Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Lindsay Lohan Lol GIF by MOODMAN
 

He can’t do anything about it. This is a big nothingburger until and unless Congress gets off their fat lazy asses and does something 

  • Hook 'Em 9
Posted

Nobody will stop the bags.

They are happening.  It's fucking stupid that folks have the inclination to try and stop it.

They ain't, regardless of stripe.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Drool 1
Posted

I am tired of pandering to old men who yell at clouds. Free markets baby. Keep all the bag men out in the open and keep it all legal. 

All these idiots in the NCAA and elsewhere adding unnecessary rules to the new world are just going to create a new under the table system. And then they'll try to police the mess they made to justify their own existence. Get the fuck out of the way.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted

Bullshit payments need to stop, schools should pay, salary caps based on divisions, new super league needed, NIL is whatever the kid can make based on his or her image. Just like NFL. But fuck all that we are finally operating with the advantage so fuck it all wild Wild West no changes make it all legal no regulation. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

Just to review, the executive branch does not make law.  Most of the executive orders you hear about just set "policy", which can simply mean the executive order reads like an opinion piece and then vaguely instructs departments to work on memos, reports and such.  I'm sure some of it has an impact but a lot of it is bluster.  Here's the text of the executive order on college sports:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/07/saving-college-sports/

For example, here's section 5 of the order:

The Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy and the Director of the White House Office of Public Liaison shall consult the United States Olympic and Paralympic Committee and other appropriate organizations of American athletes about safeguarding the integral role and competitive advantage that American collegiate athletics provide in developing athletes to represent our Nation in international athletic competitions.

A bit of a word salad...

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)

This has as much force and effect as if I jotted it down and posted it on Facebook. It means literally nothing. The House Settlement also is going to try and essentially do what this order says with the NlL clearinghouse to determine that the payments are for legitimate value of NIL and I think everyone knows that’s a joke too and will be challenged if they ever try to cancel anyone’s bag. But I guess he tried lol.

 

 

image.jpeg

Edited by 'stache
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 4
  • blacklab changed the title to Big money ruining college sports has been solved; maybe
Posted
40 minutes ago, Texas Jeff said:

Just to review, the executive branch does not make law.  Most of the executive orders you hear about just set "policy", which can simply mean the executive order reads like an opinion piece and then vaguely instructs departments to work on memos, reports and such.  I'm sure some of it has an impact but a lot of it is bluster.  Here's the text of the executive order on college sports:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/07/saving-college-sports/

 

38 minutes ago, 'stache said:

This has as much force and effect as if I jotted it down and posted it on Facebook. It means literally nothing. The House Settlement also is going to try and essentially do what this order says with the NlL clearinghouse to determine that the payments are for legitimate value of NIL and I think everyone knows that’s a joke too and will be challenged if they ever try to cancel anyone’s bag. But I guess he tried lol.

I wouldn't write off its potential impact that quickly. For one thing, it already mirrors much of what the House seems to be trying to do with the SCORE Act, and I'm not sure that SCORE would generally be able to hold up well in court in different times. Now, with legislative and executive branches a little more aligned, it could have a lot more teeth.

This is close enough to CR as it is, and I'm trying to stick more to general facts and avoid value judgments. But I think folks can agree -- regardless of where anyone is on the political spectrum -- that we're not operating under the same political rules this year that we were last year.

We've already seen how this administration has reshaped, at least temporarily, the executive's ability to implement actual changes in things like the size of government departments, funding for science, and how DEI is implemented (in this case, no longer implemented) in educational settings. And universities, facing declining enrollments and unilateral cuts in scientific funding, consider themselves especially vulnerable to the will of the administration.

If anyone here has been paying attention to the way Columbia, for instance, has approached pressure from the administration, it's pretty obvious that universities are very attentive to what the administration wants. Only a very few universities -- such as Harvard -- have fought back. The real questions come from how this will all play out with regard to the interactions among the administration, Congress, the NCAA, the big schools, the small schools, and both courts and lawyers. 

My guess is that between this order and SCORE, there will be more immediate shakeups than we anticipated, and even if folks try to dial it back a little when we get further down the road, the explosions will have already occurred and there will be a lot to clean up.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

If there is anyone who has shown over the years that they have the skillet to run a sports league, it's definitely Donald J. Trump.

MAKE TRUMP PANCAKES! with MAGAPAN 10" Cast Iron Skillet

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 5
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Iceman said:

Nobody will stop the bags.

They are happening.  It's fucking stupid that folks have the inclination to try and stop it.

12 hours ago, TornACL said:

I am tired of pandering to old men who yell at clouds. Free markets baby. Keep all the bag men out in the open and keep it all legal. 

All these idiots in the NCAA and elsewhere adding unnecessary rules to the new world are just going to create a new under the table system. And then they'll try to police the mess they made to justify their own existence. Get the fuck out of the way.

So now I'll venture my best guess. Nothing these folks do will stop the flow of money upward to the bigs. In the near term, successful football and basketball schools will keep winning. Consolidation at the top will continue. So that's kinda "free market" and kinda not. If I'm interpreting correctly, it looks like @TornACL is saying that the executive order is a little anticompetitive, and I think there's a very strong argument to be made there. Some folks might even look at it and say that it's a little "socialistic" -- especially if you change the topic from college sports to something else, like professional sports or maybe electronics stores. It's pretty crazy stuff.

I think, ultimately, it's going to hasten the shuttering of lots of lesser football programs and smaller team sports. 

27 minutes ago, Js1 said:

You give him way too much credit for a symbolic nothingness. 

That's one way of looking at it, but what I'm trying to do is look at the bigger picture of how everyone ELSE is going to react to that symbolic nothingness. I have no idea what the hell is going on around college sports right now.

But I'm paying very close attention to it for several reasons. One is that I work for a university and am particularly close to the issue of how "policy," law and power work, both for internal and external issues.

Another is that I have a young adult-child who's off to college in a year and is on the cusp of minor D1 sports competition -- not scholarship level, in almost all certainty, but the combination of scholarly and athletic ability are going to be very attractive to colleges who are begging for students and, in particular, students who have what they are looking for beyond just tuition dollars. Next week, we'll probably hit one major D1 university and one excellent D3 school that really emphasizes sports. What I'm not sure of is how my offspring feels about sport in either or both of these places, and whether the team we'll look at will even exist at the D3 school four or five years from now.

Edited by Hayduke
Posted

Why? It is directly related to college football. The current admin is trying to meddle in the sport, wrongly and incompetently. Last I checked, this forum was called FOOTBALL.

  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted
4 minutes ago, Hagbard Celine said:

this thread should be moved to cr

This is one of those borderline topics that, sadly, will probably end up in CR because it will get CRed up. Once it's there, it's probably not going to be very good sports discussion, as most folks will probably avoid it.

I think folks always have the potential to talk about this stuff without the partisanship and name-calling. I'm sure that some will say I or others have already made it political, or that it's inherently too political.  But I'm trying pretty hard not to be political -- just pragmatic and sports-focused, with an emphasis on where things are going that will affect the field of competition.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Hayduke said:

This is one of those borderline topics that, sadly, will probably end up in CR because it will get CRed up. Once it's there, it's probably not going to be very good sports discussion, as most folks will probably avoid it.

I think folks always have the potential to talk about this stuff without the partisanship and name-calling. I'm sure that some will say I or others have already made it political, or that it's inherently too political.  But I'm trying pretty hard not to be political -- just pragmatic and sports-focused, with an emphasis on where things are going that will affect the field of competition.

The problem is one person cannot change or “fix” it by executive fiat. We are much better off discussing SCORE and whatever else Congress is working on, because the courts have basically said it’s for Congress to handle with a law. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
9 minutes ago, Js1 said:

The problem is one person cannot change or “fix” it by executive fiat. We are much better off discussing SCORE and whatever else Congress is working on, because the courts have basically said it’s for Congress to handle with a law. 

Agree in principle, but I'd say one person "should not" instead of "cannot." It's pretty clear that one person can have an outsized influence on an issue -- not just the president and not just this issue, but Trump does tend to have outsized influence.

My first thought in looking at the executive order was that it probably written with the help of AI. I wrote on another forum that the presence of the "reported" fact of one team paying $35-40 million for its football team this coming season seems to come directly from the internet rumor. The revenue cut-offs in the executive order seem arbitrary and potentially very problematic.  But now they're numbers that are out there, and we'd all be fooling ourselves if we didn't admit to the possibility that they could take on substantial weight before anybody knew exactly why or how.

Posted
1 minute ago, Hayduke said:

I wrote on another forum that the presence of the "reported" fact of one team paying $35-40 million for its football team this coming season seems to come directly from the internet rumor.

Or from Cody Campbell and Tommy Tuberville 

Posted
39 minutes ago, Hagbard Celine said:

this thread should be moved to cr

I view it as a football issue being given attention by the executive branch, regardless of who it is.  Legislative branches at different levels  has dabbled too. 
 

Maybe it is CR.  I think a lot of it is freaking football though

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
Spoiler

 

51 minutes ago, Hagbard Celine said:

this thread should be moved to cr

No, to ipihb so we can post titties.

 

Edited by Armybrat
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 3
  • Drool 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, TejasPedro said:

What ever happened to separation of church and State?

That's some first-class CR trolling there ... well done.

 

Posted

Every word the man says is cloak room. They set it up this way on purpose. It's one thing to ask the president about their opinions on topics of the day but to do this by executive order is part of this country's ongoing conversation about executive powers. The legislature might have a role in this, the president would have a say if it got to that, but again, the executive order and the president's ongoing actions in all aspects of society is what takes this to CR and beyond. Especially with how he's treating colleges in general these days on a variety of topics. LOL at anyone who thinks he can be taken seriously on anything other than in a purely cloak room context. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Drool 1
Posted

What's even the point of talking about any of this. Any time someone brings up a salient point it's "CR" and gets the whole thing moved and censored. I doubt Texas cares much as long as they can keep operating the way they are.

Posted
1 hour ago, Hayduke said:

I think, ultimately, it's going to hasten the shuttering of lots of lesser football programs and smaller team sports. 

I'm old enough to remember when the NCAA testified in court that many athletic programs would literally go bankrupt if forced to sponsor women's sports.

Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, TornACL said:

I am tired of pandering to old men who yell at clouds. Free markets baby. Keep all the bag men out in the open and keep it all legal. 

All these idiots in the NCAA and elsewhere adding unnecessary rules to the new world are just going to create a new under the table system. And then they'll try to police the mess they made to justify their own existence. Get the fuck out of the way.

This out in the open arrangement has been a game changer for schools like BYU, which has a lot of wealthy alumni and many are willing to spend for athletics.

Edited by Crockett
Posted
14 hours ago, Iceman said:

Nobody will stop the bags.

They are happening.  It's fucking stupid that folks have the inclination to try and stop it.

They ain't, regardless of stripe.

Walter Camp reportedly had a $100,000 slush fund in the late 1800s at Yale. The history of paying players in college football is about as old as college football. I dont see it ending anytime soon. 

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

I'm old enough to remember when the NCAA testified in court that many athletic programs would literally go bankrupt if forced to sponsor women's sports.

Yeah, me too ... I was covering a little bit of sports back when the AIAW was still the ruling body for women and it argued against being taken over by the NCAA and its corrupting influence (at the same time it was arguing that it needed more money and support). And now the AIAW is gone. I'm sure at least some of its members thought it would always be there. At least good ol' Wayland Baptist and Delta State have continued their dominance of intercollegiate women's basketball, though.

But those were pretty different times. Title IX had just come into effect and it forced the formation of large numbers of women's teams to try to demonstrate some kind of "equity" in men's and women's sports. Now Title IX is being taken apart before our very eyes and nobody's talking about it -- NIL and SCORE are a big part of that, especially the latter if it passes in anything close to its current form. Revenue is the biggest factor in this equation, and now that people are finally talking about that, they're rethinking non-revenue sports.

Part of SCORE could remove student fees from the equation. If that happens, a ton of smaller sports are going to be toast. I don't see any way that won't happen.

Don't know if you saw what I posted in the recruiting forum about that, but most smaller schools and even a decent number of the bigger ones rely to a very substantial extent on student fees to fund intercollegiate sports. And believe me, both students and families are increasingly questioning both the value of college degrees and where their money is going within those colleges. 

 

Edited by Hayduke
Posted
2 hours ago, Hayduke said:

 

I wouldn't write off its potential impact that quickly. For one thing, it already mirrors much of what the House seems to be trying to do with the SCORE Act, and I'm not sure that SCORE would generally be able to hold up well in court in different times. Now, with legislative and executive branches a little more aligned, it could have a lot more teeth.

This is close enough to CR as it is, and I'm trying to stick more to general facts and avoid value judgments. But I think folks can agree -- regardless of where anyone is on the political spectrum -- that we're not operating under the same political rules this year that we were last year.

We've already seen how this administration has reshaped, at least temporarily, the executive's ability to implement actual changes in things like the size of government departments, funding for science, and how DEI is implemented (in this case, no longer implemented) in educational settings. And universities, facing declining enrollments and unilateral cuts in scientific funding, consider themselves especially vulnerable to the will of the administration.

If anyone here has been paying attention to the way Columbia, for instance, has approached pressure from the administration, it's pretty obvious that universities are very attentive to what the administration wants. Only a very few universities -- such as Harvard -- have fought back. The real questions come from how this will all play out with regard to the interactions among the administration, Congress, the NCAA, the big schools, the small schools, and both courts and lawyers. 

My guess is that between this order and SCORE, there will be more immediate shakeups than we anticipated, and even if folks try to dial it back a little when we get further down the road, the explosions will have already occurred and there will be a lot to clean up.

Well one of the main ways this administration has of coercing compliance with unenforceable and unlawful EOs is to withhold funding to those who do not comply, which itself is a dubious exercise of executive power.

As far as I know, the federal government provides no funding to college athletics.  I suppose it could attempt to withhold other funding from the university generally if it doesn't like their revenue-sharing or NIL practices, much as it does with DEI.

That's gonna severely annoy some supporters of the administration in the SEC and elsewhere.  So it probably won't happen.

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 hour ago, TejasPedro said:

What ever happened to separation of church and State?

 

Wait .... Y'all need to understand that this ⬆️, is how you CR a thread. 

Pedro, what does your statement have to do with athletics, oh I get it the church of DRK, services are on Saturdays in the fall

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well one of the main ways this administration has of coercing compliance with unenforceable and unlawful EOs is to withhold funding to those who do not comply, which itself is a dubious exercise of executive power.

As far as I know, the federal government provides no funding to college athletics.  I suppose it could attempt to withhold other funding from the university generally if it doesn't like their revenue-sharing or NIL practices, much as it does with DEI.

That's gonna severely annoy some supporters of the administration in the SEC and elsewhere.  So it probably won't happen.

 

In addition to federal contracts and grants, which are a significant part (probably 10-20%) of most large schools' budgets, federal student loans are a major factor that the government can use as a wedge. Those loans put butts in seats, helping with the tuition that's another substantial chunk of funding (often the biggest). Every school is different, but direct state support for schools has been shrinking for a long time, making tuition more important (and generally higher) with each year. Many state schools get less than 10 percent of their budget from annual state appropriations.

Compliance with federal laws (privacy, student safety, occupational safety, Title IX, sexual harassment, all sorts of stuff) comes into play in lesser but important ways, as it does for private business. So, yeah, stuff like DEI, student protests, the number of international students -- all have played large roles in federal pressure on schools. 

Regardless, if anything can annoy or motivate enough of a politician's power base to help "work on" an issue, it's probably college football and bikini-clad women. Everything else is just small stuff (OK ... that was CR).

Posted
6 minutes ago, Wally Fairway said:

oh I get it the church of DRK, services are on Saturdays in the fall

Why you wanna bring North Korea into this?

Interview (The interview) : Movies & TV - Amazon.com

Oh, never mind. I see them now.

Posted

In my middle school we had football, basketball, and track. That was it. There were unofficial golf and tennis club teams that met after school but those 3 were the only school sponsored sports. College needs to adopt the  same model, maybe add in volleyball and baseball. There’s zero reason to have a college golf team, gymnastics team, rowing team, swimming team, etc. Nobody watches or cares about those sports, at all. People  care about golf and tennis at the pro level, where everyone good is. It should not be a college sport, they do nothing but drain funds.

Posted

Go start a fucking thread in board discussion to discuss whether or not this is thread directly related to football is in the right place. 

Shut the fuck up and stop fucking up threads because you don't have the maturity to say nothing or contribute to the topic. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

How could any Texas fan possibly want regulation? We saw for 50+ years that the NCAA can't police itself effectively. 

Swing open the doors, and let the teams with the most money do what they can do. Hint: We're the ones with the most money. You fucking idiots.

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.



×
×
  • Create New...