tenneseehorn08

The NPV isn't zero, but that's the wrong reference point. The reference point is what is the NPV of these deals collectively - the cost savings for A&M for not managing this in house referenced against Texas's net NPV for similar. As mentioned, the wild card is whether there is some competitive advantage for legit NIL deals, which there might be due to centralization of the marketplace. But the top line number is a just a headline.

This is just a headline. Rather than manage individual media rights deals in house directly with brands--for example, Texas has deals with American Airlines, Budweiser, etc, to name a few--Aggie is contracting that out in advance to one entity. That entity gets both the upside and downside. In short, they are aggregating their advertising and media deals over time to one entity. Im not privy to the numbers, but I assume if we did that it would be way higher. Presumably there is some NIL upside here too because it is likely the brands and the students athletes get a centralized place to try and sell/license actual nil rights. But the long and short is that Texas probably already gets more from its media deals collectively than this agreement promises for a&m.

Vince!

I have heard he was also injured for a good deal of his initial time in ways that impeded physical development necessary for improving blocking.

I believe he tried to get the game moved prior to Georgia losing

I am not normally conspiritatorial, but I would not be surprised if after Ryan Day got beat by Michigan and knew his job was on the line, Ohio State looked at the fact that Michigan essentially got off Scott free for cheating by stealing signs and started doing the same for the Tennessee and Oregon games. They appear to have the perfect play calls most of the time, and it is making me suspicious...

Good not great pic but undoubtedly one of the best moments of the season.

If not Golden, who are the marginal NFL players who we might try to recruit coming back to be leaders? I don't know this for certain, but it seems very likely to me Sark tabbed certain older players who might have otherwise moved on like Sweat and JWhitt in 23 and Collins and Barron in 24 to come back (and paid them big NIL nearly comparable to what they could get in NFL as either a later round or rookie free agent). Taffe and Broughton seem like obvious candidates. Perhaps Blue if Sark thinks he can iron out fumble issues? Maybe DJ Campbell (although I know the board would hate it--seems like he has another level of potential that Sark could tap--not sure if he has leadership potential either)? Maybe Hayden Conner instead? I feel like recruiting back your marginal NFL players is the best bang for buck use of NIL because the people you bring back you are most familiar with in terms of culture and character/known ability. Would be great to have a couple of these guys...

I think you can tell he had not had enough sleep. He was blinking and saying um more than usual, but nothing a little shut eye can't cure

Didn't Denver Harris end up at UTSA after LSU?

Would be sad if at least one couldn't be a long term success story.

Assuming we took care of business at home, we also would play the B12 champ, to get into semifinal. I think that is almost worth it.

I agree with Joel Klatt. But that is a prospective, future-looking solution. That doesn't address the appropriate punishment right now under the current rules for the past violations. And I'm certainly not saying or implying you did any of this. I'm saying the only way to ensure that in the future other people don't throw a similar tantrum through similar acts of rioting/vandalism is to ensure there is no incentive for us to do it again. 250k, taking away beer sales, or kicking out a couple students of future games won't work. Even if it was a terrible call, you have to live with it under the current rules, because that's sports. If they fix the rules so it doesn't happen again via replay, great. But that comes with downsides too, and there will always be certain unreviewable plays where the refs mess it up. When those happen, the precedent has been set that a tantrum will fix the problem. So unless that is so heavily punished that it takes that option off the table, it will happen again. The hammer should come down to ensure it does not ever happen again.

Acceptable extreme expression form of frustration: booing the refs, even cursing them out. Unacceptable form of expression: throwing trash on field. We will never know if they would have changed the call otherwise. The fact that that IT WORKED is beside the point. Other teams that we play will be screwed by very bad calls in the future, we may get similarly screwed again, and it will not justify this behavior. That is sports. In order not to incentive it because IT WORKED is precisely why it should be severely punished. Otherwise you teach students, the leaders of tomorrow, that you can get what you want by throwing a tantrum/rioting.

So a riot, which is what this was, is justified because we don't like the call? There will be lots of calls we don't like. Officials will not (and cannot) always get things right. It doesn't matter how bad it is. Throwing a tantrum because you perceive something as unfair is how children behave. We should not reward childish behavior. Just the opposite: it should be severely punished. Right now, with the call reversed, we have been more rewarded than punished. That sets a terrible precedent. If we don't reverse course and get hammered even more, then it sends a message to every fanbase that acting like a child and throwing a tantrum is acceptable. But it is not.