Mark Bowman update

[Glass Joe]

22 minutes ago, Forrest J. said:

It’s worked so far, but one year the slow play, late flip philosophy will not work. 

If the SEC (or NCAA) implements a legit enforcement process - such as the proposed NIL deal valuation validation by PWC - than Texas will be just fine in the post-House settlement world.  And bogus NIL deals like the garbage we’re seeing now by USC, Miami, and Aggy won’t be allowed in the future.

Let’s see how the House settlement is implemented.

[Hashtag]

2 hours ago, Burnt Orange Horn said:

USC has some deep Alum pockets if Riley can get into them.

That’s the problem

[Hashtag]

49 minutes ago, Glass Joe said:

If the SEC (or NCAA) implements a legit enforcement process - such as the proposed NIL deal valuation validation by PWC - than Texas will be just fine in the post-House settlement world.  And bogus NIL deals like the garbage we’re seeing now by USC, Miami, and Aggy won’t be allowed in the future.

Let’s see how the House settlement is implemented.

And bag game comes way back into the picture to bypass those rules and such. You also can’t tell an athlete what they’re worth SCOTUS has made that clear and any intention to limit will be met. 
 

I’ll believe there is an enforcement process and legit penalties when I see them because they haven’t existed except for one time with SMU. 

[Jack Lala]

It won't last.

[Thanos72]

14 hours ago, TexasLonghorns said:

Don’t disagree but who says that when a player commits and celebration ensues on the board? It’s never mentioned when we get someone. 

Maybe sit recruiting out. It’s just a game. We’re going to “lose” others we think are Texas and gain some we didn’t. 

We should always celebrate a commitment while crossing our fingers. 80+% stay with Texas after committing. If it’s a true blue chip, folks give themselves a little hope with December dreams. Ain’t rocket science.

This dude is gone I think as even ga fans are befuddled. Money is money to a lot of people. Though it’s not my primary motive, I don’t begrudge it even when I don’t understand it. He would have made top money at ga or Texas so that check must have been heavy. Good for Texas having limits. Money is finite regardless of what fans think. 

[AusMOJO]

Recruiting is even more volatile now, especially with NIL deals factoring in. Though I do hope the young man realizes that taxes are quite high in Cali, so if they are throwing that kind of serious money around, you need to factor in your taxes. 

Now, as for him going to USC, well I don't get it outside of the money angle. If that's all it is, I don't think the commit will stick. I'd say with 90% certainty that this staff sticks on him to get him to flip. 

[Ace Recruiter]

It sucks, but it is early, things can change. I think Kirby saw this one coming and called out usc and their NIL pay structure at the sec meetings. Can't blame a local kid from wanting to stay home. Congrats.

Sark and staff will stay on him and if the door cracks open,  we'll have as good a chance as any for the flip.

[Ace Recruiter]

17 hours ago, TexasLonghorns said:

Had he committed to Texas you’d be telling the celebration to simmer down because it’s not December? This argument is tiring. Celebrate and dance in the streets when a kid commits, but when they go elsewhere it’s always “it’s not December” “wasn’t a take”.  

No one said he wasn't a take. Thats ridiculous. If he commits to us, we should celebrate, but if he doesn't then what do you want us to do? Sark sucks, fire Sark? Lol

Sark stays on his guys and has a good history if lare flips. Usc also has a recent history of getting early commits that don't stick. Justus Terry says Hi. 

The class will be fine with or without Bowman, but this recruitment is not over.

 

[Ace Recruiter]

16 hours ago, TexasLonghorns said:

Don’t disagree but who says that when a player commits and celebration ensues on the board? It’s never mentioned when we get someone. 

Consider the school. If he commited to osu, the likelihood of a decomit is way lower and wait until December not as much of an argument. 

[Born Burnt Orange]

18 hours ago, TexasLonghorns said:

Gerry literally just said it was Georgia and Texas out front and the others weren’t serious contenders. Big whiff 

Gerry definitely has some explaining to do.  😂 

[Glass Joe]

11 hours ago, Hashtag said:

And bag game comes way back into the picture to bypass those rules and such. You also can’t tell an athlete what they’re worth SCOTUS has made that clear and any intention to limit will be met. 
 

I’ll believe there is an enforcement process and legit penalties when I see them because they haven’t existed except for one time with SMU. 

NIL isn’t about telling a kid what they’re worth to play football.  NIL is a marketing deal whereby Company X pays a kid to represent or sponsor their product for money.  Company X records a marketing expenditure on their books and taxes.  There’s also the silly collective charitable functions to funnel money to players, but all now agree that’ll be going away.

NIL is not the school paying a fee to play football.  

As with many commercial marketing agreement, a fair value criteria must be maintained - whether NIL to an athlete or paying an actor to do a commercial or pitch a product.  If FMV is violated, the agreement is not valid.  And, most importantly, Company X loses the tax deductibility of the marketing expense paid to the player or actor.

PWC is being hired to validate the FMV of player NIL deals going forward.  Just as PWC values other commercial marketing agreements for their corporate clients every day.   PWC is not enforcing anything.  They are expressing their professional opinion on the FMV on the agreement.  PWC will the report their opinion to NCAA or SEC enforcement for THEM to determine any next steps or penalties for violations.

This is what will be called in the post-House settlement landscape of college football as “legitimate NIL”.  Such as Quinn Ewers with Dr.Pepper, Caleb Williams with Dr.Pepper, or Arch Manning / Livy Dunne with Vuori.

Again, the reason USC is offering 3-year guaranteed contracts if agreed to before House is to avoid exactly the NIL validation process described above by grandfathering these currently INVALID (non-FMV) agreements with athletes.

Nobody is denying any athlete the ability to earn as much money as possible legitimately through marketing their Name, Image, and Likeness to corporate sponsors.  This is about regulating the pay-for-play schemes that are already running amok at certain schools - USC, Miami, aggy.  

[horns96]

16 minutes ago, Glass Joe said:

NIL isn’t about telling a kid what they’re worth to play football.  NIL is a marketing deal whereby Company X pays a kid to represent or sponsor their product for money.  Company X records a marketing expenditure on their books and taxes.  There’s also the silly collective charitable functions to funnel money to players, but all now agree that’ll be going away.

NIL is not the school paying a fee to play football.  

As with many commercial marketing agreement, a fair value criteria must be maintained - whether NIL to an athlete or paying an actor to do a commercial or pitch a product.  If FMV is violated, the agreement is not valid.  And, most importantly, Company X loses the tax deductibility of the marketing expense paid to the player or actor.

PWC is being hired to validate the FMV of player NIL deals going forward.  Just as PWC values other commercial marketing agreements for their corporate clients every day.   PWC is not enforcing anything.  They are expressing their professional opinion on the FMV on the agreement.  PWC will the report their opinion to NCAA or SEC enforcement for THEM to determine any next steps or penalties for violations.

This is what will be called in the post-House settlement landscape of college football as “legitimate NIL”.  Such as Quinn Ewers with Dr.Pepper, Caleb Williams with Dr.Pepper, or Arch Manning / Livy Dunne with Vuori.

Again, the reason USC is offering 3-year guaranteed contracts if agreed to before House is to avoid exactly the NIL validation process described above by grandfathering these currently INVALID (non-FMV) agreements with athletes.

Nobody is denying any athlete the ability to earn as much money as possible legitimately through marketing their Name, Image, and Likeness to corporate sponsors.  This is about regulating the pay-for-play schemes that are already running amok at certain schools - USC, Miami, aggy.  

Informative few posts you've made in this thread, much appreciated.  Seems very few people genuinely understand what's going on (me included).

Edited 19 hours ago by horns96

[thatdude2]

21 hours ago, TexasLonghorns said:

Gerry literally just said it was Georgia and Texas out front and the others weren’t serious contenders. Big whiff 

I mean looked dead into my eyes on camera and told ME this with straight face. I can’t trust that beautiful, manscaped ad reading, man again.

[thatdude2]

Just now, thatdude2 said:

I mean looked dead into my eyes on camera and told ME this with straight face. I can’t trust that beautiful, manscaped ad reading, man again.

Pause!

[taxsaver]

22 hours ago, Hookem72 said:

If I recall this time last year Justus Terry was committed to USC.

 

 

not with THAT kind of NIL...IMO this one sticks for at least 1 year

[Ace Recruiter]

9 hours ago, Glass Joe said:

NIL isn’t about telling a kid what they’re worth to play football.  NIL is a marketing deal whereby Company X pays a kid to represent or sponsor their product for money.  Company X records a marketing expenditure on their books and taxes.  There’s also the silly collective charitable functions to funnel money to players, but all now agree that’ll be going away.

NIL is not the school paying a fee to play football.  

As with many commercial marketing agreement, a fair value criteria must be maintained - whether NIL to an athlete or paying an actor to do a commercial or pitch a product.  If FMV is violated, the agreement is not valid.  And, most importantly, Company X loses the tax deductibility of the marketing expense paid to the player or actor.

PWC is being hired to validate the FMV of player NIL deals going forward.  Just as PWC values other commercial marketing agreements for their corporate clients every day.   PWC is not enforcing anything.  They are expressing their professional opinion on the FMV on the agreement.  PWC will the report their opinion to NCAA or SEC enforcement for THEM to determine any next steps or penalties for violations.

This is what will be called in the post-House settlement landscape of college football as “legitimate NIL”.  Such as Quinn Ewers with Dr.Pepper, Caleb Williams with Dr.Pepper, or Arch Manning / Livy Dunne with Vuori.

Again, the reason USC is offering 3-year guaranteed contracts if agreed to before House is to avoid exactly the NIL validation process described above by grandfathering these currently INVALID (non-FMV) agreements with athletes.

Nobody is denying any athlete the ability to earn as much money as possible legitimately through marketing their Name, Image, and Likeness to corporate sponsors.  This is about regulating the pay-for-play schemes that are already running amok at certain schools - USC, Miami, aggy.  

All good points, but we'll see how it plays out. Regardless on what comes out of the House Settlement case, lawsuits, appeals and so on will follow. Putting the genie back in the bottle is going to be a monumental task 

[justwinbaby]

I’ll laugh if the NCAA makes any recruit who were paid NIL by a program before they enroll in college as ineligible.

[tommym]

Bowman will be in the portal just like Duece Robinson the other 5 star tight end, that Lincoln signed. If they give you money take the first year then transfer. No guarantees, that is what I like about Sark and company. Come to Texas because you want to, and we pay well.