UT under potential NCAA investigation for NIL

Yeah, but that's the end of college sports. It's not actually in UT's interest to have the NCAA lose the Antitrust Law issue, so they don't want to go that far.

The replacement for the NCAA is most likely some kind of pro league because any attempt at saying players won't be compensated is, again, in violation of Antitrust Laws.

So, hoping for the NCAA to get crushed by the courts on Antitrust Laws probably isn't what you want to see either.
No, it isn't. It will change the business model, that's all.
 
The NCAA knew it would be litigated before they made the allegations yet they decided to pursue it anyway. Maybe it’s a desperate attempt or maybe they believe they can win the argument in court.

I actually believe it is a solid argument. Booster Collectives like The Volunteer Club fund raising millions and then paying recruits guaranteed money under the guise of NIL isn’t at all what was proported when the courts ruled in favor of NIL.
What was purported doesn't matter.
The Sherman Act protects NIL, period.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolDave53
The NCAA knew it would be litigated before they made the allegations yet they decided to pursue it anyway. Maybe it’s a desperate attempt or maybe they believe they can win the argument in court.

I actually believe it is a solid argument. Booster Collectives like The Volunteer Club fund raising millions and then paying recruits guaranteed money under the guise of NIL isn’t at all what was proported when the courts ruled in favor of NIL.
You are not wrong. Its more about the NCAA charging everyone with the same crime. If Tenn AG loses and NCAA charges UT, then UT should sue NCAA for unfair practices.
 
  • Like
Reactions: onevol74
Any news on the lawsuit?
Soon.

Couldn't resist. Could get ruling any time. Personally, I don't see the states winning this round either. Doesn't really matter until the NCAA decides to drop a notice of allegations. Once that happens, the bullets will really fly. The NCAA likely will lose in the end, but hey, it's all about putting as much stench on UT's program as possible and pushing Nico somewhere else to play. Might as well just relax and let it all play out. Heck, my money says Nico will be in the NFL by the time this one ends.
 
Soon.

Couldn't resist. Could get ruling any time. Personally, I don't see the states winning this round either. Doesn't really matter until the NCAA decides to drop a notice of allegations. Once that happens, the bullets will really fly. The NCAA likely will lose in the end, but hey, it's all about putting as much stench on UT's program as possible and pushing Nico somewhere else to play. Might as well just relax and let it all play out. Heck, my money says Nico will be in the NFL by the time this one ends.

Also the B1G and SEC are likely going to form a league of their own before this ends.
 
Here's my end of the deal. I'll wait for yours.

The problem with your take on this is that Spyre signed Nico to go to ANY university of his choosing. The state of Tennessee states that is in the contract. You appear to want to limit his choices which is in violation of the law. Georgia PAID Beck to stay at Georgia.
 
The problem with your take on this is that Spyre signed Nico to go to ANY university of his choosing. The state of Tennessee states that is in the contract. You appear to want to limit his choices which is in violation of the law. Georgia PAID Beck to stay at Georgia.
Prove it. Beck got paid by a NIL collective.
Georgia didn't do it.
 
The problem with your take on this is that Spyre signed Nico to go to ANY university of his choosing. The state of Tennessee states that is in the contract. You appear to want to limit his choices which is in violation of the law. Georgia PAID Beck to stay at Georgia.
Legally, paid Beck. Welcome to college football.

I'm hoping there was no quid pro quo from Spyre for Nico to sign, but giving someone a couple of million dollars that others and I donated to pay UT players and NOT having a quid pro quo in Nico's situation is very, very risky business if that's what Spyre did.

It's trouble with the NCAA if there was a quid pro quo.

It makes me question Spyre's business savvy if there wasn't.

With Beck a solid, legal business decision in college football was made.The GA collective responded to Beck wanting to leave with a bigger NIL offer. It's nothing like the Nico situation.
 
Legally, paid Beck. Welcome to college football.

I'm hoping there was no quid pro quo from Spyre for Nico to sign, but giving someone a couple of million dollars that others and I donated to pay UT players and NOT having a quid pro quo in Nico's situation is very, very risky business if that's what Spyre did.

It's trouble with the NCAA if there was a quid pro quo.

It makes me question Spyre's business savvy if there wasn't.

With Beck a solid, legal business decision in college football was made.The GA collective responded to Beck wanting to leave with a bigger NIL offer. It's nothing like the Nico situation.
I hadn't heard about Spyre until after they went and got Nico. I'd be curious to see Spyre's accounting books and find out when the 25 dollar donations from fans started rolling in. Certainly a calculated gamble, but maybe not too far fetched. I'm glad the NCAA can't subpoena the books though.
 
I hadn't heard about Spyre until after they went and got Nico. I'd be curious to see Spyre's accounting books and find out when the 25 dollar donations from fans started rolling in. Certainly a calculated gamble, but maybe not too far fetched. I'm glad the NCAA can't subpoena the books though.
The NCAA's beef with UT and Spyre seems to center around the fact that Nico signed with Spyre, then UT.

It's obvious Spyre is designed to fund NIL for UT, signing almost all athletes ALREADY COMMITTED to UT.

The NCAA thinks that with Nico UT had Spyre make the offer and that there was SOME kind of assurance Nico would sign at UT.

The NCAA, foolishly in this Wild West era, wants to "maintain that it doesn't allow pay-for-play" deals to go: schools pay first, then you sign. The NCAA prefers: you sign, then schools pay.

I get the NCAA's position. Legally, what good are they if schools can go out, have their collective offer money to a player and have some kind of agreement the player will then sign with their school? The NCAA is dead after the UT and VA lawsuit, IMO.

Unlike others, I don't want the NCAA to completely die. I can't imagine another organization being allowed to form which maintains any semblance of the "college football" game.

It's going to be EXTREMELY hard legally to keep players from being seen legally as employees and even harder without the NCAA taking all the lawsuits for the schools. It's going to be EXTREMELY hard legally to make an employee tasked with playing football take courses like Geology "for their own good."

The NCAA sucks. They screwed thousands of athletes by not planning ahead for this BUT they keep the ruse of college football as "student athletes." Without the NCAA, I don't think a new organization can legally form using that model. The Courts seem to consistently find it illegal.
 
Does anybody have a idea when a ruling on the injunction is going to be released? I would think sometime in the next few days for sure. GBO
 
Does anybody have a idea when a ruling on the injunction is going to be released? I would think sometime in the next few days for sure. GBO
I don't think the judge has a deadline to rule and it will be a big decision, no doubt on ESPN, etc.

The NCAA having to suspend NIL rules is much bigger than just UT and VA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Woodlawn VOL


Sounds like to me that they got a chuckle out of Carson Beck’s new car, and the NCAS attorney said what investigation is aimed at Tennessee? 😂😂😂

Never heard of "Sports Talk J", but it's a bit difficult to take them seriously if they don't know the difference between "cite" and "site".
 
The NCAA's beef with UT and Spyre seems to center around the fact that Nico signed with Spyre, then UT.

It's obvious Spyre is designed to fund NIL for UT, signing almost all athletes ALREADY COMMITTED to UT.

The NCAA thinks that with Nico UT had Spyre make the offer and that there was SOME kind of assurance Nico would sign at UT.

The NCAA, foolishly in this Wild West era, wants to "maintain that it doesn't allow pay-for-play" deals to go: schools pay first, then you sign. The NCAA prefers: you sign, then schools pay.

I get the NCAA's position. Legally, what good are they if schools can go out, have their collective offer money to a player and have some kind of agreement the player will then sign with their school? The NCAA is dead after the UT and VA lawsuit, IMO.

Unlike others, I don't want the NCAA to completely die. I can't imagine another organization being allowed to form which maintains any semblance of the "college football" game.

It's going to be EXTREMELY hard legally to keep players from being seen legally as employees and even harder without the NCAA taking all the lawsuits for the schools. It's going to be EXTREMELY hard legally to make an employee tasked with playing football take courses like Geology "for their own good."

The NCAA sucks. They screwed thousands of athletes by not planning ahead for this BUT they keep the ruse of college football as "student athletes." Without the NCAA, I don't think a new organization can legally form using that model. The Courts seem to consistently find it illegal.
I didn't explain my position clearly. I feel kind of bad now. I know you've got to be sick of explaining the difference between NIL/Payed Employee/ Antitrust/Collective Bargaining Agrreements, etc....

My supposition was that maybe Spyre can scoff and dismiss any notion of any quid-quo-pro insinuations and simply state signing Nico vastly boosted Spyre's profile early on.

Spyre could claim signing Nico early helped garner interest and donations to the NIL-Collective from the fan base. That even had Nico gone on to sign with another school, the revenue and attention he brought in during the interim was a net positive for Spyre.

Again, might be kind of far fetched, but it's not like the NCAA has any authority to audit Spyre's books.
 
Never heard of "Sports Talk J", but it's a bit difficult to take them seriously if they don't know the difference between "cite" and "site".
Sports talk j is unique he adds in movie interludes during reaction times, he's on with boogie sometimes
 
I didn't explain my position clearly. I feel kind of bad now. I know you've got to be sick of explaining the difference between NIL/Payed Employee/ Antitrust/Collective Bargaining Agrreements, etc....

My supposition was that maybe Spyre can scoff and dismiss any notion of any quid-quo-pro insinuations and simply state signing Nico vastly boosted Spyre's profile early on.

Spyre could claim signing Nico early helped garner interest and donations to the NIL-Collective from the fan base. That even had Nico gone on to sign with another school, the revenue and attention he brought in during the interim was a net positive for Spyre.

Again, might be kind of far fetched, but it's not like the NCAA has any authority to audit Spyre's books.
Completely agree. As a small time donor to Spyre, I depend on the big time donors to have access and keep Spyre reasonably well run. After all, they have big bucks in the game.

If Spyre can argue Nico's signing was a "one off" risk they took to showcase how serious they were about their business or as a business promotion risk, I'm fine with that if it has a chance to win.

Frankly, I'm not convinced but I'm not going to side with the NCAA vs UT/Spyre. Having spoken with an attorney (it's a court holiday but he's a friend) a few minutes ago about a situation I'm tangentially involved in, he reminded me that in legal matters it's not necessarily what happened but how you spin what happened that matters.
 

VN Store



Back
Top