Wisconsin Badgers are idiots

Donate To GopherHole

I don't truly understand much of this and I'm sure a lot of other posters are in the same boat. I'm not a litigation expert nor do I operate a small business, let alone a major institution. I'm just sitting here waiting for the part where Wisconsin burns down. Not literally, of course.
 



TheBarry built a cloistered environment at UW. It’ll be interesting to see if the center holds.
 


Dave H said:
Problem with this is that revenue sharing isn't allowed yet if I read right.

This is a lot of fun to watch from afar!
Click to expand...

Listened to Stew and Bruce today. They are of the opinion Wisconsin doesn’t have a leg to stand on; the Big Ten is afraid the Lucas precedent will render useless their carefully designed BIG TEN rev-share contract that apparently hundreds have already signed.

They also said the justice department sent Judge Wilken a letter a few days or weeks ago asking her not to give final approval to the House settlement because, as we’ve said here for months…it’s replacing one salary cap with another.

So, anyway. Does anyone know what they’re doing.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Listened to Stew and Bruce today. They are of the opinion Wisconsin doesn’t have a leg to stand on; the Big Ten is afraid the Lucas precedent will render useless their carefully designed BIG TEN rev-share contract that apparently hundreds have already signed.

They also said the justice department sent Judge Wilken a letter a few days or weeks ago asking her not to give final approval to the House settlement because, as we’ve said here for months…it’s replacing one salary cap with another.

So, anyway. Does anyone know what they’re doing.
Click to expand...
SNAFU
 

College football is getting close now to the old philosophical argument whether anarchy is unchecked chaos or simply a different form of order.
 

what does Wisconsin possibly have to gain from all of this? Money? The return of a disgruntled player? Just seems that regardless of the outcome, they come out looking bad, which is fine by me.
 



cheeseheadgophfan said:
what does Wisconsin possibly have to gain from all of this? Money? The return of a disgruntled player? Just seems that regardless of the outcome, they come out looking bad, which is fine by me.
Click to expand...
if Wisconsin gave him a bunch of money from his new contract, then I’m with them on this. If they had yet to give that money, then let the kid go.
 

WAGopher said:
if Wisconsin gave him a bunch of money from his new contract, then I’m with them on this. If they had yet to give that money, then let the kid go.
Click to expand...
If they gave him money, then sue him and get it back. The (toothless) restricting of his transfer was and is foolish. The NCAA was never going to allow it. (nor should they)

Get your money back, hell get him penalized for more money.

Jesus are we going to start seeing buyout clauses in NIL deals?
 

Sportico acquired the MOU template the B1G is encouraging member schools to use: https://www.sportico.com/leagues/co...athlete-revenue-sharing-agreement-1234824623/

Do we have any confirmation whether or not Minnesota is using this MOU template?

In reading the article, it seems there is protection for the school(s) to claw back any payments made in the instance of a transfer. So the question of why Wisconsin refused to enter Lucas into the portal still remains.
 




thor said:
I just want to say one thing. Wisconsin Badgers are idiots. Thanks for starting this thread.
Click to expand...
Thor Tolo?! Welcome back! I was a at the MOA when you hosted the David Palmer draft!
 

Scottsdale Gopher said:
Sportico acquired the MOU template the B1G is encouraging member schools to use: https://www.sportico.com/leagues/co...athlete-revenue-sharing-agreement-1234824623/

Do we have any confirmation whether or not Minnesota is using this MOU template?

In reading the article, it seems there is protection for the school(s) to claw back any payments made in the instance of a transfer. So the question of why Wisconsin refused to enter Lucas into the portal still remains.
Click to expand...
The agreement also restricts student athletes ability to enroll at another school.

If that article is accurate, the agreement requires the student athlete to give the university control over their NIL commitments, manipulate NIL payments as they see fit based upon performance, the ability to withhold payment if they fall out of good standing academically, waive the ability to become an employee, pay back money if they transfer or enter the transfer portal and restrict their ability to enroll at another school.

I’m sure there’s some sort of human sacrifice involved as well.
 

Scottsdale Gopher said:
Sportico acquired the MOU template the B1G is encouraging member schools to use: https://www.sportico.com/leagues/co...athlete-revenue-sharing-agreement-1234824623/

Do we have any confirmation whether or not Minnesota is using this MOU template?

In reading the article, it seems there is protection for the school(s) to claw back any payments made in the instance of a transfer. So the question of why Wisconsin refused to enter Lucas into the portal still remains.
Click to expand...

Shady AF. Typical one-sided corporate attorney BS. Embarrassing. Contracts must have legal tenets to be enforceable, right? Explicit pay for play. Yet…not. Because we said so. Ok.

Do not sign, or cross out the ridiculous parts with notations. Return to sender. Maybe Judge Wilken blows this up before the schit gets any deeper.



Big Ten schools are asking athletes to sign over their NIL rights, permit universities to sublicense the rights to “any and all third parties,” and surrender any legal claim to employee status as part of the planned revenue-sharing structure, according to a copy of an agreement that was viewed by Sportico.

The seven-page memorandum of understanding includes language that says schools will be reimbursed for some revenue already paid should an athlete transfer to a different school–or even enter the transfer portal–and allows the school to adjust the payment up or down as a reflection of the athlete’s performance. The MOU contains a morals clause; requires the athlete to be in good academic standing to be eligible to receive payments; and explicitly asserts the agreement is not “pay-for-play,” leaving the door open for the deal to be terminated without further payment should the laws change.

Separately, it establishes a set of “representations, warranties and covenants” that includes the seemingly contradictory promise the athlete “will not make … any similar commitment to enroll at and/or compete in athletics for another college or university.”
 

contractual issues aside......

the other aspect of this case is the tampering allegations.

I keep seeing people connected to college sports claiming that tampering is getting more blatant. but until or unless schools and/or coaches start calling out other schools and/or coaches, nothing is going to change.

If Wisconsin has proof of tampering by Miami, put it out there. file a formal complaint with the NCAA.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
contractual issues aside......

the other aspect of this case is the tampering allegations.

I keep seeing people connected to college sports claiming that tampering is getting more blatant. but until or unless schools and/or coaches start calling out other schools and/or coaches, nothing is going to change.

If Wisconsin has proof of tampering by Miami, put it out there. file a formal complaint with the NCAA.
Click to expand...
Isn’t the tampering implied in this case since the kid was never in the portal?
 

GreasyGopher said:
Isn’t the tampering implied in this case since the kid was never in the portal?
Click to expand...

I think that's the point. any direct contact with a player who is not in the portal is supposed to be "impermissable" under NCAA rules. so school A cannot contact a player at School B and tell him "if you transfer to School A, we'll give you this much NIL....."

as I read the story, that seems to be what Wisconsin is accusing Miami of doing. the question is whether they have any real evidence to back up the allegations.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
I think that's the point. any direct contact with a player who is not in the portal is supposed to be "impermissable" under NCAA rules. so school A cannot contact a player at School B and tell him "if you transfer to School A, we'll give you this much NIL....."

as I read the story, that seems to be what Wisconsin is accusing Miami of doing. the question is whether they have any real evidence to back up the allegations.
Click to expand...
Sounds like Wisconsin may have figured something was going on and did what it did to potentially force the issue...
 

short ornery norwegian said:
I think that's the point. any direct contact with a player who is not in the portal is supposed to be "impermissable" under NCAA rules. so school A cannot contact a player at School B and tell him "if you transfer to School A, we'll give you this much NIL....."

as I read the story, that seems to be what Wisconsin is accusing Miami of doing. the question is whether they have any real evidence to back up the allegations.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I’m saying his commit to Miami given he was never in the portal is the evidence of tampering. There had to be discussions between the two parties for him to commit and he was never able to have those discussions.
 

Dave H said:
If they gave him money, then sue him and get it back. The (toothless) restricting of his transfer was and is foolish. The NCAA was never going to allow it. (nor should they)

Get your money back, hell get him penalized for more money.

Jesus are we going to start seeing buyout clauses in NIL deals?
Click to expand...
Why would Wisconsin give up their leverage if a contract specified it? We don’t yet know the exact agreement, but the B1G’s template may be close to what it was.
 


GreasyGopher said:
Yeah, I’m saying his commit to Miami given he was never in the portal is the evidence of tampering. There had to be discussions between the two parties for him to commit and he was never able to have those discussions.
Click to expand...
My guess is legally if the player asked to be put in the portal at that point they are in the transfer portal regardless of what the school does. Based on everything I have seen it is more procedural than anything. Player notifies the school that they want to transfer, school has 2 business days to enter their name in the portal....but they can't block the transfer request.

So as long as Miami waited until after the player made the request to transfer I don't think there would be tampering....of course chances are they made contact before the request as we all know that is going on all over the place.

I can totally understand Wisconsin going after whatever money they can but as far as I know they can't block the transfer and not putting his name in the portal is them being petty because not putting his name in the portal doesn't stop him from transferring.

Obvious caveat in all this is that I am just basing this off of some internet searches and what I understand of how the transfer process works. I 100% could be completely wrong. :)
 

WAGopher said:
Why would Wisconsin give up their leverage if a contract specified it? We don’t yet know the exact agreement, but the B1G’s template may be close to what it was.
Click to expand...
But the Big Ten template is not enforceable yet. Hell in reading a synopsis of it I doubt it even stands up in court. (the soaps at the Holiday Inn Express are subpar ;) ) Their leverage is suspect at best.

As for the tampering...its going to be funny when someone proves Wisconsin tampered as well.
 

GreasyGopher said:
Yeah, I’m saying his commit to Miami given he was never in the portal is the evidence of tampering. There had to be discussions between the two parties for him to commit and he was never able to have those discussions.
Click to expand...
Problem is we know those discussions happen every day...which is why no one is really that upset and kind of wonders why Wisconsin is doing this. Sooner or later someone will spill the tea on them as well...

And hey, I am all for the domino effect on this one!
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom