Jump to content
Hurtlocker

Player Compensation

Recommended Posts

I cannot for the life of me find the thread on this, so please burn with fire if its duplicated.   But the AP is reporting that the NCAA is clearing the way for Athletes to profit from their NIL, not to mention endorsements or training opportunities.

NCAA moves toward allowing athletes to be paid sponsors

TLDR:

Can - 

  • Make sponsorship or endorsement deals
  • Sign and sell autographs
  • Be paid for personal appearances
  • Work as an instructor in their sport (camps, etc)

Can't - 

  • Wear any school apparel or branding of any kind (personal likeness only)
  • Enter into an agreement with an individual who is already deemed to be a school sponsor
  • Retain eligibility if they do not share the financial agreement with their athletic department.

 

Article:

Quote

The NCAA is moving closer to allowing Division I athletes to earn money from endorsements and sponsorship deals they can strike on their own as early as next year.

Recommended rule changes that would clear the way for athletes to earn money from their names, images and likeness are being reviewed by college sports administrators this week before being sent to the NCAA Board of Governors, which meets Monday and Tuesday.

If adopted, the rules would allow athletes to make sponsorship and endorsement deals with all kinds of companies and third parties, from car dealerships to concert promoters to pizza shops, according to a person who has reviewed the recommendations. The person spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity Thursday because the details were still being discussed and debated.

The recommendations are expected to form the foundation for legislation the NCAA hopes to pass next January so it can take effect in 2021. Changes could still be made before January.

No school-branded apparel or material could be used by athletes in their personal endorsement deals, according to the recommendations reviewed by the person who spoke to the AP. Athletes would be required to disclose financial terms of contracts to their athletic departments, along with their relationships with any individuals involved.

Athletes would be allowed to enter into agreements with individuals deemed to be school boosters, the person said.

The NCAA would create a mechanism to evaluate potential deals for fair market value and spot possible corruption. An athlete could compromise their eligibility for failing to disclose details of a financial agreement or relationship, the person said.

The recommendations also call for allowing athletes to sign autographs for money, sell their memorabilia, and be paid for personal appearances and working as an instructor in their sport.

“Trevor Lawrence could have his own passing academy,” the person said, referring to the Clemson quarterback.

The recommendations come from a working group set up 11 months ago and led by Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith and Big East Commissioner Val Ackerman.

The need for change was sped up by pressure from state lawmakers. California was first to enact a law that would make it illegal for NCAA schools to prohibit college athletes from making money on endorsements, social media advertising and other activities tied to name, image and likeness.

Dozens of states have followed California’s lead, some more aggressively than others. California’s law does not go into effect until 2023 while a Florida bill awaiting the governor’s signature would go into effect July 2021.

NCAA leaders have gone to Congress looking for help to fend of a patchwork of state laws and create a national standard.

In one way, the recommendations go even beyond the free-market approach of the California law, which would restrict athletes from making sponsorship deals with companies that conflict with a school’s existing business relationship. For example, an athlete could not sign a deal with Nike if the school had a contract with Under Armour.

The working group’s recommendations would keep the NCAA out of that decision. leaving it to each school to decide whether it will allow an athlete to sponsor a competing brand, the person told the AP.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Seems terribly corruptible, just pay them a larger monthly stipend. Also, this seems shite for team unity, ego paper chasing feeling they deserve as much or more than another.

Edited by JohnnyRage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is corrupt.

This is the way.

 

(Point being, nothing going to make it absent of corruption at this point.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JohnnyRage said:

Seems terribly corruptible, just pay them a larger monthly stipend. 

Or just stop the charade and pay them for their labor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Or just stop the charade and pay them for their labor.

they are already paid. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

Enter into an agreement with an individual who is already deemed to be a school sponsor

Does that mean boosters or like a Nike supplying shoes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, dingleberryswitzer said:

Does that mean boosters or like a Nike supplying shoes?

They didn't clarify in the article.   They just said if they are listed as a school booster, they can't pay kids.   Basically you either support the school or the kid it seems.

California's law, I believe, draws the distinction, saying you can't be sponsored by Nike if your school is Adidas, but I don't know if that applies in what they are discussing.   Obviously its not finalized yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

DD,

Market value with or without their association with the school?  The guys who make bank off purely personal branding are likely being paid by corrupt boosters or athletic departments.  Sam Ellinger couldn’t sell shit by putting his own line of athletic apparel in stores unless those stores pay him up front for the deal, kinda like upfront book deals for politicians who end up - predictably - with shit for book sales.  Let Sam put his name on a #11 Texas jersey, they fly off the racks without any upfront deals. Let him sell his autograph on blank pieces of paper (no footballs or school paraphernalia or game programs) with no reference to Texas, #11, or even Hook ‘em, and he makes 90% less. 

Edited by ImissWallyPryor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

LOLz.  I love that one the most.  Texas MADE the kid who he is.  No they didn't.

 

Otherwise UT could just sell jerseys with 00 on them.  You KNOW people would buy them the fuck up, right?

Edited by Iceman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ImissWallyPryor said:

I would bet a Texas jersey with 00 would outsell an Ellinger jersey of another color and number. 

LOL.

The player makes the difference.  That's why we don;t have EA sports college football any more.  and that's why a #20 Texas jersey is worth more than a #02.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You’re missing my point. A #20 Campbell jersey would sell like crazy 43 years after the fact. But, if Texas only allowed sales of official nameless jerseys in numbers that don’t belong to current star players, those would still sell very, very well. A purple jersey (#20 or not) with Campbell on it would go unsold. The official Texas jersey is the main driving factor in sales. Putting a star player on it makes it sell even better, but that isn’t the main attraction. I’m not gonna keep debating this because I’m right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No you aren't.  the numbers prove why.  You're ignoring it.  I don't have to convince you...LOlz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ImissWallyPryor said:

You’re missing my point. A #20 Campbell jersey would sell like crazy 43 years after the fact. But, if Texas only allowed sales of official nameless jerseys in numbers that don’t belong to current star players, those would still sell very, very well. A purple jersey (#20 or not) with Campbell on it would go unsold. The official Texas jersey is the main driving factor in sales. Putting a star player on it makes it sell even better, but that isn’t the main attraction. I’m not gonna keep debating this because I’m right. 

When did Earl Campbell ever wear a purple jersey? If I went into a store and saw a purple #20 Campebell jersey, I would not think it was an Earl Campbell jersey. It's not an "Earl Campbell" jersey if it's something he never wore.  If there was a gold and green jersey football jersey with "Texas" on it, I doubt that would sell very well either; because it's not Texas, just like a purple jersey is not Earl Campbell.

You can't separate the two; they're forever linked.  

But also, not every school has the same aura that Texas does.  You don't think Randy Moss gear (like sponsored receiver gloves) would sell better than his Marshall jersey without his name? Steve McNair gear vs. unnamed Alcorn St. jersey?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

63, 70, and 06 jerseys are the best sellers and most seen numbers at UT Tailgates, right?  Those are the most successful team years in program history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A generic #1 jersey is what you typically see most of the time.

 

Followed by 20, 10, 12, 34 in some sort of order

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Okay, I lied. I’m back.

6 hours ago, TheBryMan81 said:

When did Earl Campbell ever wear a purple jersey? If I went into a store and saw a purple #20 Campebell jersey, I would not think it was an Earl Campbell jersey. It's not an "Earl Campbell" jersey if it's something he never wore.  If there was a gold and green jersey football jersey with "Texas" on it, I doubt that would sell very well either; because it's not Texas, just like a purple jersey is not Earl Campbell.

You can't separate the two; they're forever linked.  

But also, not every school has the same aura that Texas does.  You don't think Randy Moss gear (like sponsored receiver gloves) would sell better than his Marshall jersey without his name? Steve McNair gear vs. unnamed Alcorn St. jersey?

You're exactly right about the aura surrounding the Texas brand. We bought jerseys for our kids, numbers 34, 10, and 12. Those choices were not surprising given the significance of the players who wore them, but what they wanted most was a Texas jersey.

You’re also right about the numbers and the Texas brand being forever linked, but that doesn’t disprove my point that it’s that Texas brand that being the primary driver and the players’ number being a distant second. Hence, the hypothetical purple jersey was born.

If jersey sales are up by 20% this year, then we could reasonably conclude that it’s because of Sam (mostly). Team success drives sales more than individual success. If Texas can’t even win the Big 12, but Sam wins the Heisman, his jersey would sell very well. But if Texas wins the the national championship and Sam is only honorable mention Big 12, his jersey would sell even more.

When Johnny Football won the Heisman, aggy jersey sales with his number surely flew off the racks, but that’s partly because every aggy already had a #12 jersey and their Hall of Champions is mostly empty. They still wanted something that said Texas A&M. After his epic failures, I’m sure they went back to #12.

I’m not blind to individual players driving demand, I just think that they aren’t nearly as significant in those sales as the Texas brand. Some people (I’m not pointing a finger at particular posters) seem to think it’s more about the players than I do. 

Edited by ImissWallyPryor
I’m being redundant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So @Iceman, should each player be paid proportionally to their merchandise sales? Freshman Sam wouldn’t have sold shit. Would there be a salary cap in your system and everyone makes different money? The money pool of the average D1 or Big12 divided equally by 85 players is probably $10-20k a year, maybe a little more...roughly the value of the tuition, housing, books, food, etc. they get already. Stretch it even further when the Title 9 folks get involved and demand QB1 get paid the same as freshman backup on girls cross country team. $1000 a semester, holla!

Some stipend so they are getting more compensation for what they bring the university is fair. Some sponsorship/marketing they make on their own (better players will get more) is probably fair if some smart person can come up with a way that it’s not simply a legalized method for boosters to pay 5 star kids to attend. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Pay them money. Texas needs to get ahead of this. Jesus 

I don’t think that’s what is being debated as much as the wisdom behind this and how much is due to an individual player. Of course Texas needs to get on board, it’s just that many of us see how this could be abused or otherwise go wrong.

I know I’ve said in the past that players are already being paid, but like most of that mind set, I think this is going to be a shit storm. Fine, pay the players an enhanced stipend, but this will not go well for the programs that aren’t big time or that aren’t willing to abuse the system. 

Edited by ImissWallyPryor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Murfdogg21 said:

So @Iceman, should each player be paid proportionally to their merchandise sales? Freshman Sam wouldn’t have sold shit. Would there be a salary cap in your system and everyone makes different money? The money pool of the average D1 or Big12 divided equally by 85 players is probably $10-20k a year, maybe a little more...roughly the value of the tuition, housing, books, food, etc. they get already. Stretch it even further when the Title 9 folks get involved and demand QB1 get paid the same as freshman backup on girls cross country team. $1000 a semester, holla!

Some stipend so they are getting more compensation for what they bring the university is fair. Some sponsorship/marketing they make on their own (better players will get more) is probably fair if some smart person can come up with a way that it’s not simply a legalized method for boosters to pay 5 star kids to attend. 

I feel like each player should receive the same stipend as other players.  It should be the same at each  FBS school, IMHO.  if a school can't keep up, then drop out of the race.  NCAA should determine the stipend, not the schools.  That's the cost of doing business.  It would also control the arms race type shenanigans, should they occur, from a school's perspective.

If a player wants to market their likeness, it's up to them.  If they want to charge for autographs/ endorsements/ appearance fees, so be it.  Let the market bear what it will.  If the school restricts use of its jerseys/ logos, I'm absolutely cool with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm ready for the Texas football classes to use the #RaptorSquad hashtag..  We will start to really clean up. #InRedWeTrust

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

In addition to tuition books and supplies, housing, meals, tutoring, gyms, trainers, physical therapy, coaching, media marketing...and a gracious stipend

 

Put funds each year into a 'pension' that they can cash out or have pay out AFTER THEY GRADATE. If they leave early, the money stays in a university account that they can always come back and finish their studies. To make things a little more unbalanced and fair, a portion of jersey and likeness sales could be directed toward the individual and payable again after they graduate. They can also let the account accrue interest and invest in it for a real retirement.

This shit isn't hard. We don't need to invite in every sleazy scumbag and remove all amateurism.

Edited by JohnnyRage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need to clean house at Belmont.  We have sooo many useless paper pushers.  Many make 6 figures for doing nothing.  This cash could go to paying players.  Look at tOSU, those assholes are getting a huge bailout.....  guess where that money is going?  Texas plays stupid, we are always behind the curve.  Come on admin, get your shit together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, JohnnyRage said:

In addition to tuition books and supplies, housing, meals, tutoring, gyms, trainers, physical therapy, coaching, media marketing...and a gracious stipend

 

Put funds each year into a 'pension' that they can cash out or have pay out AFTER THEY GRADATE. If they leave early, the money stays in a university account that they can always come back and finish their studies. To make things a little more unbalanced and fair, a portion of jersey and likeness sales could be directed toward the individual and payable again after they graduate. They can also let the account accrue interest and invest in it for a real retirement.

This shit isn't hard. We don't need to invite in every sleazy scumbag and remove all amateurism.

Amateurism is a fucking pipedream. With regard to college football at the FBS level.

Continuing to ‘protect’ it, only strengthens the corruptors.

Edited by Iceman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Iceman said:

Amateurism is a fucking pipedream. With regard to college football at the FBS level.

Continuing to ‘protect’ it, only strengthens the corruptors.

They make UT Austin and the other schools that don't "play the game" look inept.  Anyway, it's been this way for a long time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, 2300 Nueces said:

They make UT Austin and the other schools that don't "play the game" look inept.  Anyway, it's been this way for a long time. 

That's bullshit. Shitty coaching makes Texas look inept. Unless your argument is that we were cheating our ass off during the 2000's and then decided to go clean this past decade.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_win-loss_records_in_the_2000s

More likely we've been playing the game roughly like we always have, but our coaching regressed to dogshit levels. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Blotto said:

That's bullshit. Shitty coaching makes Texas look inept. Unless your argument is that we were cheating our ass off during the 2000's and then decided to go clean this past decade.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_win-loss_records_in_the_2000s

More likely we've been playing the game roughly like we always have, but our coaching regressed to dogshit levels. 

Settle down.  They cheat.  We don't, at least compared to tOSU.  We don't play the game.  10+ years is a long time.  Yes, we have crap coaching and admin..  We don't pay enough... etc... 

 

Why does tOSU need a bailout from the government?  Something is wrong in the rust belt.

Edited by 2300 Nueces

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, 2300 Nueces said:

Why does tOSU need a bailout from the government?  Something is wrong in the rust belt.

Have a few hours?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wont argue that we don't pay players to the level of the worst offenders (ole miss and most of the SEC), but its naive to think we are the only school that recruits well on the merits of our program. Every school thinks that.

Our results from 2000-2009 show that whatever level we do pay is plenty when coupled with good coaching. Those squads placed plenty of talent in the NFL. Our recruiting rankings didnt fall off nearly as bad as our records once Mack got lazy, Strong showed up and fucked up everything, and we allowed Herman to initially staff his squad with a bunch of his mediocre buddies. 

But to whatever extent the NCAA does allow "legitimate sponserships/endorsements/stipends", it should benefit Texas more than most, as there is a lot money with ties to Texas football swirling around Austin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Blotto said:

I wont argue that we don't pay players to the level of the worst offenders (ole miss and most of the SEC), but its naive to think we are the only school that recruits well on the merits of our program. Every school thinks that.

Our results from 2000-2009 show that whatever level we do pay is plenty when coupled with good coaching. Those squads placed plenty of talent in the NFL. Our recruiting rankings didnt fall off nearly as bad as our records once Mack got lazy, Strong showed up and fucked up everything, and we allowed Herman to initially staff his squad with a bunch of his mediocre buddies. 

But to whatever extent the NCAA does allow "legitimate sponserships/endorsements/stipends", it should benefit Texas more than most, as there is a lot money with ties to Texas football swirling around Austin.

Agreed.  I hope you are correct with the "player compensation" claim.  There is a lot of money that follows Texas football.  Hopefully we can make it work 100x better than some of these schools.  Ever been to Baton Rouge?  It's pretty dumpy, yet they are able to make the money flow to all the right places.  Here's to using our resources to dominate CFB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hypothetically...

we pay for visits. We don’t pay for Jaylen Waddle to sign on the dotted line. I could list 20 other super obvious players that we got “out-recruited” for over the years. Yes winning matters, coaching matters, player development matters, but Jaylen Waddle also matters. 

As to the argument that it will be abused, unfair, or go wrong. Yes it will. College Football is already unfair. Unless your a big state school with tons of money, you are probably not winning shit. You can, but it’s an uphill battle. Abused? Of course, but hell the system is already abused. Some of the top players are being paid six figures to sign. Shoe companies pay trainers to push athletes to schools they sponsor. Some schools don’t even have their players go to school. 

The fairytale of a student athlete died a long time ago. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

EWxyR-WWoAU0IBY?format=png&name=medium

Look at this fucking bullshit from the NCAA.  Athletes are the only students on campus that don't have NIL rights.  Did all of the non-athletes have to jump through state laws or federal anti-trust laws to gain NIL rights?  Fuck no, they didn't.  This is the NCAA still trying to kick and scream and stall on doing what is right, while trying to hang on to the "model of intercollegiate athletics" that makes sure everyone involved except that athletes gets rich.

Edited by Beau Vine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/24/2020 at 10:37 AM, JohnnyRage said:

Seems terribly corruptible, just pay them a larger monthly stipend. Also, this seems shite for team unity, ego paper chasing feeling they deserve as much or more than another.

That would require a player union to negotiate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/25/2020 at 1:51 PM, Iceman said:

LOLz.  I love that one the most.  Texas MADE the kid who he is.  No they didn't.

 

Otherwise UT could just sell jerseys with 00 on them.  You KNOW people would buy them the fuck up, right?

Not too mention Sam isn't even the best player in Texas history to wear #11.

 

I like this, it's hilarious. Because kids are going to have to report their earnings to the government. Sure there are going to be more handshakes of cash, but any of this new stuff is going to be highly scrutinized.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

NILclick - a simple click can earn your favorite player PLENTY O' BUCKS!

Click here, buy a $1.00, $5.00, $10.00 - or more - LOTTERY TICKET. A Winning ticket is split between you and your favorite player, and even if you lose, he (or she) gets a commission.

Support Your Team! Play NILclick TODAY!

Edited by Tex Long

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

List the players on Team you think would have the biggest endorsements in 2020?

1. Sam Ehlinger

2. Joseph Ossai

3. Sam Cosmi

4. Caden Sterns

5. B.J. Foster

6. Roschon Johnson

7. Keontay Ingram

8. D'Shawn Jamison

9. Brennan Eagles

10. Cameron Dicker

 

I think 1-4 aren't changing, but arguments can be made for 5-10

Edited by Neonmoon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pandora’s Box. Just make college athletics a true professional Sport with players having agents, drafts, money negotiations. To hell with going to class. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Brandywine said:

Just make college athletics a true professional Sport with players having agents, drafts, money negotiations. To hell with going to class. 

I agree, except don't call it College Football. Call it whatever you want, but it's not college athletics. I know I'm the outlier on this site, but I want the opposite to happen. I want money out of college sports. Athletes that want to go pro w/o going to college, should just go straight to the pros. I prefer the model of the lower divisions. Strict adherence to amateur athletics. Buzzkill, I know

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hypothetically...
we pay for visits. We don’t pay for Jaylen Waddle to sign on the dotted line. I could list 20 other super obvious players that we got “out-recruited” for over the years. Yes winning matters, coaching matters, player development matters, but Jaylen Waddle also matters. 
As to the argument that it will be abused, unfair, or go wrong. Yes it will. College Football is already unfair. Unless your a big state school with tons of money, you are probably not winning shit. You can, but it’s an uphill battle. Abused? Of course, but hell the system is already abused. Some of the top players are being paid six figures to sign. Shoe companies pay trainers to push athletes to schools they sponsor. Some schools don’t even have their players go to school. 
The fairytale of a student athlete died a long time ago. 

What current players are being paid six figures? Do you have proof of this and their names or are you just throwing out spurious anecdotes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

List the players on Team you think would have the biggest endorsements in 2020?

1. Sam Ehlinger

2. Joseph Ossai

3. Sam Cosmi

4. Caden Sterns

5. B.J. Foster

6. Roschon Johnson

7. Keontay Ingram

8. D'Shawn Jamison

9. Brennan Eagles

10. Cameron Dicker

 

I think 1-4 aren't changing, but arguments can be made for 5-10

so basically 1 player?

Who gives a shit about abuse as long as it is reported and taxed.  The schools should not pay them anything directly (they already do - for the 90% who will never play professionally).  And who is being abused?  The student in need of money or the booster with disposable cash to spend?

I'm sure jerseys 2-10 will sell by the hundreds this season, but the number worn and previous players doing the same will have some effect on sales as well.  There are no shortage of high schoolers willing to play ball for a scholarship.  Schools make money off of students all the time in fields other than Athletics (patents etc), why carve out an exception only for athletes? 

As has been stated extremely clearly in this thread, 98% of the "value" is the name on the front of the jersey, not the back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Mileslong said:


What current players are being paid six figures? Do you have proof of this and their names or are you just throwing out spurious anecdotes?

Yes, I have proof of this and their names. I'm just keeping it to myself because I like to see Texas getting its dick kicked in recruiting. Seriously? The world is not black and white. There is a large swath of positions between "making this up" and "proof of payment". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

so basically 1 player?

Who gives a shit about abuse as long as it is reported and taxed.  The schools should not pay them anything directly (they already do - for the 90% who will never play professionally).  And who is being abused?  The student in need of money or the booster with disposable cash to spend?

I'm sure jerseys 2-10 will sell by the hundreds this season, but the number worn and previous players doing the same will have some effect on sales as well.  There are no shortage of high schoolers willing to play ball for a scholarship.  Schools make money off of students all the time in fields other than Athletics (patents etc), why carve out an exception only for athletes? 

As has been stated extremely clearly in this thread, 98% of the "value" is the name on the front of the jersey, not the back.

I meant, which players will have the best endorsement deals on the team

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


mpu


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Recruiting ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Help ... For Sale ... Politics ... Board Discussion
×
×
  • Create New...