forums

Wisconsin accuses Miami of tampering

Advertisement
Anyone know if UM has a seriously beefed up compliance dept with serious people? If we are going to brawl with the Big 10, I hope we are ready to knock them the **** out.
 
Squid Bumciorek said:
Big12 has no such concerns

Think About It GIF by Identity
Click to expand...
Yeah, because they make $60 million less a year
 
DMoney said:
I think the Big 10 is mad because Miami violated a gentleman’s agreement on the rev-share deals. The truth is it’s more evidence of NCAA collusion.

This episode will likely hurt our reputation in the Big 10. That’s the only real practical concern I have.
Click to expand...
I think so as well. It’s bigger than one player if we are “perceived” as habitual line crossers.

Playing the game to get where you need/want to go is totally different than kissing a**.

Remember this summer it was a bunch of people saying “we’re playing the long game and not ruffling feathers by filing lawsuits”.

Now it’s Fck the B1G. 🤣
 
BTW, I have all the confidence in Joe E. and zero in Dan R. on this. My worry is Joe is busy and Dan is napping in South Carolina.
 
Advertisement
Noliaboi said:
Idk. From reading through the Mega Conference thread, I thought the sentiment was no one (ACC schools) were getting invites right now because we are all stuck in a contract with the ACC and once the contract was up that’s when interest would pick up.
Click to expand...
Really? From reading through the Mega Confeewnce thread, I thought the sentiment is that we're all a bunch of nutjobs that don't know our elbows from our ******** when it comes to conference realignment. But that's just my interpretation of that particular thread lol.
 
RVACane said:
The BiG is mad at the ACC for not playing the game.

Do you mean they expected the ACC to scold miami and make them drop the transfer of Lucas???

I’d like to see the ACC and miami state that Wisconsin tampered with Dyoni Hill, not that we care v
Click to expand...
I would go with X since TVD went there.
 
Advertisement
For the "you don't want to cut off your nose to spite your face" people who think we should bend the knee to the B1G, exactly how long should we do this? There is no offer out there to join the B1G (at least that we know of). Most are speculating it would be 2030 at the earliest. So, at least 5 years of allowing the talent who would be actually willing to not play in the P2 to stay in the B1G instead of coming here?

The truth is, the B1G is going to invite whatever schools they believe will bring them more money. Miami will not command that level of eyeballs on the screen by playing .500 or less for the next 5 years. They need to be as competitive as possible to get an invite (and that might not even be enough).
 
flips said:
Wisky/Big10 fighting to kill player free agency and bind players to schools for multiple years without treating them as employees and without having to collectively bargain with players
Click to expand...


Just published:

www.sportico.com

Inside a Big Ten Athlete Revenue Sharing Agreement

In revenue-share MOUs, schools are asking athletes to sign away NIL rights, waive employee status, and accept performance-based terms.
www.sportico.com www.sportico.com
 
Advertisement
miami_yak said:
SIAP.

Here’s a Sportico article about a similar MOU from another B1G university.

t.co

Inside a Big Ten Athlete Revenue Sharing Agreement

In revenue-share MOUs, schools are asking athletes to sign away NIL rights, waive employee status, and accept performance-based terms.
t.co t.co
Click to expand...
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.”
 
786Cane said:
I would go with X since TVD went there.
Click to expand...
I don’t see what Restrepo has to do with this beyond that they may have tried to get him. @DMoney said there’s a gentleman’s agreement. What gentleman’s agreement allows dyoni hill to transfer from Miami to Wisconsin while precluding Xavier Lucas from transferring from Wisconsin to Miami???
 
flips said:
www.sportico.com

Inside a Big Ten Athlete Revenue Sharing Agreement

In revenue-share MOUs, schools are asking athletes to sign away NIL rights, waive employee status, and accept performance-based terms.
www.sportico.com www.sportico.com

Click to expand...


Hoyacane1620 said:
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.”
Click to expand...
I’m glad their scheme is finally getting exposed. Greedy *** B1G not satisfied enough with what they’re getting so they have to dip into the players pockets. **** will never change…
 
Advertisement
I know it's just an MOU and many were already doing pay for play in some form - but wow, hope denying lucas entry to the portal due to a minimal tampering violation was worth this



wonder if the B1G instructed them to do this to see if it would be enforceable - still have to imagine they didn't want this language out for players and families to see before the spring portal window
 
Ispyin said:
Yeah, because they make $60 million less a year
Click to expand...

That’s because they don’t have a marquee program like Miami. UM sells out stadiums everywhere (except in Miami, ironically).

UM wouldn’t burn that bridge unless it had something else up its sleeve.

Coincidence that Bezos looking to buy a team and now lives in Miami? Miss Cleo sees all
 
Last edited:
mcnaire2004 said:
I mean, what are they going to do about it?
Click to expand...
Nothing. Any serious lawyer close to NIL has made it perfectly clear that UW is in the wrong for making players sign a document that has no legal binding behind it.

And then, they tried to enforce that non-binding legal stature by violating actual bylaws only for a lawyer to come up and free the player legally.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top