Will transfer rules be affected, or will players be sgined to multi-year deals at schools to prevent all this transferring?

if not, then nothing has been solved.
the transferring is the real problem.

there has always been pay for play in some form or another.

with this settlement, nothing on transfer. there is no way a court would approve that.

but when congress gets involved, the new entity in charge will put in new transfer rules.

DonHenley said:

---

There are salary caps in all the major sports leagues, save for the MLB. Makes sense there is a cap. And its not like all of A&M's spending has won us anything in the revenue generating sports....

---

The difference is there are built in behind the scenes payments that have been in place for decades. That is not going to simply just go away. This sport has been dirty for 100 years, that aint changing.

BMX Bandit said:

---

with this settlement, nothing on transfer. there is no way a court would approve that.

but when congress gets involved, the new entity in charge will put in new transfer rules.

---

Congress won't get involved.

W said:

---

and of course...

does Title IX apply to this $20 MM ?

---

Title IX shouldn't apply to any sports funding. So of course it does?!?

Other questions:

*Why limit players to 4 or 5 years to play?

*Why make these paid athletes pass classes to play or even be admitted as a student?

*Can this court restrict how athletes get paid or not in other jurisdictions (even if you assume the NIL restrictions implemented now are real)?

Why stop at just a 10 year back pay?

VP at Pierce and Pierce said:

---

NewEra2023 said:

---

I dont like that there's a cap limit.

Money is one advantage A&M has always and will always have on most schools and now that's capped…

---

I hear what you are saying but there will be work arounds and other "solutions." Programs such as ours, and tu and Ohio State to name a few aren't going to let the rules hamper their decades long advantages.

---

Don't get it twisted, we were never allowed to spend with the blue bloods in the past, anytime we started winning they came after us. I would expect the similar treatment going forward. This may only benefit those in the club.

I hope we bend the rules with the best of them though.

To me, the cap only makes sense if it's only what the university can / needs to pay. It's a CYA for schools to say this isn't an unfair labor practice. From there, what a guy can get from 3rd parties seems out of their control. If a guy is making a million a year off YouTube pointing videos I see no reason that should be part of the "cap" that then limits what everybody else makes.

DonHenley said:

---

There are salary caps in all the major sports leagues, save for the MLB. Makes sense there is a cap. And its not like all of A&M's spending has won us anything in the revenue generating sports....

---

That's because we havent had a clue who or how to hire... Until MAYBE recently. And only recently ('12/'13) have we committed financially at the level we have.

It takes time. You have to be aligned administratively with the same goal. Perhaps we are closer to that. I have no clue.

Bill Superman said:

---

VP at Pierce and Pierce said:

---

NewEra2023 said:

---

I dont like that there's a cap limit.

Money is one advantage A&M has always and will always have on most schools and now that's capped…

---

I hear what you are saying but there will be work arounds and other "solutions." Programs such as ours, and tu and Ohio State to name a few aren't going to let the rules hamper their decades long advantages.

---

Don't get it twisted, we were never allowed to spend with the blue bloods in the past, anytime we started winning they came after us. I would expect the similar treatment going forward. This may only benefit those in the club.

I hope we bend the rules with the best of them though.

---

Bill, I hear what you are saying. I think the difference now is we have more resources and we are far more organized and intentional with our resources. The framework is already laid, for once we arent playing catchup. If they want to try to stop us, good luck, it aint happening.

Bill Superman said:

---

Don't get it twisted, we were never allowed to spend with the blue bloods in the past, anytime we started winning they came after us. I would expect the similar treatment going forward. This may only benefit those in the club.

I hope we bend the rules with the best of them though.

---

Frustratingly true and I hope we do too. Welsh and Trev may be on the ball. I like them both.

I hope a positive rebranding of Texas Aggie Athletics is in order. We have the money. Always have. But if you wanna be in the club without a winning history you MUST have a generally positive perception nation-wide.
I've always said poor marketing has been this program's biggest detriment. Keep our unique tradition. Add/modernize some things.

Haven't won big ever. Long enough. Time to not look ugly while doing it.

NewEra2023 said:

---

DonHenley said:

---

There are salary caps in all the major sports leagues, save for the MLB. Makes sense there is a cap. And its not like all of A&M's spending has won us anything in the revenue generating sports....

---

That's because we havent had a clue who or how to hire... Until MAYBE recently. And only recently ('12/'13) have we committed financially at the level we have.

It takes time. You have to be aligned administratively with the same goal. Perhaps we are closer to that. I have no clue.

---

I love this post, and I believe your point is one of the most overlooked points about aggie football in general. We have been unorganized, amatuerish, and without a real vision and without real leadership until about 8 to 20 years in to this century. Prior to that is cronyism, throwing money at everything, and only worried about one game. We are making huge strides in becoming organized, having a unified vision, an action plan to get there, and putting the right people in place to make it happen. We are in a position to find big success now, regardless of what the ncaa or whomever says.

NewEra2023 said:

---

Bill Superman said:

---

Don't get it twisted, we were never allowed to spend with the blue bloods in the past, anytime we started winning they came after us. I would expect the similar treatment going forward. This may only benefit those in the club.

I hope we bend the rules with the best of them though.

---

Frustratingly true and I hope we do too. Welsh and Trev may be on the ball. I like them both.

I hope a positive rebranding of Texas Aggie Athletics is in order. We have the money. Always have. But if you wanna be in the club without a winning history you MUST have a generally positive perception nation-wide.
I've always said poor marketing has been this program's biggest detriment. Keep our unique tradition. Add/modernize some things.

Haven't won big ever. Long enough. Time to not look ugly while doing it.

---

Are you me? Am I you? Amen, brother!!

Anyone thinking Congress is not going to get involved in this is completely oblivious to how much DC loves to meddle in things.

The NCAA and conferences all want Congress involved, now you have these student athletes that will join in the lobbying. I'd be very surprised if a bill is not passed by the end of 2025. Ted Cruz is at the forefront:

A reaction to the NCAA settlement from Sen. Ted Cruz, who is heavily involved in the association's effort for Congressional legislation.

Cruz believes there is an "urgent need" for lawmakers to take action. pic.twitter.com/GuJ5hCnQYf

— Ross Dellenger (@RossDellenger) May 24, 2024

This settlement is a huge push to the new level of college football so many have discussed on this board and elsewhere. Its gong to be Big 10 and SEC (neither will look the same as they do now) and then everyone else.

Cen-Tex said:

---

Why stop at just a 10 year back pay?

---

Its not 10 years back pay, its 2016-2021 in backpay.

Suit was filed in 2020, 4 year statute of limitations on antitrust case.

VP at Pierce and Pierce said:

---

DonHenley said:

---

There are salary caps in all the major sports leagues, save for the MLB. Makes sense there is a cap. And its not like all of A&M's spending has won us anything in the revenue generating sports....

---

The difference is there are built in behind the scenes payments that have been in place for decades. That is not going to simply just go away. This sport has been dirty for 100 years, that aint changing.

---

Not just that but other leagues don't try to limit what money players can make outside their pay for play. If a guy does tv commercials, trains other athletes for cash, etc it's not their business as long as it doesn't interfere with their contractual obligations to the team.

Go back to Orangeturds!

NewEra2023 said:

---

DonHenley said:

---

There are salary caps in all the major sports leagues, save for the MLB. Makes sense there is a cap. And its not like all of A&M's spending has won us anything in the revenue generating sports....

---

That's because we havent had a clue who or how to hire... Until MAYBE recently. And only recently ('12/'13) have we committed financially at the level we have.

It takes time. You have to be aligned administratively with the same goal. Perhaps we are closer to that. I have no clue.

---

and NIL has been in place for only a few years... A&M has a huge advantage under NIL. Brand (which honestly ours isn't as good as Bama and some other blue bloods) doesn't matter near as much. Money talks and we have it.

Aston04 said:

---

NewEra2023 said:

---

DonHenley said:

---

There are salary caps in all the major sports leagues, save for the MLB. Makes sense there is a cap. And its not like all of A&M's spending has won us anything in the revenue generating sports....

---

That's because we havent had a clue who or how to hire... Until MAYBE recently. And only recently ('12/'13) have we committed financially at the level we have.

It takes time. You have to be aligned administratively with the same goal. Perhaps we are closer to that. I have no clue.

---

and NIL has been in place for only a few years... A&M has a huge advantage under NIL. Brand (which honestly ours isn't as good as Bama and some other blue bloods) doesn't matter near as much. Money talks and we have it.

---

Branding will matter more as we and others will have to be unique and attractive in how we present ourselves to the market. The marketing of Texas A&M will be critical to continue to get blue chips on campus, then it is up to the coaches and staff to make their pitch then the booster must be organized for their end of the pitch as well.

NewEra2023 said:

---

I dont like that there's a cap limit.

Money is one advantage A&M has always and will always have on most schools and now that's capped…

---

The way I see it is that you have $20M of legal money directly from universities then on top of that players can earn NIL so really it's not that much of a difference. We can still offer huge NIL partnerships via companies and other sources than that university.

Glenn Frey just called. He wants his soul back. We are right where we should be in SEC. And we were way early and forward thinking. We will never consistently win big in this monster of a conference but we get……Mo Money,Mo Money,Mo Money! The whole university is better off. Those that love the Aggies always will and those that don't, don't matter.

20 million?!



This number will conveniently increase over the next few years.

Private equity will be getting involved any day now

So we basically eliminated the "student" in "student athlete"

rsf0626 said:

---

So we basically eliminated the "student" in "student athlete"

---

Not really. As long as they are required to have meaningful academic progress then they are both, still. Paying them occurs in work study programs and teaching and research assistantships. I'm guess those aren't students either???

No, just removed the amateur from amateur student athlete

Aston04 said:

---

Other questions:

*Why limit players to 4 or 5 years to play?

*Why make these paid athletes pass classes to play or even be admitted as a student?

*Can this court restrict how athletes get paid or not in other jurisdictions (even if you assume the NIL restrictions implemented now are real)?

---

The requirement for the plaintiffs to support seeking federal statutory changes was part of the settlement language. The judiciary's interest in incentivizing settlements over court sessions is even more important in civil court…

They just need to remove any requirement that the players pass an entrance exam or have to be enrolled in classes.

Anyone want to get together with other universities and start a student athletic league?

We could make teams from current students in all the big sports/games…

Baseball
Football
Golf
Hockey
Softball

so, now the question becomes, why have eligibility at all?

Next to go is this concept of Freshman, Soph, Jr. Sr.

If a kid just wants to play SEC play forever, then let him. Imagine how many years Johnny could have played for TAMU? 8-9 years?

The power 5 should go toe to toe with the NFL.

The list of great SEC players that never made it in the NFL is long and distinguished, they could have just stayed in college forever and raked in great money

BMX Bandit said:

---

highlights from Ross Dellinger twitter:


Revenue Share
- How much: ~$20-22M annually (fluid; will escalate based on school rev figures)
- From: Schools
- To: Athletes
- Distribution: School discretion (Title IX applies)
- Implementation: Summer/Fall 2025
- Exceptions: $5M of Alston/new scholarships can count toward cap


Cap Enforcement
- Court oversight/audits
- Athlete reporting mechanism of 3rd party NIL
- Must be "true NIL" based on developed "fair market value" data
- Enforced thru NCAA/outside entity w/Court backing
- Burden on school/athlete to prove "true NIL"
- No pay-4-play/booster pay


Roster Change
- Eliminates scholarship caps
- Implements new roster limits (not finalized)
- Ability to provide scholarships to entire roster
- Potential football roster reduction to as few as 85 roster spots (on-going discussions)
- Title IX applies

Governance/other
- Potential new DI subdivision for increased power conference rule-making
- Flexibility for leagues to set some own rules
- Rev-share model could be extended beyond 10 yrs
- Plaintiffs agreed to lobby on behalf of NCAA's effort seeking Congressional protections


story here:

https://sports.yahoo.com/ncaa-power-five-conferences-vote-to-approve-28b-settlement-in-house-hubbard-and-carter-cases-001736810.html

---

Good summary, but per your link, the applicability of Title IX is far from settled.

In that article, Kessler (plaintiff attorney) stated, "The courts will decide... It doesn't impact us. If we have a settlement, we'll negotiate a system in which athletes will be compensated. The degree in which Title IX applies will be determined [by the courts]."

ETA: The non-power conferences - particularly those without football - are the ones getting the short end of the stick to the tune of $990M, or about 60% of the schools' end of the deal (per your link).

Bag said:

---

so, now the question becomes, why have eligibility at all?

Next to go is this concept of Freshman, Soph, Jr. Sr.

If a kid just wants to play SEC play forever, then let him. Imagine how many years Johnny could have played for TAMU? 8-9 years?

The power 5 should go toe to toe with the NFL.

The list of great SEC players that never made it in the NFL is long and distinguished, they could have just stayed in college forever and raked in great money

---

I have heard this talking point for a few months, is there any legs to this or is this fear mongering? I simply do not see the value for the schools to keep paying some 26 year old.

its fear mongering

I don't think there is really any argument that title IX is not still applicable.

kessler knows this. probably has another class action ready to go the minute these payments start being made