Jump to content

Texas Wahoo

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    1372
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Texas Wahoo

  1. Quote

    Located in the heart of the “Live Music Capital of the World,” the SEC Celebration will feature star-studded concerts on the Tower Stage, including a headlining performance at 9 p.m. by a to-be-announced global superstar. Live music will kick off at 5:30 p.m.

    A to-be-announced global superstar?  

     

  2. 4 hours ago, HateYouAndMyself said:

    Someone should remind Gerry that the rules were changed. Grad transfers had to be in the portal by the closing of the Spring window just like everyone else starting this year. 

    https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/40022677/all-college-basketball-transfers-portal-1

    Unless there is some loophole I am unaware of our options are limited to those players already in the portal and the pickings are slim to say the least. 

    The solution is obviously to find a great player on a mid-major that has not transferred yet and poach his coach to be an assistant and then the portal opens for players on that team.

    • Like 2
  3. 25 minutes ago, HateYouAndMyself said:

    Just to provide additional clarity and information to those that are curious about the settlement:

    Where the fuck did that 22M number come from?

    That 22M figure being thrown around is such because the average power conference athletic program's revenues have been 100M over the past few years. So 22% of the 100M = a 22M cap. That number will adjust naturally based on how power conference revenues fluctuate each year. They decided upon 22% because scholarship costs and other athlete benefits currently come out to being about 28% of your average power conference program's revenue. Scholarships being around 16M. So they didn't just pull the 22% number out of their ass; it pushes the split of athletic program revenue going to athletes to be roughly an even split at 50%. 

    There are also some built in escalators where the cap increases by like 4% each year but it was confusing how they worded it. It sounds like that is a 4% increase over the actual dollar amount (the 22M) rather than meaning that in year two it would become 26% of the average revenue. I assume that yearly 4% increase in the actual dollar value of the cap is done to combat inflation. 

     

     

    Will Title IX apply? 

    Short answer is no. Not if the schools involved are smart. All that matters is that the funds equaling that 22% end up in the pockets of players. The method used is irrelevant to the terms of the settlement. The loophole that has essentially been created here in conjunction with the ruling of protected NIL rights for athletes is that schools can enter into likeness usage agreements with specific players and essentially pay them whatever they view to be fair. Title IX has no involvement in this. If Texas thinks that using the likeness of Ewers to advertise our program justifies giving him 3 million a year we can do so. Without issue. It doesn't mandate we then find some female athletes or members of other sports and likewise buy their rights for equal total amount. There are plenty of people on Surly who can explain this better than I can but I imagine they are probably keeping tight lipped about how Texas specifically plans to attack this issue until it is actually in motion. The NCAA's stance on the issue so far has been strongly against Title IX having any application to compensation of these athletes and that so long as equal opportunity is provided for male and female athletes to show their value to the program Title IX is satisfied. 

    Really we won't have a concrete answer till the department of education rules on it but pretty much every competent lawyer who specializes in that area seems to think regardless of if Title IX is mandated to apply it will quickly be struck down in a court challenge. 

     

    I'm not sure if you wrote this or copied it from somewhere, but I think the conclusion of Title IX not applying is far from certain.  And the last part about competent lawyers is definitely not correct.

    As just one example, see https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2023/12/lawsuit-with-claim-of-unequal-access-to-nil-opportunities-raises.

    Quote

    NIL and Publicity Under Title IX

    NIL opportunities likely fall under Title IX's purview. The base of NIL is publicity rights. The equivalence for men and women of "access to publicity" is a factor relevant to determining whether an institution's athletics program complies with Title IX. (See 34 C.F.R. § 106.41(c)(10)). Thus, any NIL benefit generated by an institution would trigger Title IX compliance concerns via an extension of the equal opportunity for publicity requirements. An allegation of unequal access to NIL opportunities may, in turn, form the basis for a Title IX claim as seen in the University of Oregon lawsuit. The 1979 "Policy Interpretation: Title IX and Intercollegiate Athletics" published by the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights provides:

    [Title IX] [c]ompliance with regard to publicity will be assessed by examining, among other factors, the equivalence for men and women of:

    (1) Availability and quality of sports information personnel;

    (2) Access to other publicity resources for men's and women's programs; and

    (3) Quantity and quality of publications and other promotional devices featuring men's and women's programs[.]

    44 Fed. Reg. 71417 (emphasis added)

    An institution or an agent under its direction and control assisting its athletes with securing NIL deals may be considered a "publicity resource" or "promotional device." Therefore, an institution must have a careful evaluation of the legal structure supporting its NIL program or prepare for defending its program's compliance.  

    This was about the access to NIL opportunities when the schools were not even handling NIL.  It's much closer to an NIL issue now that schools will apparently be paying it out themselves.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  4. 37 minutes ago, NorthLoop said:

    So if we only play Q1 teams in the tourney, then we should be golden. 

    That's the genius of David Pierce.  Make sure we do not get a number 1 seed to avoid the possibility of playing a Q4 team in the tourney.

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Haha 2
  5. 1 hour ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:


    I’m sure after a month most will move on. I wonder what happens with Kevin Harlan? Inside the nba has sorta ran its course.


    I’m just happy ESPNs bullshit is done

    I just hope nba on nbc has the music, graphics and voice and all will be well.

    My understanding is that ESPN/ABC is maintaining the A rights package, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.  TNT's package appears to be going to NBC and Amazon.

  6. 3 hours ago, Js1 said:

    Yeah the SEC did some shit ass WBB scheduling. Hopefully there’s enough complaining by the coaches about it. Zero reason we shouldn’t be playing aggy and OU home and road. 

    It looks like Texas-USC, A&M-Arkansas, OU-Mizzou, Tenn-LSU, Auburn-Miss St, Ole Miss-Vandy, Bama-Florida, and UGA-Kentucky are the home-home "rivalries."  Not sure what the reasoning is other than vaguely matching up the better teams.

  7. 2 hours ago, SimonBolivar said:

    Is El Paso that bad? It's certainly an out there destination but they have a metro pop of 865k (Juarez is another 2.5 million people but they don't watch UTEP sports) and an easily accessible airport. That seems good enough for the SunBelt/MWC to me? I think it's more about the AD than El Paso itself.

    Obviously if they were winning championships it probably wouldn't matter, but El Paso is the 91st ranked media market (behind places like Champaign, Shreveport, Charleston, etc.) and not close to any others that El Paso would probably draw from.  No one in Houston/Dallas/San Antonio probably watch them, even when they are good.

    They would be outside of the conference maps for both the Sun Belt and the MWC, especially the Sun Belt:

    image.png.c3197c542cc0954fd7a173b7377d0daa.png

    They're not that far from UNM, but the MWC already left UTEP behind once (along with SMU, TCU, etc.), so I doubt they would want them back.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  8. 3 hours ago, ousux said:
    9 hours ago, texifornia said:
    ESPN wants big names at each time slot. It's smart for TV, and that's all that really matters.

    Bama gets the night game against their cupcake opener while the team that beat them last year (and higher ranked pre-season) gets to pan sear in the August afternoon sun? Help it make sense..

    They weren't going to put the Texas game on ESPN up against the A&M-Notre Dame game on ABC because they think those games will likely have a lot of overlap in viewership.  They gave Texas the "better" TV time slot for viewership, but it is obviously not better for people going to the game in person.

    • Hook 'Em 1
×
×
  • Create New...