Anyone notice 5 star Meleek Thomas got a crystal ball to Pitt on rivals

[Gunga_Galunga]

They said we can choose. I think that's a good selling point to put out there.

On the higher monthly membership you used to be able to designate where you wanted the funding to go. Maybe that's changed? Pretty sure you can still direct it with individual contributions.

Also, there was a BB Alliance 412 fund that was setup and posted on here a while back.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

If it's donated and allocated to football, then that's where it has to go.

I would suspect if we pickup Thomas that Bub and/or Ish are likely gone so there migh be more money that could go to Meleek. Just a guess.

Yeah, it can be earmarked for a sport (although I'm not sure if the everyday Joe donations can be, other than that basketball thing they just started doing not long ago), but I don't think many donors have enough pull to be able to tell a program exactly what players to spend it on.

 

[Atilla Cosby]

I absolutely acknowledge where it comes from, and I acknowledge that what I give is tiny speckle of pee in the ocean.

I also acknowledge that giving $300k to a 5th string QB with a hitch in his delivery is dumb. But... tough to know what the actual numbers are, so it all comes with a grain of salt.

They need to make Nil performance based. Jurkovec being the perfect example.

These apparent guaranteed monies make it too much like baseball.

 

[Fsgolfdr]

In todays world of college athletics Pitt Bb needs to find a wealthy individual who can fund a consortium specifically designated to acquiring and keeping talent if it wants to compete against the big boys . Bb is doable , while I believe that in Fb I can’t see a school like Pitt ever competing against the fan bases of schools likes of PSU , OSU , Alabama ,Texas and Georgia’s of the world .

 

[buckage]

They need to make Nil performance based. Jurkovec being the perfect example.

These apparent guaranteed monies make it too much like baseball.

I couldn't disagree more.

They're already one year contracts. Are you suggesting they change during the year?

 

[PittMed]

Let's imagine they all are here next year. what would be the staring lineup? Can Thomas play the 3?

1. Lowe
2. Bub
3. Thomas
4. Leggett
5. (Kante/Diaz Graham/etc.)

?

 

[PittMed]

Let's imagine they all are here next year. what would be the staring lineup? Can Thomas play the 3?

1. Lowe/Cummings
2. Bub/Thomas/
3. Thomas/Leggett/Barnes
4. Austin/JDG/Ndiaye
5. (Kante/GDG/etc.)

Maybe:

1. Lowe/Cummings
2. Bub/Thomas/
3. Thomas/Leggett/Barnes
4. Austin/JDG/Ndiaye
5. (Kante/GDG/etc.)

Leggett still comes off the bench?

 

[PittMed]

Maybe:

1. Lowe/Cummings
2. Bub/Thomas/
3. Thomas/Leggett/Barnes
4. Austin/JDG/Ndiaye
5. (Kante/GDG/etc.)

Leggett still comes off the bench?

That is an impressive roster. I'd roll with that.
Banking a lot on Kante though.

 

[Atilla Cosby]

I couldn't disagree more.

They're already one year contracts. Are you suggesting they change during the year?

Not change during the year, but with a min and max determined up front. Maybe Phil gets $x dollars to sign here, less than he got last year. Then $y and $z get tacked on for making plays, putting up stats and wins. Then they have motivation to perform.

 

[buckage]

Not change during the year, but with a min and max determined up front. Maybe Phil gets $x dollars to sign here, less than he got last year. Then $y and $z get tacked on for making plays, putting up stats and wins. Then they have motivation to perform.

What happens when the NIL collectives don't have the money to cover the bonuses?

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

What happens when the NIL collectives don't have the money to cover the bonuses?

And what happens when the NCAA finds out you put performance bonuses in your NIL deals, which is one of the very few things that is absolutely prohibited?

 

[TheSpecialSauce]

And what happens when the NCAA finds out you put performance bonuses in your NIL deals, which is one of the very few things that is absolutely prohibited?

It depends who the school is. If you are a powerful program, then you lawyer up and find a scapegoat if they want to punish you. The NCAA is a band of cowards when it comes to powerful programs.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

And what happens when the NCAA finds out you put performance bonuses in your NIL deals, which is one of the very few things that is absolutely prohibited?

Yea, uhhh, nothing. Cant tell if you were being serious or joking. What are they going to do?

 

[Atilla Cosby]

Yea, uhhh, nothing. Cant tell if you were being serious or joking. What are they going to do?

Very true.

But for Joe, I was saying how Nil SHOULD work, not how it does work.

 

[Atilla Cosby]

What happens when the NIL collectives don't have the money to cover the bonuses?

Wouldn't that already be an issue with the money they dole out? Do they have to prove they have the money before they promise it? If they do, that requirement wouldn't have to change.

Obviously you couldn't commit to paying more than you have. You lock in a max amount for each player, and you benefit if the player doesn't perform.

All I'm actually saying is take whatever a player is promised as the high end, max performance number, then line up the steps for them to earn that amount. Just like regular pro sports performance bonuses.

 

[rockypanther]

On the other board Vader’s info doesn’t seem accurate as far as Maleek being at Pitt next year.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Yea, uhhh, nothing. Cant tell if you were being serious or joking. What are they going to do?

I don't know exactly what they'd do, because so far no one has been dumb enough to make that a part of an NIL deal.

One might think that there is a reason for that, but I guess not.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

I don't know exactly what they'd do, because so far no one has been dumb enough to make that a part of an NIL deal.

One might think that there is a reason for that, but I guess not.

Because its against NCAA rules currently and you dont really have to put that in a contract. Just a wink and nod works. Get us to the Sweet 16 and you get an extra 100K. These are all shady AF pay for play deals anyway.

The NCAA has lost any power that it had. Lets say somone actually did put performance incentives in a pay for play NIL deal and the NCAA ruled that player ineligible. The state Attorney General would just need to sue and they'd win an injunction.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Because its against NCAA rules currently and you dont really have to put that in a contract. Just a wink and nod works. Get us to the Sweet 16 and you get an extra 100K. These are all shady AF pay for play deals anyway.

The NCAA has lost any power that it had. Lets say somone actually did put performance incentives in a pay for play NIL deal and the NCAA ruled that player ineligible. The state Attorney General would just need to sue and they'd win an injunction.

Here's the thing, and I get that you don't understand this. Pay for play is not just against the NCAA rule, it is against the NIL laws passed by many states, one of which is Pennsylvania.

If a Pitt player were to sign a pay for play deal, he wouldn't just be violating NCAA rules. He'd be violating Pennsylvania state law. So the State Attorney General is not going to sue anyone to allow that. If anything, he's going to charge the people violating the law.

I mean imagine stepping into a court room and telling a judge that you think that an institution should be sanctioned because that institution will not allow you to break the law. The only person who could think that something like that would be a winning argument is you.

 

[ChiefJusticeMarshall]

Here's the thing, and I get that you don't understand this. Pay for play is not just against the NCAA rule, it is against the NIL laws passed by many states, one of which is Pennsylvania.

If a Pitt player were to sign a pay for play deal, he wouldn't just be violating NCAA rules. He'd be violating Pennsylvania state law. So the State Attorney General is not going to sue anyone to allow that. If anything, he's going to charge the people violating the law.

I mean imagine stepping into a court room and telling a judge that you think that an institution should be sanctioned because that institution will not allow you to break the law. The only person who could think that something like that would be a winning argument is you.

But they are all being "paid for play". All.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

But they are all being "paid for play". All.

Well sure, at some level. But you can't write an NIL deal that says "I will pay Bub Carrington $10,000 for every game he plays at Pitt" or "I will pay Jaland Lowe $1,000 for every three pointer he makes for Pitt", or even "I will pay Ish Leggett $100,00 if he plays all year next year for Pitt".

Those would all be against the NCAA rules, and far more importantly, under PA law all of those would be illegal.

 

[MarshallGoldberg]

But they are all being "paid for play". All.

They're not, technically. Pitt isnt paying. They're being paid to sell their name to 412 Alliance or PG Trucking who just magicaly do a terrible job on using those rights to have them do ads. The NCAA isn't interested in making a rule stronger than state laws or the SCOTUS ruling, so it's just the biggest wink loophole ever.

Not saying it's all a wink, the players likeness and names will appear in the EA sports NCAA 25 football video game, which I can't wait for.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Here's the thing, and I get that you don't understand this. Pay for play is not just against the NCAA rule, it is against the NIL laws passed by many states, one of which is Pennsylvania.

If a Pitt player were to sign a pay for play deal, he wouldn't just be violating NCAA rules. He'd be violating Pennsylvania state law. So the State Attorney General is not going to sue anyone to allow that. If anything, he's going to charge the people violating the law.

I mean imagine stepping into a court room and telling a judge that you think that an institution should be sanctioned because that institution will not allow you to break the law. The only person who could think that something like that would be a winning argument is you.

All of the Pitt and PSU deals are pay for play. Do you think those collectives are making money by paying those players hundreds of thousands of dollars? They are all pay for play.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Pitt isnt paying. They're being paid to sell their name to 412 Alliance or PG Trucking who just magicaly do a terrible job on using those rights to have them do ads.

LOL. Yea, all these collectives must be terrible businesses because they sign players for like $1 million and then that player does very close to nothing from a marketing standpoint. Its actually shocking how little you see these players actually doing. I figured they'd at least make it look good by having them do ads and stuff but nope. Purely pay for play.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

All of the Pitt and PSU deals are pay for play. Do you think those collectives are making money by paying those players hundreds of thousands of dollars? They are all pay for play.

All you keep proving by saying this over and over and over again is that you don't understand what the phrase "pay for play" means.

Which probably doesn't surprise anyone.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

All you keep proving by saying this over and over and over again is that you don't understand what the phrase "pay for play" means.

Which probably doesn't surprise anyone.

I know what pay for play is and I know that these collectives arent technically paying these players to play by contract but they are. Here's an example.

Lets say I buy a lot and all the materials but I need someone to build me a house. I hire you to a marketing contract for $500K and you also just happen to build me the house for free. What do you do to "earn" that 500K in marketing/advertising dollars? Well, basically nothing of course. Maybe I have you give a free seminar that 4 people show up to watch. And maybe I have you do a commercial filmed with my cell phone camera for SMF Collective's Instagram page. So yea, you technically arent getting paid to build a house for me, I am paying you to give a seminar and film a commercial.....but make sure you build me that house 😉

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

I know what pay for play is

And yet you keep saying:

They are all pay for play.

Purely pay for play.

when they are clearly no such thing. It is literally illegal for these deals to be pay for play. If you want to call it something, call it "pay for hope you play". Because THAT is what they actually are.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

And yet you keep saying:





when they are clearly no such thing. It is literally illegal for these deals to be pay for play. If you want to call it something, call it "pay for hope you play". Because THAT is what they actually are.

Can I call it pay for play*

So let me you ask you this. Do you think these are real marketing deals where Collective X pays Player Y $1 million to generate $2 million or $3 million in revenue for that collective? Joe, you know these are pay for play even though they legally cannot say that.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Can I call it pay for play*

So let me you ask you this. Do you think these are real marketing deals where Collective X pays Player Y $1 million to generate $2 million or $3 million in revenue for that collective? Joe, you know these are pay for play even though they legally cannot say that.

They aren't pay for play because they can't be. Literally, they can't be.

Of course when the deals are made there is an expectation that the player plays, but there is absolutely no way to enforce that. Any way to enforce that is both against the rules and illegal (in many states).

You can call these deals whatever you want. But if you call them pay for play then you are simply wrong. You are using that term to mean something different than it actually means. Which, come to think of it, is not the first time you have tried to redefine terms that everyone knows the meaning of so that you can pretend you are right about something that you are not.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

They aren't pay for play because they can't be. Literally, they can't be.

Of course when the deals are made there is an expectation that the player plays, but there is absolutely no way to enforce that. Any way to enforce that is both against the rules and illegal (in many states).

You can call these deals whatever you want. But if you call them pay for play then you are simply wrong. You are using that term to mean something different than it actually means. Which, come to think of it, is not the first time you have tried to redefine terms that everyone knows the meaning of so that you can pretend you are right about something that you are not.

You still dont get it. I totally understand that they cant call them pay for play. But that doesnt mean that they AREN'T pay for play. These players are being paid to play and produce at the schools they attend. They are being disguised as marketing deals but we both know that in reality, they are player salaries which just have to be paid by a 3rd party.

I'm not even sure what you are arguing with me about. Nobody thinks these are marketing-only deals even though that's what the contract says. These players are worth like $10,000 to local businesses but yet are making $500K, $750K, $1 million. They are pay for play salaries.

 

[buckage]

They aren't pay for play because they can't be. Literally, they can't be.

Of course when the deals are made there is an expectation that the player plays, but there is absolutely no way to enforce that. Any way to enforce that is both against the rules and illegal (in many states).

You can call these deals whatever you want. But if you call them pay for play then you are simply wrong. You are using that term to mean something different than it actually means. Which, come to think of it, is not the first time you have tried to redefine terms that everyone knows the meaning of so that you can pretend you are right about something that you are not.

They may not call it that, but companies are grossly over paying kids for signatures so they play for their teams.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

You still dont get it. I totally understand that they cant call them pay for play. But that doesnt mean that they AREN'T pay for play. These players are being paid to play and produce at the schools they attend. They are being disguised as marketing deals but we both know that in reality, they are player salaries which just have to be paid by a 3rd party.

I'm not even sure what you are arguing with me about. Nobody thinks these are marketing-only deals even though that's what the contract says. These players are worth like $10,000 to local businesses but yet are making $500K, $750K, $1 million. They are pay for play salaries.

It's funny when someone who even admits that they don't know what they are talking about tells someone else that they don't get it.

These deals are NOT pay for play. They are not allowed to be. In PA, it would be illegal if they were. As I said, you can call them whatever you want, but if you call them pay for play then you are simply wrong.

Brian Reynold's deal with the Pirates is pay for play. Sidney Crosby's deal with the Penguins is pay for play. No one, literally no one, in college athletics has a deal like that. No one has a deal that says that they will play for a school for the next year, or two or three years, or anything like that.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

They may not call it that, but companies are grossly over paying kids for signatures so they play for their teams.

Of course people are grossly overpaying.

And of course that has nothing to do with whether or not a deal is pay for play. The deal isn't for play, it's pay for marketing rights or endorsements or providing a service or any other number of things, with the hope that the player will continue to play for the right school.

Pay for play means I will pay you $X and you will play for my team for Y period of time. These deals are not that. They can't be.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

They may not call it that, but companies are grossly over paying kids for signatures so they play for their teams.

Actually, they arent. Real companies want to make money. So there's almost none of what you described going on. Its these "fake companies" (ie collectives) who are paying these kids "to play," not for them to sign anything or do commercials.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

It's funny when someone who even admits that they don't know what they are talking about tells someone else that they don't get it.

These deals are NOT pay for play. They are not allowed to be. In PA, it would be illegal if they were. As I said, you can call them whatever you want, but if you call them pay for play then you are simply wrong.

Brian Reynold's deal with the Pirates is pay for play. Sidney Crosby's deal with the Penguins is pay for play. No one, literally no one, in college athletics has a deal like that. No one has a deal that says that they will play for a school for the next year, or two or three years, or anything like that.

I KNOW.

Its pay for play*******

Get it?

Actually, because these deals cannot legally mandate that they play for a team, they usually say they have to live in or near the campus. The thought being that it would be hard for the PSU QB to live in State College and collect on the Pedo NIL but play for Ohio State or Maryland. So its really a "pay to live in a town" deal. What I'd be interested to see is if lets say a kid has to live in West LA for the UCLA NIL but decides he wants to collect on that but "commute" to USC to play for them.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

What I'd be interested to see is if lets say a kid has to live in West LA for the UCLA NIL but decides he wants to collect on that but "commute" to USC to play for them.

If the kid fulfills the requirements of the contract then of course they would have to pay him. Because the deal is not pay for play. If it was, they wouldn't have to. If it was, it would be illegal, as California also appears to be one of the states that has an NIL law that make pay for play illegal.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

If the kid fulfills the requirements of the contract then of course they would have to pay him. Because the deal is not pay for play. If it was, they wouldn't have to. If it was, it would be illegal, as California also appears to be one of the states that has an NIL law that make pay for play illegal.

You do realize that they are trying their best to ensure its pay for play without it legally saying pay for play, right? Or maybe I should phrase it like the collectives' intention is that the player perform at a high level on the field for that team and that any money thing bring into the collective will be vastly less than the money they spend on the player.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

You do realize that they are trying their best to ensure its pay for play without it legally saying pay for play, right?

There is, literally, no way for them to do that.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

There is, literally, no way for them to do that.

Uhh, yes, there is. If you tell Jaland Lowe that you will pay him XXX to live in Pittsburgh next year, the expectation is that he's going to play for Pitt. I mean, sure, I guess he could take your money and go play for Duquesne or RMU or WVU or make a long commute to PSU but its extremely unlikely he'd take A412 money but play for those other schools. Right?

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Uhh, yes, there is. If you tell Jaland Lowe that you will pay him XXX to live in Pittsburgh next year, the expectation is that he's going to play for Pitt. I mean, sure, I guess he could take your money and go play for Duquesne or RMU or WVU or make a long commute to PSU but its extremely unlikely he'd take A412 money but play for those other schools. Right?

If you tell Jaland Lowe that you are going to pay him $X to sign some autographs and help coach at some basketball camps and do some social media posting about different company's products and you include a clause that he has to live in the greater Pittsburgh area, and you HOPE that that means that he will play basketball for Pitt next year, and then Jaland Lowe fulfills every requirement of the actual contract, he will get paid his money whether he plays for Pitt or not.

Because hope is not an enforceable part of a contract.

And requiring him to play for Pitt would be illegal.