Burnt Orange Horn

I hear Georgia has a pretty decent OL.

What is a paragraph, Daddy?

The Power 2 The Medium 2 The Underfunded 6

And Herman owned Kirby. So? ....

Yes, Maalik has a much better arm and a much more robust build.

Really??? 🤔

Not this year. He usually gets to 3. But some passes seem to be pre determined.

No downtown luxury high rise condos in Collie Station.

Maybe the calls contribute to Quinn's red zone inefficiency?? 🤔

It’s crazy / insane that players are jumping into the portal when their team is about to start playoff run. This has to get addressed soon by conf commissioners to help improve roster stability at pivotal time of year. I liked Joel Klatt’s recent suggestion that they should move to only have 1 Portal Window and make it the month of May. That lets coaches and all players (new EE recruits and veterans) see how they stack up after spring ball. Make the month of May ‘free agency’ then from June (when portal transfers and summer enrollees join the team) through January (when EEs join the team) there is complete stability with no team hopping. Decisions can be thoughtful after full offseason and not made on emotion in the moment while season is still ongoing for some. The one exception to this would be when head coach leaves, players get 1 month to jump into portal if they choose. can you imagine starters or backups on an NFL team about to start playoffs being able to go into free agency and leave their team before the playoffs start. Makes absolutely no sense for the game. Curious what others prefer? Hook em!

Yeah, first 9 win season in 20 years must have bummed them out!! 🤦🏻‍♂️

Shirley, you jest! He only developed Caleb and Rattler. All the others were 90% developed at previous schools.

Exactly my thoughts. Michigan blew their wad already. LSU or Bama? Miami? Oregon might like him, too. USC would love him but I doubt he would go there as Riley is a QB evaluator more than a QB developer. Williams and Rattler are testament to that. Then there is Georgia. Yikes.

Guy goes from high school to Graduate DB School at Texas.

Texas also tried and succeeded in getting Walton back for a week. I think neither of those had an exit interview. Perhaps they are talking to Bledsoe? Baker will say yea or nay.

Put it this way: how many other teams are using freshman or even sophomore punters now?

Ain't no testing in Sark's Portal. One foot in and you are gone.

Blake, I bet his recovery will accelerate now. Just communicate to him this is his best path forward and the alternative was not tenable. His dreams are still ahead of him.

Scrotum had a very difficult time with Goosby. Do you think Hilson noticed? 🤔

Foooooooooooor Paaaaaaaaaaggies!

Central time?

Only about 16 football programs are self sustaining.

Then you are indeed correct .

(due to the statute of limitations) through the present. However, the $2.78 billion will not be equally distributed. Approximately 75% is expected to go to football players, with 20% going to men’s and women’s basketball players and 5% for other athletes. The expected average damages award for a Power Five football or men’s basketball player is approximately $135,000 in payments over 10 years. Although the 27 non-Power Five conferences and their member schools were not defendants in the House lawsuit, these conferences and their schools are expected to bear about $990 million in costs. Power Five schools, by contrast, are expected to pay approximately $664 million, with the remainder paid by the NCAA. Additionally, the preliminarily approved settlement establishes a 10-year revenue-sharing plan, allowing NCAA conferences and their member schools to share 22% of annual revenue with student-athletes. This revenue-sharing plan is permissive, not required. Most importantly, schools can also opt into an athlete pay model of sports revenue, which is capped at $22 million annually for each school (for all athletes in a given school’s athletic program, at the school’s discretion). This salary cap is the next step in moving college sports closer and closer to “pro-style” sports, with schools under this model now having to choose where and how to distribute that $22 million figure. The revenue-sharing figure is expected to grow up to $32.9 million by the end of the 10-year revenue-sharing agreement. Under the preliminarily approved settlement, enforcement authority over third-party NIL deals will no longer extend to all third parties, including broadly defined boosters. Instead, restrictions will focus only on groups "of entities and individuals closely affiliated with the schools," such as collectives. Any NIL deals involving these "associated entities or individuals" must be approved through a third-party clearinghouse. The NCAA will not be responsible for reviewing these agreements; instead, they will be subject to neutral arbitration. An arbitrator will determine whether the NIL deals serve a "valid business purpose" or are merely pay-for-play schemes disguised as NIL agreements. Other key pieces of the settlement agreement include required reporting of all third-party NIL deals valued at $600 or more, a removal of scholarship limits (although scholarships will still count towards the $22 million “salary cap” figure, up to $2.5 million), and provisions for NCAA regulatory oversight. Next Steps and Takeaways Now that Judge Wilken has granted preliminary approval, a notice campaign and claims period will begin on October 18, at which point current and former athletes will receive the settlement terms as well as claims procedures. The first payment for back damages is currently scheduled for May 15, 2025, or within 45 days of the settlement agreement’s finalization. The deadline for objections and claims will close on January 31, 2025, with a final approval hearing scheduled for April 7, 2025. Under the current schedule, implementation of the settlement terms will likely arrive in time for the 2025-2026 academic year. The House v. NCAA settlement represents one of the most significant and dramatic shifts toward a more professional model for college sports. The settlement not only provides more revenue-sharing opportunities for student-athletes, but the introduction of a salary cap could fundamentally reshape the landscape of college sports. However, it does not address all the labor and employment issues in the field, as college athletes remain non-employees without the right to join labor unions. Moreover, the settlement agreement only resolves the three consolidated cases, it does not bar future potential antitrust claims from current and future college athletes, including plaintiffs in the Fontenot v. NCAA and Cornelio v. NCAA cases. Critics of the settlement argue that the revenue-sharing model could further widen the gap between the wealthy Power Five schools and their non-Power Five counterparts. Additionally, House v. NCAA may lay the foundation for the creation of a super conference or super league composed of high-revenue football and basketball programs in the future. For now, the settlement aims to level the playing field for all student-athletes, regardless of conference, while broadening NIL opportunities by allowing athletes to more closely link their financial success to that of their schools. The settlement’s new revenue-sharing model will require schools to implement stricter controls over the distribution of NIL payments to ensure compliance with legal and regulatory frameworks. Schools will need to be prepared to take on greater responsibility in managing and overseeing NIL payments to ensure compliance with evolving regulations and rules. Questions remain about how to ensure Title IX compliance, as schools must balance the distribution of resources across men's and women's sports. Additionally, looming labor issues, including the potential classification of athletes as employees, may further complicate schools' responsibilities. Schools will need to be proactive in maintaining transparency, fairness, and legal adherence as the NIL landscape continues to evolve. ©

Ewes in garter belts and fishnet stockings only appeals to an animal husbandry practitioner.