It's not about UT. The issue is whether all universities wish to have a governing body that establishes rules, and then
enforces its rules, or whether it wants no rules and anything goes.
The law's firm's presumption of guilt line, which it goes on and on about, is nonsense. The NCAA investigates if it has information suggesting that
rules have been, or are, being violated.
The NCAA decided at the beginning of last year that it wanted to tighten NIL rules and get NIL out of recruiting, since that was not the original purpose of NIL. It wants NIL deals to be arranged only after a prospect has signed with a school. I think this is a notably sensible idea and move--and anybody who doesn't agree is crazy, in my opinion.
Why would UT--or any major program--want a recruiting environment that features bidding wars for top prospects? Is there an advantage for UT--or any other of the 50 major programs in America--in such a system? Do fans really think UT is going to outbid Alabama, Texas, A&M, OSU, Michigan or any combination of 5/10/20 major programs who might all be interested in any or all, say, top 100 recruits? Is the UT collective going to raise more money than the other 50 schools? No, it is not--Texas A&M is crazy and rich enough to give $76 million to a fired coach. And they, in theory, will not out-raise us. Some programs will certainly raise more money than others; because some will have more crazy, well-heeled fans. What exactly would be the point of such a system: Our rich old boosters can outbid your rich old boosters? Yea, we can throw $2 million at some 18-year-old top prospect and outbid others for one guy---and we in turn will get outbid by many other schools for many other players. So again, what is the point? This is what the schools and the fans want recruiting and college football to become? It's stupid--it's seedy.
Forget the supposed investigation of UT. The NCAA changed its NIL rules at the start of 2023; some collectives/schools did not adjust to the new rules outlawing contact/deal offers with prospects, and the NCAA is attempting to enforce the new rules. It's investigating FSU, us and others. The investigation is not the point--that will be resolved, probably will little or no damage to UT given that there is apparently so much confusion and chaos in college football these days. The big issue is what do ALL the major schools and the NCAA want to do moving forward. What do they want college football to be about.
The coaches don't like this NIL system--and why should they? It's lunacy. And why would fans want to donate their hard-earned money to their favorite collective so that it can attempt to bribe high-school prospects when 1) the prospect might not even pan out; and 2, if he does pan out, he might very well transfer in a year or two. Anybody who thinks that turning high-schoolers into money-grubbing mercenaries is what college, and college football, should be about is daft and does not know anything about the idea of college in the first place.
UT is not gaining any advantages from the current system of bidding for prospects. Nor is anybody else. It's just devolved into 40/50 collectives running around desperately throwing money at the same top prospects like horny patrons at a strip club. It's unseemly. Everybody will win a scattered few--as we landed Nico by showering him with money-- and lose a helluva lot. And meantime, a lot of money will be wasted corrupting kids. High-school prospects only have value now because NIL came along--as a benefit for CURRENT college players--and then the crazy boosters/collectives jumped in and dragged it down to high school.
Recruiting should be about selling your tradition, your coaches, your facilities, your academics and fans--in the same way that Peyton Manning once chose to sign with the Vols--not who's get the most crazy rich boosters willing to try and outbid 30 rivals. It's stupid.
I'm sure that the new SEC/Big10 advisory group will give this a lot of thought--and they and others can think about what kind of sport, with what level of integrity, they want.
www.jdsupra.com
) and how their relationship to college sports is bias against certain teams but the legal haggling we’ve seen and about to see involving our Vols is a different bowl of fruit. Not a legal scholar here and certainly not a constitutional scholar but I think these trade winds of discontent and waves of “fed upness” will drive change and redirection going forward and the courts will rule in our favor. 
