And Texas with nearly unlimited funds has been able to buy themselves a big12 championship.

I hope some women's softball player from Texas sues the **** out of UT for what is clearly a title IX violation. Just because you have some third party paying players, it's clear that's at the direction of the university.

Sark is an employee of the school and he is telling those NIL boosters who to pay.

BUATX2000 said:

---

And Texas with nearly unlimited funds has been able to buy themselves a big12 championship.

I hope some women's softball player from Texas sues the **** out of UT for what is clearly a title IX violation. Just because you have some third party paying players, it's clear that's at the direction of the university.

Sark is an employee of the school and he is telling those NIL boosters who to pay.

---

While I think it's obvious that Sark bought a Big 12 championship, I'm not sure the correct solution is to have economic parity here. Women's softball brings in very little revenue, and a player should only be paid according to the revenue that he/she or the sport itself produces. So it stands to reason that UT would focus on the money sports, which is something Baylor should have been doing all along.

Guitarbiscuit said:

---

BUATX2000 said:

---

And Texas with nearly unlimited funds has been able to buy themselves a big12 championship.

I hope some women's softball player from Texas sues the **** out of UT for what is clearly a title IX violation. Just because you have some third party paying players, it's clear that's at the direction of the university.

Sark is an employee of the school and he is telling those NIL boosters who to pay.

---

While I think it's obvious that Sark bought a Big 12 championship, I'm not sure the correct solution is to have economic parity here. Women's softball brings in very little revenue, and a player should only be paid according to the revenue that he/she or the sport itself produces. So it stands to reason that UT would focus on the money sports, which is something Baylor should have been doing all along.

---

"No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance"

The key wording here being "denied the benefit of"

If UT employees are directing NIL funds, they are discriminating and denying benefit to one group over another. The current state of NIL is far from settled case law. It needs to be challenged.

The university doesn't control NIL funds, so this is barking up the wrong tree.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

The university doesn't control NIL funds, so this is barking up the wrong tree.

---

They do control them almost in their entirety, they just don't do so with their name attached to the funds. We all know this. It's only a matter of time before texts and whatnot come out proving these coaches are the entire NIL program in reality.

Krieg said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

The university doesn't control NIL funds, so this is barking up the wrong tree.

---

They do control them almost in their entirety, they just don't do so with their name attached to the funds. We all know this. It's only a matter of time before texts and whatnot come out proving these coaches at the entire NIL program in reality.

---

The suspension of disbelief needed to think coaches and programs aren't directly involved in directing these funds is extreme.

BUATX2000 said:

---

Krieg said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

The university doesn't control NIL funds, so this is barking up the wrong tree.

---

They do control them almost in their entirety, they just don't do so with their name attached to the funds. We all know this. It's only a matter of time before texts and whatnot come out proving these coaches at the entire NIL program in reality.

---

The suspension of disbelief needed to think coaches and programs aren't directly involved in directing these funds is extreme.

---

We even had a guy that ended up committing to OU talking about how all Sarkisian talked about on his home visit was NIL. It's amazing that nobody cares.

https://www.sportico.com/leagues/college-sports/2023/oregon-title-ix-lawsuit-division-street-1234749110/amp/

Krieg said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

The university doesn't control NIL funds, so this is barking up the wrong tree.

---

They do control them almost in their entirety, they just don't do so with their name attached to the funds. We all know this. It's only a matter of time before texts and whatnot come out proving these coaches are the entire NIL program in reality.

---

But they don't though. Imagine this scenario: a coach asks a player how much that player wants and then that coach tells the alumni how much that is. That's not controlling the funds, and that's why Title IX isn't an issue here.

In the alternative, if someone is alleging that alumni give the funds to the coach and then he/she distributes it, then that's different. I have not seen this alleged anywhere though.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Krieg said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

The university doesn't control NIL funds, so this is barking up the wrong tree.

---

They do control them almost in their entirety, they just don't do so with their name attached to the funds. We all know this. It's only a matter of time before texts and whatnot come out proving these coaches are the entire NIL program in reality.

---

But they don't though. Imagine this scenario: a coach asks a player how much that player wants and then that coach tells the alumni how much that is. That's not controlling the funds, and that's why Title IX isn't an issue here.

In the alternative, if someone is alleging that alumni give the funds to the coach and then he/she distributes it, then that's different. I have not seen this alleged anywhere though.

---

Pretty sure that's not a winning argument in a federal discrimination suit. But good luck.

BUATX2000 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Krieg said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

The university doesn't control NIL funds, so this is barking up the wrong tree.

---

They do control them almost in their entirety, they just don't do so with their name attached to the funds. We all know this. It's only a matter of time before texts and whatnot come out proving these coaches are the entire NIL program in reality.

---

But they don't though. Imagine this scenario: a coach asks a player how much that player wants and then that coach tells the alumni how much that is. That's not controlling the funds, and that's why Title IX isn't an issue here.

In the alternative, if someone is alleging that alumni give the funds to the coach and then he/she distributes it, then that's different. I have not seen this alleged anywhere though.

---

Pretty sure that's not a winning argument in a federal discrimination suit. But good luck.

---

This is shifting goal posts as what we are discussing and what the Oregon athletes are alleging are two different things. But sure.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

BUATX2000 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Krieg said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

The university doesn't control NIL funds, so this is barking up the wrong tree.

---

They do control them almost in their entirety, they just don't do so with their name attached to the funds. We all know this. It's only a matter of time before texts and whatnot come out proving these coaches are the entire NIL program in reality.

---

But they don't though. Imagine this scenario: a coach asks a player how much that player wants and then that coach tells the alumni how much that is. That's not controlling the funds, and that's why Title IX isn't an issue here.

In the alternative, if someone is alleging that alumni give the funds to the coach and then he/she distributes it, then that's different. I have not seen this alleged anywhere though.

---

Pretty sure that's not a winning argument in a federal discrimination suit. But good luck.

---

This is shifting goal posts as what we are discussing and what the Oregon athletes are alleging are two different things. But sure.

---

To be clear, I think the Oregon lawsuit is flawed, but it alleges that only 15% of the recruiting funds from NIL are being directed at female athletes. Thats going to be a problem.

BUATX2000 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

BUATX2000 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Krieg said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

The university doesn't control NIL funds, so this is barking up the wrong tree.

---

They do control them almost in their entirety, they just don't do so with their name attached to the funds. We all know this. It's only a matter of time before texts and whatnot come out proving these coaches are the entire NIL program in reality.

---

But they don't though. Imagine this scenario: a coach asks a player how much that player wants and then that coach tells the alumni how much that is. That's not controlling the funds, and that's why Title IX isn't an issue here.

In the alternative, if someone is alleging that alumni give the funds to the coach and then he/she distributes it, then that's different. I have not seen this alleged anywhere though.

---

Pretty sure that's not a winning argument in a federal discrimination suit. But good luck.

---

This is shifting goal posts as what we are discussing and what the Oregon athletes are alleging are two different things. But sure.

---

To be clear, I think the Oregon lawsuit is flawed, but it alleges that only 15% of the recruiting funds from NIL are being directed at female athletes. Thats going to be a problem.

---

Yep. With the way Title IX has been expanded, you know it's going to encompass NIL collectives at some point. It likely can't include real NIL, but that's a fraction of the crap we have going on at the moment.

BUATX2000 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

BUATX2000 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Krieg said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

The university doesn't control NIL funds, so this is barking up the wrong tree.

---

They do control them almost in their entirety, they just don't do so with their name attached to the funds. We all know this. It's only a matter of time before texts and whatnot come out proving these coaches are the entire NIL program in reality.

---

But they don't though. Imagine this scenario: a coach asks a player how much that player wants and then that coach tells the alumni how much that is. That's not controlling the funds, and that's why Title IX isn't an issue here.

In the alternative, if someone is alleging that alumni give the funds to the coach and then he/she distributes it, then that's different. I have not seen this alleged anywhere though.

---

Pretty sure that's not a winning argument in a federal discrimination suit. But good luck.

---

This is shifting goal posts as what we are discussing and what the Oregon athletes are alleging are two different things. But sure.

---

To be clear, I think the Oregon lawsuit is flawed, but it alleges that only 15% of the recruiting funds from NIL are being directed at female athletes. Thats going to be a problem.

---

Have you had an opportunity to look at the details of what they are alleging? Much of it has nothing to do with NIL - facilities, uniforms, equipment, athletic spending by gender, practices, scheduling, scholarships, etc.

Ehhhh Sarkisian improved Texas' roster a bit through NIL, but they've always had lots of highly rated guys. Sarkisian isn't amazing, but he's a competent head coach, and the big 12 is honestly not a hard conference to win in, though don't tell that to Mack Rhoades.

I agree with the general sentiment about NIL. Universities should have to report how much they've spent including dollar figures for Mercedes leases and stuff like that, and the top 32 or so teams should be forced to play in their own league.