Okie Lite is out on Cade. UK or UNC, but likely UK. Bryce is OU or UNC, likely OU.
FarmerJayhawk
12380 posts
90% sure Bryce Thompson has eliminated Kansas. I think OU with UNC on the outskirts. I’ll keep asking about KU until I know it’s not us. But I the NCAA cloud is doing some bad things to us right now on the trial. Not exactly breaking news, but the consequences become more real for each kid we miss on.
HighEliteMajor said:
Cliff Clavin for the win!
Sometimes you want to go
Where everybody knows your name
And everyone likes seeing you walk in the door! Like all the KU bucketeers, for example.
@Woodrow pretty sure he'll sign in the fall. But as far as specific timing, he hasn't announced anything yet and nobody in KU's orbit really knows either as far as I can tell.
BShark said:
I want the option where Bill stays.
You’ll definitely get that. An extension for Bill is in the works. They’ll get serious about it after the dust settles.
BShark said:
Are things gonna get this bad?
Half wondering if this is related to Gethro as well.
Wide net. Potential walk on.
Good for Ty. A degree from NW is legit.
JAYHAWKFAN214 said:
Bill self is going to see gethro's on Thursday
🔒🔒🔒
Possible walk-on and year 2 scholly https://247sports.com/Player/Quentin-Skinner-46094672/ ↗
JAYHAWKFAN214 said:
FarmerJayhawk said:
jayballer73 said:
FarmerJayhawk said:
BShark said:
@rockchalkwyo Yeah seems done.
Asked my guy who works around NC schools and knows people who know Todd and he’s thought KU for a long time.
Not trying to doubt your friends who know the Todd's BUT sure looks like to me he is headed to Michigan.
Since he named his two finalists - - Michigan has gotten 4 CB picks today - -seems like somebody must know something , and others following suit. - -Something leak? - - -ROCK CHALK ALL DAY LONG BABY
With respect to the pickers, I don’t trust their opinions much. I think a lot of guys won’t even put them in as long as overseas looks like the eventual landing spot.
Were is this overseas talk is coming from
Quite a few folks have asked him about it and he’s never denied he’s interested or it’s a legit option.
jayballer73 said:
FarmerJayhawk said:
BShark said:
@rockchalkwyo Yeah seems done.
Asked my guy who works around NC schools and knows people who know Todd and he’s thought KU for a long time.
Not trying to doubt your friends who know the Todd's BUT sure looks like to me he is headed to Michigan.
Since he named his two finalists - - Michigan has gotten 4 CB picks today - -seems like somebody must know something , and others following suit. - -Something leak? - - -ROCK CHALK ALL DAY LONG BABY
With respect to the pickers, I don’t trust their opinions much. I think a lot of guys won’t even put them in as long as overseas looks like the eventual landing spot.
BShark said:
@BeddieKU23 Yeah you would think Gethro would be a 4 year guy which we need. And definitely not, Howard is much more willing to recruit than Belein from the looks of it.
@FarmerJayhawk Don't do this to me lol.
I really could see KU getting a commitment then Todd bolting in the spring. Can’t play HS hoops when fielding offers from pro teams (I think)
BShark said:
@rockchalkwyo Yeah seems done.
Asked my guy who works around NC schools and knows people who know Todd and he’s thought KU for a long time.
BShark said:
Overseas still firmly in play anyway.
That’s my pick
Woodrow said:
🐦 View Tweet?s=21
Visited this weekend
I believe we’re taking Gethro instead but it’s not 100% locked down yet. Memphis is still trying to get him on campus and probably will.
Corey put in a pick for KU so even if KU makes the list assume he’s going elsewhere 😂
BShark said:
@FarmerJayhawk :eyes:
Haven’t heard but my guess is Memphis and Michigan, but he goes overseas.
Love the move. I think we’re all frustrated with Koenning’s playcalling and things got better when Dearmon had more input at BC. The timing is great too. Have a bye to get into the groove of things and we’ll see what we have in some winnable games down the stretch.
Marco said:
So, predictions people! Out of all those in attendance (all represented classes) who do you think will whind up wearing a Jayhawk uniform?
If I had to pick one I’d say KK Robinson.
Texas Hawk 10 said:
@FarmerJayhawk Another example in Texas of holding minorities down and a contributing factor in the disparity of conviction rates and sentence lengths is the prison system. I can't speak on other states, but in Texas, most prisons are privately owned and operated. They are also among the richest and most powerful lobby groups in the state. They don't make money by rehabbing convicted criminals so they don't become repeat offenders, they make money by keeping those prisons as full as possible.
This lobby group is why Texas will be among the last states to decriminalize marijuana, let alone legalize it even for medicinal use. Marijuana convictions are big business in Texas, along with other misdemeanor level drug crimes because those fill these private prisons and fund a lot of law enforcement agencies in the state.
That makes sense. People making money from incarceration gives me the willies. The incentives are just bad. Have you read Frank Baumgartner’s book about the death penalty? Apparently Houston is the execution capital of the country and the ideal of equal justice under law is basically just a slogan. Also plugging it because he was kind enough to answer any and all questions from a lowly grad student a couple years ago.
@benshawks08 that would make sense! There’s a lot of stuff out there about monitoring costs of these programs and how they’re basically wastes of money.
I’m not sure how common it is. I think the major disagreement is about the existence of a welfare state at all. I believe we need one. As great as charities are and have been they can’t plug all the leaks in society. So my argument is that a) a welfare state is necessary and b) the current one focuses way too much on in-kind benefits instead of just giving people cash.
I’m agnostic on who actually provides education and I’m definitely not informed enough to tell everyone what system is best. Some people really like their private, religious school. Some love their neighborhood public school. Great! Lets just make the government neutral on it and let people make these choices (within certain guardrails).
I've got a lot to say about this since public policy & education are my areas of expertise, but I'll try to stay brief. No promises though!
As we ask why, like @HighEliteMajor says we have to do, the answers to this are very complicated. The state has pretty consistently botched creating equality of opportunity in this country, sometimes intentionally, sometimes with the best of intentions. Just a few examples. Jim Crow obviously was the kind of de jure segregation and oppression nobody should find acceptable in a liberal society. As the SCOTUS ruled in 1954, separate cannot be equal. Even today, by some measures school systems are as segregated as they were right after Brown. We know that integration efforts worked at first, especially in the South. After busing declined and the federal government stepped back in the 80's (arguably betraying the mission of Brown), segregation increased.
Why is this important? Schools that are predominantly minority are generally worse than schools that are predominantly white. And school quality has a strong, causal relationship with future market and non-market outcomes. See the evaluation of the Perry Preschool program and the reams of studies evaluating charter schools as examples.
Pre-Brown, state and local governments intentionally underfunded school districts that were majority minority. As an example, (and to @Texas-Hawk-10's point) Texas only spent 83 cents on each black kid for every dollar they spent on whites in 1960. Why? Racism. What happened post-Brown? Magically, funding equalized among schools. Not really magically (it was because legislatures didn't want white kids to have to go to the old, decaying black schools). The other major piece is that higher quality teachers tend to work in wealthier districts. The district could be better at recruiting, offer a different quality of life, or other factors like rich kids being easier to teach than poor ones. Also to @Texas-Hawk-10's point, across the country, poor & minority students receive about 2% more funding than their wealthier counterparts, though it's pretty unlikely that's enough to bridge the actual gap in terms of costs.
Since schools are residentially assigned here in the U.S., controlling who gets to live where has a strong relationship with school quality. As one of the primary channels through which any given individual's opportunity in life is determined, this becomes very important. If we look at data on home ownership and lending, we see that blacks have historically faced severe discrimination in ability to receive mortgages and even if they were able to get a loan, many whites wouldn't sell homes to blacks in good neighborhoods, a set of practices called redlining. Many whites who were dead broke could receive credit where middle- to upper-income blacks couldn't ever get a similar loan.
This meant many blacks who would move couldn't and were stuck in a bad neighborhood and possibly a bad school. In addition, blacks weren't able to access the capital necessary to develop their own neighborhoods. This kind of hopelessness led to many of the societal ills that still exist there. Put simply, the channels to success that exist for whites exist to less of an extent for blacks.
But racism wasn't the only culprit. I'm a libertarian so I'll keep dumping on the state In response to this concentrated poverty (that the government in large part created) they tried to fix it with the War on Poverty and related efforts. Some of the programs were effective (SS and Medicare greatly reduced senior poverty, but have severe issues with solvency, thanks Boomers). One major program was AFDC, a means tested cash benefits program for families who had a male in the house who was unable to work for whatever reason. The program was started in the 30's, but black women weren't allowed to access it until the 60's! Crazy. The program was wrought with administrative issues as well. It discouraged marriage since benefits could be cut if a beneficiary married someone with higher income. This drives some of the increase in out of wedlock births among those with low income (who are more likely to be black.) In addition, the phaseout of benefits was very sharp, which discouraged anyone to work since the marginal tax rate (when including lost benefits) became extremely high, more than 100% in some cases.
And we couldn't talk about failed wars without bringing up the giant cash fire known as the War on Drugs (and the criminal justice system as a whole). Let's use a specific example. Why does possession of crack cocaine carry much more severe sentences (about 1/3 longer) than powder? Could it have anything to do with the fact that crack is more commonly found in majority black neighborhoods and powder is more common to white neighborhoods? Even though powder cocaine is worth much more in street value? Not difficult dots to connect there. Another question. Why do blacks get pulled over at nearly twice the rate of whites, even controlling for factors like type of car, even though whites are more likely to carry contraband? Another fun fact: marijuana prohibition was largely based on the fear that blacks would "entice" white women to become addicted to weed. That legacy remains. Blacks are 4x as likely to be arrested for weed possession as whites even though they use at essentially the same rate. Blacks are 12x (!) as likely to be falsely convicted of drug crimes as whites. The U.S. Sentencing Commission found that, even controlling for other observables, blacks were given 20% longer sentences than whites for identical charges. Want a really huge part of family breakup and why young, black men have issues as a group? No wonder they don't trust the institutions.
So what's the result of all this? Well, glad you asked. Look at the maps here: https://www.opportunityatlas.org. ↗ It tells the story that both private and state actions have created a perverse kind of inequality in this country where it's a lot harder for the average black kid to succeed in this country than the average white kid. When society continually beats a set of people down for, like, no reason it's perfectly predictable that that set of people will have problems. One surely wouldn't expect an abused kid to have the same outcomes as one from a perfectly healthy and safe family.
So what do we do about it? I've got a couple ideas. In a paper that hopefully will come out soon, I argue for universal school choice for every student in the country. If we believe primary and secondary education is positive right in this country (most states have constitutional provisions stating such) that it makes sense to allow people the freedom to exercise this right however they want, and allow for the marketplace to work to improve school quality, like we see in the charter sector. As these schools have grown and matured (and been allowed to innovate) their outcomes have gotten better. Now, it's rare to find negative outcomes of charters, even with the strongest experimental designs.
Second, I believe strongly that we should repeal the entirety of the current welfare state and replace it with a universal basic income. The math works out to about even if we give everyone $800/month, deposited into a bank account, as soon as they graduate high school or turn 18, whichever is first. That's enough to get above the poverty line for a couple and drastically increase bank usage.
Third, decouple employment and health care. Because of a quirk of WWII tax law, employer sponsored health benefits aren't taxed like income, incentivizing employers to pay for health insurance instead of increasing salary. Replace it with expanded HSA's or something similar. It would increase job mobility since your health insurance would be portable and not tied to your employment.
These three things have a common purpose: empower the individual to take control of their lives and live up to their potential unimpeded by the state. Other things like opportunity zones could help attract capital to the areas that need it.
Finally, everyone should read this book: https://www.amazon.com/Dignity-Seeking-Respect-Back-America/dp/0525534733/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=chris+arnade&qid=1551149213&s=gateway&sr=8-1. ↗ The author did the unthinkable: he went out and talked to people! Crazy thing to do these days. It really drives home the point that people in large swaths of the country feel neglected and hopeless, so they turn to drugs or other vices to escape.
Anyhoo, I've said too much. Have a lovely evening, everyone.
Carter is the 🐐 against bad defenses
Notable, also funny story about the weirdness that is the NCAA https://www.golf.com/news/features/2019/10/04/division-3-golf-dylan-dethier-ncaa/ ↗
BShark said:
I wouldn't blast Herbert based on what I just heard. Can't share it but just trust me on this that there is more than what is being reported.
Agreed.
rockchalkwyo said:
I gotcha. Thanks guys
I gotchu. The private vs. public thing is super interesting in athletics.
rockchalkwyo said:
@HighEliteMajor just because it’s private vrs state college? Am I reading that right?
Yes and no. Private schools have a lot of leeway in who they accept and why. State schools less so. Stanford doesn’t take academic exceptions, dook does because they can stash the kid at NCCU for any “hard” classes. To my knowledge, UNC cannot make exceptions for people who wouldn’t get in otherwise. I know it’s been a frustration for Roy over the years.
@BShark as a walk on? Maybe
HighEliteMajor said:
@FarmerJayhawk Should be paid based on a poll is in a different universe vs. exerting one's leverage, walking out. Funny, really. A poll to ask if someone should be paid. "Question - do you want free money? Yes or no?" I say yes. Heck, how do 29% say no? Sounds like some campaigns right now -- free money. But the deal the athletes get is too good. The players can demand whatever they want. But a "work stoppage" makes no sense economically for the masses of athletes. So it hasn't. All to my points.
But great point on federal legislation. If Congress sees this as important, federally, I support that approach. I may disagree with the legislation, but as far as process, I think you've ID'd the much better approach than piece-meal state-by-state. Normally, I like state's deciding their own issues but this is a national deal.
@bskeet @Kcmatt7 Ok, well it's clearly not a monopoly. You do see the NBA, MLB, and NFL. You've seen the d-league, the g-league, AAF, XFL, USFL, minor league baseball, independent league ball. There are thousands of stadiums and arenas in the country. The NCAA does NOTHING to stamp out competition. They don't acquire businesses. I'm sorry, again, it might sound good when it's said, but when you examine it, not so much.
Except there's no mechanism available for athletes to walk out since they aren't covered under the NLRA. The NCAA could suspend their eligibility for trying to receive "improper benefits." It's a cost:benefit calculation on their part. Does every employee quit or walk out if they ask for a raise and their employer says no? Of course not. Saying it's not a valid position to have if they aren't willing to strike for it is a ridiculous assertion. They're not even asking for money from the institutions. Just the ability to make extra cash in their free time. THE HORROR!
If the market is such that almost nobody will get much of anything from their likeness, why do a big majority of athletes say they should be able to profit? Almost like it's a principled position. They want their friends to be able to make money. The American ideal!
BeddieKU23 said:
FarmerJayhawk said:
Bit from Bossi on Thompson, “ Thompson is planning to be at Kansas this weekend and the Jayhawks had looked to be emerging as a pretty clear leader. However, he'll have to ask some tough questions about the Jayhawks' status with the NCAA. If not Kansas, his in-state finalists could be in best position to capitalize.“
Thanks for sharing. Self looks like he has a chance to hold the edge or lose it here. Probably the only recruit that matters this weekend in the big picture dont you think?
I’d add KK Robinson to that list as far as 2020 guys. I’m still hanging onto some hope of Todd but probably just a vice at this point.
McBride was always a scorer and shot maker. It would've taken a lot of time to develop into a serviceable PG.
HighEliteMajor said:
@FarmerJayhawk Who's asking for the raise? That question really defines this discussion. I see no protests, I see no mass of athletes asking for a raise, I see nothing like that. What I hear and see is a politically driven agenda that is based on the false narrative of the inner city black athlete being exploited. That's what's driving this entire thing.
And don't mistake the market. The "market" is not internal, or inside the NCAA. It's outside the NCAA. It's an entirely free market outside the NCAA. Anyone can compete for the players' services. You, me, anyone. When you intrude inside the NCAA, telling a business association what they can and can't do, it's more Marx.
71% of student athletes believe they should be paid: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/11/student-athletes-should-get-paid-college-students-say.html. ↗ They can't even ask because it could jeopardize their eligibility.
This is why I like the federal legislation. It doesn't force the NCAA to do anything. Either let players get paid or start paying taxes. Your call. And yes, anyone and their employer is a market (albeit a small one). Firms demand labor and workers demand wages, and they negotiate those terms. All we're doing is empowering individuals to do with their free time what they please without interference by their quasi-employer. Hardly something Marx would endorse.
drgnslayr said:
UPDATE:
Colorado and Washington are soon to follow. Anyone know where Texas sits on this issue? I'm of the opinion if the NCAA still isn't bluffing after a few more states join in, adding Texas will be the final blow. I already see this as the end of the NCAA as we know it. They will have to adjust to a new system. Maybe we just need to stall out as long as we can and then we are the proverbial kid in Colorado who is caught with a joint the day pot was legalized.
The times are a changin'. I figure the NCAA is worth about one more silly threat before the bend over and say "uncle!"
The key, as many have stated in here, is for the NCAA to create laws they can actually enforce. Since the system is so large, they can't enforce it without help from everyone; institutions, players, onlookers, shoecos... everyone.
What you don't hear people talking about is the IRS. Suddenly, they are going to be very very interested in "student-athletes."
This is the time for an entrepreneur to step up and start a new organization to compete against the NCAA. No one seems to like the NCAA so this entire country (outside the NCAA) would listen to an alternative. An alternative would attempt to create a fail-safe system, connected to the IRS and DOJ for a presence of transparency and control. Fairness.
BTW: for those not convinced the NCAA is about to take this up the backside.... just imagine for a second this case ending up in federal court, State of Cal vs NCAA. California holds all the cards. All the cards. The NCAA can only sit back on controls from a private organization. Once an organization develops to the level the NCAA has, federal court has long ago stripped organizations of most of their control. Almost every single American is directly impacted by the NCAA.
Meanwhile... expect to see "action groups" organized and buying TV ads in support of the civil liberties of athletes. Big black eye on the NCAA. Again... they lose!
The Texas legislature doesn't come back until 2021 so there won't be any movement there unless Gov. Abbott calls a special session.
Bit from Bossi on Thompson, “ Thompson is planning to be at Kansas this weekend and the Jayhawks had looked to be emerging as a pretty clear leader. However, he'll have to ask some tough questions about the Jayhawks' status with the NCAA. If not Kansas, his in-state finalists could be in best position to capitalize.“
wissox said:
Duke has an acceptance rate of 8.6%. That means their basketball players are elite students. We should be impressed by them.
I'm not impre$$ed.
Little secret: a lot of students (including basketball players) take intro classes at NC Central, a HBCU in Durham.
HighEliteMajor said:
jayballer73 said:
Interesting Article. - - Rep Ward states that Kansas has been a state that normally defers with for the better or worse with the NCAA.
THAT'S the problem . People been deferring to these fricken idiots way to long -- It's time for Universities to stand up to these morons - -act like you got a pair - Enough is enough.
Why shouldn't these kids get paid SOMETHING - -like the article states - -it's very unfair the way things are right now - the amount of money these other people make off these kids when they are playing ball. - -It also says about Coach's being able to make money off endorsements - -just not right.- - Ward talks and says the NCAA is about 10 years behind the learning curve - -totally agree - - wake up idiots - it's 2019 NOT 1929.
I can totally see why Kansas wouldn't adopt this , agree to this - - THIS State never likes change - -just totally lost on a lot of things - -like he says he would need 61 votes of support from the House and 21 from the Senate. - - That's not happening - - not in this State - -let's just keep deferring , ya that's the answer - -just Unreal.
I agree with Les , with California passing this it's going to make a very uneven playing/recruiting field till somebody does Something. - -The NCAA has reached it's limit - it's time to finally let them know - -you know what - - enough is enough
So, just because the NCAA makes money off the kids and you think it is unfair, we should change the rules? I know, I know, other's have money, make money, earn money, create, and it's unfair if others can't take it. I get it. Workers of the world unite.
So you refer to those that oppose the bill as "morons" and "idiots." Cool.
I think it’s totally fair to ask for a raise if you feel like your employer is getting more than your marginal revenue product of labor, as is the case in a competitive market. More Hayek, less Marx.
justanotherfan said:
Doubtful Kansas does anything of substance in the legislature until most of the other states act. This could leave KU playing catch-up if Kansas waits too long.
To be fair, there’s not a lot of acting the legislature can do right now since they’re out of session, and won’t be until January. I suppose someone could pre-file a bill? I’ve got a call with a Senator later this week. I’ll definitely ask about it!
rockchalkwyo said:
https://giphy.com/gifs/tom-brady-concussion-gPPhH9X1NpilW ↗
I always wondered how Duke fans were made.
They’re made in test tubes in New Jersey.
Woodrow said:
5* Isaiah Todd is visiting this weekend
Alright alright alright! Even though I’m pretty sure we don’t have a shot and he’s going overseas, he’s so perfect for next year’s squad that I can’t quit it
No idea why Jim got interviewed for the story since he doesn't chair any committees (he's a Democrat) or have a spot in leadership ¯_(ツ)_/¯. But I could see the state moving on something like it. They just did a big study on sports gambling. I suppose I could ask around and get a better idea of things.
HighEliteMajor said:
Anyone can leave the NCAA. If the California schools wanted to leave, they would have left. The schools are against it.
Here is a Pac-12 statement. A touch similar to things heard here -
The Pac-12 said Monday in a statement that it is "disappointed" in the passage of the bill because the conference believes it "will have very significant negative consequences for our student-athletes and broader universities in California."
"This legislation will lead to the professionalization of college sports and many unintended consequences related to this professionalism, imposes a state law that conflicts with national rules, will blur the lines for how California universities recruit student-athletes and compete nationally, and will likely reduce resources and opportunities for student-athletes in Olympic sports and have a negative disparate impact on female student-athletes," the Pac-12 said in its statement.
"Our universities have led important student-athlete reform over the past years, but firmly believe all reforms must treat our student-athletes as students pursuing an education, and not as professional athletes. We will work with our universities to determine next steps and ensure continuing support for our student-athletes."
The schools can’t decide that. They need approval of the UC BoR and the legislature.
Lol at it costing the universities a dime. They apparently support unlimited in kind donations to each student athlete but some local car dealer wants to pay a kid for a commercial and it’s Armageddon for the schools? It sure ended the Olympics when they allowed those athletes to profit. Just terrible for the Olympics. Whatever happened to them?
Non-facetiously, it’s very difficult to square the arguments the NCAA and its organs are making: that 1) this would only apply to very few student-athletes and 2) it would destroy college sports forever. The ideal of amateurism hasn’t existed for decades. It can’t be enforced, the schools by their actions don’t believe in it, and even the parent organization takes in over $1 billion per year, of which they kept over $100 million just for funsies, not to actually try to enforce any rules they say they care so much about. The sooner the P5 decides to govern themselves the better.
I think this is the first game where it's immensely obvious how bad the roster actually is. It showed some down the stretch against WVU where the defense was gassed and couldn't get off the field, but without Prox and Herbert this thing was toast when we got off the plane. I do see signs of improvement. The defense is giving up fewer big plays, tackling better, and taking better angles to the ball. Both sides of the ball have fewer penalties. Clock management is better (we haven't taken a TO just to punt!). The offense is more efficient in terms of yards/play. Ditto the defense. Carter Stanley has a better passer rating and QBR than Bender had last year. In fact, Stanley has been an above average QB this year according to QBR. This staff is recruiting a bunch of HS kids and will have a full class this year, perhaps with a big cherry on top with Clayton.
It's obvious to me this staff has the program going in the right direction. This year was always going to really suck since there just aren't that many good players. But the signs of a pulse are there.
Cracks form... I think the NCAA will sue over it and at minimum drag it out. But hoping we get significant policy diffusion and Congress takes the lead here. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-09-30/college-athlete-endorsement-deals-ncaa-california-law ↗
Love to UNC. Will be official Tuesday.
Howard into see this kid today (actually his mom) https://247sports.com/Player/Tyon-Grant-Foster-46093992/ ↗
Kcmatt7 said:
FarmerJayhawk said:
Cry me a river, Emmert. Apparently just allowing student atheltes to profit off their likeness is a bigger threat to college sports than systematic coverups of sexual assault (even against kids), academic fraud, coaches going to prison for bribery, etc. etc. etc. https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/ncaa-prez-calls-name-image-and-likeness-rights-an-existential-threat-to-college-sports/ ↗
Too complex to manage? Give me a break. If it's that difficult, maybe let someone else run the show.
Also though, according to his own words, only like one or two players each year would make any money.
In his eyes only the NCAA can make money off college athletes. Oh, and himself. To the tune of $3 million last year. Money for me but not for thee.
Cry me a river, Emmert. Apparently just allowing student atheltes to profit off their likeness is a bigger threat to college sports than systematic coverups of sexual assault (even against kids), academic fraud, coaches going to prison for bribery, etc. etc. etc. https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/ncaa-prez-calls-name-image-and-likeness-rights-an-existential-threat-to-college-sports/ ↗
Too complex to manage? Give me a break. If it's that difficult, maybe let someone else run the show.
The NCAA is so mad Wendell Carter went to dook they had to hammer Georgia Tech