yep, that's exactly where my head is. this offer is a step toward EMU being perceived as a "player" in the new NIL landscape.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
NIL act passed - NCAA allows athletes to monetise their name, image, likeness
- Thread starter Creebuzz
- Start date
This is just the beginning. Wait till the Nebraska people step up.
They're still paying off the $29.95 they spent on the Scott Frost: A Husker's Journey Home.
That's ok, it takes a long time read anything when you have to sound out each syllable.
Texas giving 50k (minimum) annually to every player via booster charities:
Can we get the Dark Horse to step up and pitch in a free burger
annually per player?
Can we get the Dark Horse to step up and pitch in a free burger
annually per player?
I expect a swift and fair response from the NCAA any minute now.
I don't fully appreciate the legal aspects, but I thought the NCAA was fairly hamstrung on this by the SCOTUS ruling.
Texas giving 50k (minimum) annually to every player via booster charities:
Can we get the Dark Horse to step up and pitch in a free burger
The end /CFB for me
Except I believe any generational QB is much better served NOT being the #1 pick if it isn't traded to a team that isn't the worst in the league.
Otherwise, they are smart to play the long game, and no $1M isn't going to land him at EMU.
No shyt. Just saying that the 2nd or 3rd best QB in the nation (and only free agent) isn’t going to transfer for a tiny $1 million NLI deal. That’s the starting offer.
Oh yeah. Rumor around Quinn Ewers transfer is that he got first round draft pick money to come to Texas. Not sure we will ever know but he hasn't even proven himself at the college level and Caleb Williams has.
Bliff Cranch
Well-Known Member
For me, this sums up perfectly CU’s blindspot as they flounder in the current collegiate athletics landscape. Slow to react. Fail to anticipate. Stubbornly cling to the past. Etc. Etc.
It's a pretty apt take.
One of CU's biggest problems is that CU is still adhering to the lessons they "learned" when the NCAA "charged" them with lack of institutional control under Neuheisel. The lesson they learned then was that the key was to "self police and self report" any and all violations of the NCAA's rules.
CU has yet to unlearn that, and relearn that the way to handle the NCAA rules is to treat them as sort of guidelines, and then stonewall and lawyer up if the NCAA starts an "investigation."
At some point, CU might learn that - of course, if they do, they'll learn it right around the time that everyone else figures out that you don't actually need to lawyer up - that you can just straight up tell the NCAA to **** off and leave you alone.
NIL instantly becoming an open-air Slush Fund? CFB becoming a semi-pro "player for hire" circus?
WHO COULD POSSIBLY HAVE SEEN THIS COMING ???
I'm shocked I tell ya, just shocked.
Didn't see this posted anywhere - Bilas on RG's comments regarding NIL
NIL has basically turned out to be legalization of paying players to come to your school. Except now it's even a tax write-off. Unintended consequences.
As Yak mentioned earlier in this thread (or somewhere on the board) the intent of NIL was great, which was to allow players to make money off autographs or selling memorabilia without getting suspended, like Todd Gurley was ridiculously suspended for 4 games back in 2014. That's what NIL was for but it got put into place without any restrictions or guidelines so here we are. It's almost like the the days of the SWC.
All this aside, college football is not going anywhere.
As Yak mentioned earlier in this thread (or somewhere on the board) the intent of NIL was great, which was to allow players to make money off autographs or selling memorabilia without getting suspended, like Todd Gurley was ridiculously suspended for 4 games back in 2014. That's what NIL was for but it got put into place without any restrictions or guidelines so here we are. It's almost like the the days of the SWC.
All this aside, college football is not going anywhere.
Damn. Why did we fire Coach Sled?!? He was awesome at unlearning!
And as I corrected him in that thread, I'll correct you:
NIL was not "intended" to do any of that little nonsense.
When the NCAA passed it, their only "intent" was to put out a policy that would comply with a Supreme Court ruling on a lawsuit that they had lost in epic fashion.
The NCAA wasn't trying to be good guys. They were complying with the court, because their previous policy was found to be flat out illegal.
I have said it before and I’ll say it again, anyone who didn’t see this coming is an idiot
Alternative theory that's probably correct:
They have the code cracked with the way things currently are, so change is a variable that only represents risk to their current status. With that, they know that the southeast economies can't match the money elsewhere. They don't have boosters and companies that can outbid Nike or Texas oil fortunes for top players.
They have the code cracked with the way things currently are, so change is a variable that only represents risk to their current status. With that, they know that the southeast economies can't match the money elsewhere. They don't have boosters and companies that can outbid Nike or Texas oil fortunes for top players.
Disagree. I have lived in every major market in the country. I highly doubt the silent money of the SEC cannot match anywhere else. This is all they have and there is a lot of it. Think about where the most money in the US resides and then consider how into college football those areas are (they are not).
That's the point. They have mastered using silent money through shadow boosters to buy talent while avoiding NCAA penalties. Now they're hoping the hillbilly mafia can match financial resources with Nike in a legit advertising battle.
I have been drinking and may be missing the point, but i dont think there is ever a doubt with the big boys of the sec that the money will always be as much as needed Regardless of who they are going against.