in CSC purgatory and maybe knocked down by half or more.
Seeing wacky numbers doesnât necessarily mean House is being violated. It probably doesnât.
But it might mean that someone is a mark. It might be the kids agreeing to the deals. It might be the agents. It might be the schools (assuming there will be no consequences).
And whatâs the old adage? If you canât spot the mark at the table, you might be the mark? (Probably butchering that).**
** meaning, you donât need to believe everything you read on the internet, even on a VIP board.
âsuckerâ instead of âmarkâ if you want to use the Rounders quote
Food for thought.
https://x.com/nickatnocap/status/2045140725633876462?s=46&t=KRUvpbKQ9s5_3BPeM0gClg
Tag this along with Cal basically declaring bankruptcy earlier this week.
Capitalism (along with the current world) in college sports is going to cannibalize actual colleges.
NIL needs to be recalled and rolled out correctly. No agents, no bs, and caps. Dudes need to make money off of jersey sales, appearances, and other little things to generate revenue for them. I swear people forget these dudes were already getting free school, free food, free gear, and stipends!! I feel bad for schools that donât have the resources to play both sides.
Doesnât totally fit here, but w/e. Kentucky has reached âthe Governor is commenting on your Athletic Department operationsâ status:
https://x.com/GovAndyBeshear/status/2046652852286681322
(This is about the outgoing ADâs new âjobâ which is definitely not a golden parachute, why did you even suggest that?)
Mitch has been making insane decisions for years tbh. Donât know how he finessed this bullshit gig. They needed to kick him to the curb after he fought booze in stadiums tooth-and-nail, and again after hiring Pope, and again when he signed the JMI deal that still makes no damn sense.
I canât believe he was able to swing this on the way out the door, but I guess thatâs what hiring Cal and Stoops gets you, even if both are now gone and the fans kind of hate them both now.
Get em Andy (a UVa law grad!)
Am I wrong in thinking that if rev share was uncapped, the incentive is for schools to run their departments as profitably as possible for bigger budgets, which means keeping the profitable ones (FB, MBB, maybe baseball/volleyball/WBB/softball with smaller operating budgets) and then cutting as many other sports as possible while still adhering to Title IX?
Like would Gonzaga have menâs and womenâs basketball and thatâs it.
One of my more controversial beliefs is ⌠cool. Let it happen.
Not sure why weâve all decided itâs a good idea to use $$ from people going to see football games to run various semi pro Olympic sports.
If people want to play non-revenue sports, they should go for it! Not sure why itâs good for society or schools that we made various rando sports semi pro.
If you like tennis, play tennis! I enjoy some tennis. Not sure why money needs to change hands. Other than to the various Central Park overlords who charge me an arm and a leg for the right to wait on a line to reserve a court in this godforsaken town
Wait, whatâs the topic?
Something something college athletes are disproportionately more likely to be successful and engaged with the university later in life something something marketing for the university
Well thatâs true. I once was fouled out in the first half of a dorm IM game, and here I am 30 years later still making dumb posts on a UVa fan board, so I suppose there is something to it
https://x.com/DraftExpress/status/2048877605407871354?s=20
I donât really have a take on whether this is good/bad/somewhere in between. Depends on your POV.
Would be curious to revisit any takes around peak early entry time about improving college basketball retention to see if any of them stumbled onto the ultimately correct answer of âcompete on wagesâ
I think it will benefit the NBA eventually, because guys will be more known coming into the league, more built in following
NBA building its own ecosystem always felt a little halfhearted (IMO)
What is SLU?
Sharmaâs club