ADVERTISEMENT

NEW NIL GUIDELINES PROPOSED FOR BOOSTER TAMPERING

P

PatMineo22

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2019
129
561
1


“The new guidelines would say boosters “cannot communicate with a student-athlete OR OTHERS AFFILIATED with a student-athlete to encourage them to remain enrolled or attend an institution,” according to Dellenger. In addition, George said the NCAA should “100%” look into potential violations from this year.”

*OR OTHERS AFFILIATED* means fathers too…

:: paging Larry ::

Someone is shaking in their boots! 👀
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: diggerpup, nitlion6, kevin310 and 4 others
If it was already against the rules, and it sounds like it was, then this is only further clarification guidance on the matter and they can go after what happened before it’s release.

But if it’s not a clarification of existing rules, then I don’t see any way it holds up, when challenged, if applied retroactively.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PatMineo22
Im proud of the board for not running to tHR and pulling this pin. Very proud.

Im also wondering who from the lurking tHR faction is reading this thread and thinking no way am I taking this "news" over there. Guesses?

Maybe that mizzou guy will drop it.....hes a good time. That northwestren guy that got nuked would definitely had done it.
 
McScoreley said:
This is unenforceable ... how can you punish a school for boosters?
Click to expand...
NCAA banned 9 boosters involved in the SMU scandal. Im sure others over time have been banned too.

edit:
I think the NCAA would have to show that university/programmed stepped into police their own. If it was rampant and or found to be known on the fringes and nothing was done to stop it, the NCAA would have grounds. people want things to be black and white but thanks to human nature and lawyers nothing is.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ski, diggerpup, PatMineo22 and 1 other person
McScoreley said:
This is unenforceable ... how can you punish a school for boosters?
Click to expand...
It's always been part of the rules that university representatives, like boosters, cannot make inappropriate contact with recruits.

The NCAA will need to decide on the sanctions, and some parameters for determining when inappropriate contact does or does not rise to the level of tampering.

I don't see the NCAAs first step getting into whether the compensation for a rendered service was appropriate. However, my experience is that data is collected and analyzed on costs for any goods or service (part of a market survey). I used to be employed where the company paid into such a service and had a policy of paying salaries at the market established 50 percentile.

The NCAA could similarly use available data to gauge whether a NIL's compensation appeared consistent with quid pro quo or pay-for-play. Then sanctions of the university might depend on a comparison against baseline market value. Since membership is voluntary in the NCAA, universities will either pay the fine or cease to be members.

What seems somewhat obvious is the loss of a scholarship or two might not be an effective sanction when it comes to a large $ purported NIL proffered by wealthy fanatic boosters. I suspect substantial fines of the university or coach suspensions under the heading of "lack of institutional control" as the likely sanctions. Perhaps the fines will be a some factor of a NIL deal's excess value.

Remember, ultimately the head coach decides what student will become a student athlete on their team.
 
This whole thing was formed because of the Jordan Addison incident. Doubt it will remotely be enforced in wrestling and probably won't be in football at all.

But keep fighting the good fight @PatMineo22 :cool:
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcpat and PatMineo22
dunkej01 said:
Im proud of the board for not running to tHR and pulling this pin. Very proud.

Im also wondering who from the lurking tHR faction is reading this thread and thinking no way am I taking this "news" over there. Guesses?

Maybe that mizzou guy will drop it.....hes a good time. That northwestren guy that got nuked would definitely had done it.
Click to expand...
Taking my time to digest this post....
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: NittanyLion84, PSU Fan in TN, diggerpup and 3 others
mcpat said:
If it was already against the rules, and it sounds like it was, then this is only further clarification guidance on the matter and they can go after what happened before it’s release.

But if it’s not a clarification of existing rules, then I don’t see any way it holds up, when challenged, if applied retroactively.
Click to expand...
The NCAA has for decades defined who is allowed to recruit. That's not in question. People who flouted that ... pigs get fed, hogs get slaughtered.

IMO the question will be what deals an athlete would've gotten anyway vs. unique to the new school.

Example: if Arizona State's QB, who's from Los Angeles, gets a deal with a Baton Rouge car dealership -- that might be fishy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: diggerpup
McScoreley said:
This whole thing was formed because of the Jordan Addison incident. Doubt it will remotely be enforced in wrestling and probably won't be in football at all.

But keep fighting the good fight @PatMineo22 :cool:
Click to expand...
No, this has been an issue from before Addison was rumoured to be entering the portal. Saban has been talking about it for a few months and the NCAA is nowhere near that fast.
 
  • Like
Reactions: El-Jefe
El-Jefe said:
Boosters are proxies for the athletics dept.

Doesn't have to be 100% enforceable, rather just enforceable enough to be a deterrent.
Click to expand...
Forgive the ignorance, but what makes someone a booster - simply donating money to the program at any time?
 
rmg78 said:
No, this has been an issue from before Addison was rumoured to be entering the portal. Saban has been talking about it for a few months and the NCAA is nowhere near that fast.
Click to expand...

NCAA rapid reaction team:

no-reaction.gif
 
  • Haha
Reactions: diggerpup
GantryZ said:
Forgive the ignorance, but what makes someone a booster - simply donating money to the program at any time?
Click to expand...
Much broader than that -- basically anybody who has ever had a relationship with the school. Alumni, parents, volunteers, ticket purchasers ...

In the NCAA's opinion, everyone posting on an athletics board is a booster. Though they'd probably make an exception for Jammen.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: LHavenlion, diggerpup, johnstownsteel and 1 other person
The headline in this thread is a bit misleading. There aren't yet "new guidelines," at least not any that have been published. The on3 article links to a more informative Sports Illustrated article that suggests that new guidelines are being drafted. It doesn't get into retroactivity, but I'm not sure how much that matters because there are egregious enough examples out there that wouldn't require figuring out what the rules were on x and y dates b/c they'd be violations on either date. And it sounds more like the guidelines are going to be detailed clarifications more so than new rules.

But the bigger takeaway from the SI article is that there's a deep skepticism that the NCAA will (or even can) do anything at all because of the fear of antitrust lawsuits. I get why they'd fear antitrust lawsuits after the SCOTUS decision that got us to this place, but to me this just sounds like either laziness or spite ("Oh, you don't want us doing our jobs? Fine, we won't, enjoy the ensuing s***show."). The idea that they can't do anything about it is nonsense, the courts aren't going to say that they have no enforcement role to play whatsoever. So that's a choice. But they're also understaffed, making enforcement difficult. 10-15 people seems like not a lot of people for a $1.15b/yr industry, but staffing is also a choice.

Also, some of the football examples are just crazy, leading me to think that if they're going to enforce anything, everything that isn't football or basketball isn't going to be high on the NCAA's to-do list, unless they decide to arbitrarily pick an easier target to make an example of. But the football violations are spectacularly blatant and open so I'd imagine they'd prefer to make an example of something that'll get more headlines. Of course, those examples are also going to more likely turn into lawsuits because those higher-end sponsors will be able to foot those bills.
 
  • Like
Reactions: diggerpup, 98lberEating2Lunches and dunkej01
Chickenman Testa said:
Retroactivity is generally an unfair approach - covers the NCAA for their lazy approach to this thing in the first place
Click to expand...
Let me clarify that- the booster tampering rules were already in place. However when NIL hit several assumed they could operate as Wild West and that it didn’t apply in the sense of offering deals, talking portal, etc… it does and this is doubling down on that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcpat, El-Jefe and 98lberEating2Lunches
rmg78 said:
This off topic but Mineo, I saw your tweet on putting and gotta say you need to invest in a quality putter. Would have replied on Twitter but you blocked me.
Click to expand...
I have a Scottsdale Ping.. You mean the putter used in that backyard game? Yeah… That’s not the bag putter chief. Lol how did you see my tweet then! 🧐
 
El-Jefe said:
Much broader than that -- basically anybody who has ever had a relationship with the school. Alumni, parents, volunteers, ticket purchasers ...

In the NCAA's opinion, everyone posting on an athletics board is a booster. Though they'd probably make an exception for Jammen.
Click to expand...
Even the Gopher T-Shirt wearing fans in Eastern Africa?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82bordeaux, El-Jefe and dunkej01
mjmirv said:
From page 1 of the Larry Lee 3 inch binder…

Section 1, Make sure all illegal communication is done via text on your personal cell phone to make record keeping more efficient.
Click to expand...
Cenzo says to get your own jokes.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: diggerpup
McScoreley said:
This is unenforceable ... how can you punish a school for boosters?
Click to expand...
Dude.

SMU.
The "U"
The old SWC
USC + Reggie Bush
tOSU & Maurice Clarrett
"Free Shoes University"
Auburn, Bama, LSU, Old Miss, shit, the entire SEC football galaxy at one time or another.

etc, etc, et al.... Dust off your Google machine.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: NittanyLion84 and Ski
PatMineo22 said:
I have a Scottsdale Ping.. You mean the putter used in that backyard game? Yeah… That’s not the bag putter chief. Lol how did you see my tweet then! 🧐
Click to expand...
Can just sign out of Twitter and look that way. Just cannot reply. I know you post course pics occasionally, wht is your favorite course down that way?
 
  • Like
Reactions: PatMineo22
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P

NCAA D1 BOARD OF DIRECTORS NEW NIL GUIDELINES

Replies
10
Views
2K
The Wrestling Room
tikk10
tikk10
tikk10

NIL thread

Replies
13
Views
3K
The Wrestling Room
El-Jefe
El-Jefe
RyanSnyder

Penn State: Classes to begin remotely, no fans at sporting events until April 3

Replies
30
Views
1K
The Lions Den
WTNuke
WTNuke
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back