Supplied to you in post #44 in this thread. When you supplied the high estimate of Iowa NIL. And low estimate of Rutgers.
Hey Al…..
- Thread starter AreYouNUTS
- Start date
Apples and oranges, really.
IMO, Flood new he was f'd from day one with the the sorry excuse for a PC AD Rutgers hired. Barchi could not give a single fluck about football and athletics. So, he did the best he could and mailed it in. There was a non-stop circus sideshow of Julie f ups and then the Mike Rice fiasco. He had no funds for recruiting travel like Greg has always had, and he was swimming against a tide of pollution. He knew it was going to be a Long December and spent his time at Counting Crows concerts. As far as the disguise thing- it was brilliantly hilarious and a desperation move to save his best player. At an SEC school it would not even be small potatoes.
Greg's year 6 and 7 performance is a bigger disgrace than Flood's silly folly to keep his best defensive player on the team.
I didn't mean "misappropriating funds." I meant categorizing expenditures (that they were fully authorized to make) in a way that hides their true nature.
If I continue to express my opinion, are you going to threaten to hit me with your purse?
That's fascinating.
QUESTION: Why does the Big Ten and other Big Ten schools refer to the revenue sharing money as NIL payments?
LINK 1
"On December 2, Xavier and Wisconsin Athletics entered into a binding two-year NIL agreement reflecting his strong commitment to continuing with the Wisconsin football program. We understand that he also executed a similar agreement with the Varsity Collective. His agreement with Wisconsin Athletics included substantial financial compensation for Xavier. Under the terms of the agreement between Xavier and Wisconsin Athletics, it remains in effect and enforceable..."
LINK 2
"I have seen many one-sided “#NIL revenue-sharing” contracts from Big Ten schools this cycle. They use the same form provided by the conference. It’s ludicrous that they put in bold writing: “The Institution in its discretion may, at any time, adjust the Consideration to reflect an increase or decrease in the Athlete's NIL value (e.g., a Heisman Trophy win may increase the NIL value and reduced playing time may decrease the NIL value).”
LINK 3
"However, two other lawyers familiar with revenue-sharing MOUs (Memorandum of Understanding) for Big Ten athletes say the language is consistent with agreements they have reviewed."
"At its core, the MOU is an intellectual property transaction. The school is buying a license to use the athlete’s NIL and the associated right to sublicense the athlete’s NIL to third parties. The athlete accepts they do not gain a right to royalties or additional payments in the event of a sublicense."
"The main NIL concession gives schools a license to use an athlete’s “name, nickname, pseudonym, voice, signature, caricature, likeness, image, picture, portrait, quotes, statements, writings, identifiable biographical information, other identifiable features, and any other indicia of personal identity” such as jersey number or social media handle, according to the document. Those rights can be sublicensed to the Big Ten, NCAA or any other third party, and continue after an athlete is no longer at the school, though not for use to sell goods and services. (Athletes can continue to enter personal NIL deals outside this agreement, but those deals must comply with the revenue-sharing MOU and must be reported to the school). "
"The linkage between play and NIL is also apparent in how the MOU addresses a player transferring. The school agrees to “take reasonable steps not to actively use the Athlete’s NIL” after the athlete plays for another team. The school, however, stresses it can “sell-off” products with the athlete’s NIL and reserves the right to use the NIL for archival purposes and historical signage. "
-----------------------
Now, granted, I only got my law degree 25 years ago, so I wasn't really taking classes on sports likeness rights. But if I remember correctly, some of my courses (you know, like probably first year contracts) suggested that the EXPRESS LANGUAGE IN THE CONTRACT TERMS could be used to infer what the nature of the contract was focused on. But again, I'm just a simple country lawyer ... perhaps you could use your fancy book-learnin' (as well as your extensive insider contacts) to explain how the Big Ten seven-page model NIL revenue sharing agreement does not concern "rev share going to NIL payments."
We all await this knowledge with bated breath.
Yea you said that in the quote I posted above. And then right after saying that you said “cooking the books” which is nefarious in nature. Implying misappropriation of funds. You should know this “counselor”.
You do know you linked 3 articles that are dated before the official start of the house settlement agreement? These contracts were all pretty much blown up as of June 25, 2025.
House v. NCAA: Era of Revenue Sharing in College Sports Begins
A federal judge has approved a landmark $2.57 billion settlement, clearing the way for a sweeping change in college athletics: Revenue sharing for student-athletes.
www.wisbar.org
One doesn’t excuse what flood did because sec schools supposedly do worse. It was a disgrace what he did and a firable offense period
Laughable you are defending what he did. Just stop as it’s embarrassing. He clearly didn’t want to be recognized and clearly asked for a favor against school policy. Just accept it for what it was - a stupid thing to do and a firable offense. Period, move on.
The number is 21.3M, which is not enough and that explains everything! But, you just want to get rid of Schiano. Post #44 says nothing.
ZINN cant give us an official number. She can’t tell us because…
We don’t have the $$$$!!
Of course, because St. Greg doesn’t make mistakes. He’s the Zeus of college coaches.
BTW can you confirm that Greg is getting enough fiber since your head is shoved so far up his rear?
Will respectfully disagree with you here. It was totally small potatoes and blown way out of proportion. The Greg fanboys jumped on it like a pack of jackals. Was it ill-conceived and silly-sure. A disgrace? Not in my and many others' opinions. They guy was getting no support from his boss, who was constantly working to have him offed. Desperate times call for desperate measures.
Post 44 is in direct response to you fabricating Iowas roster spend. And it does say something it gives a range of what the spend is. So let’s say the mid range of roughly 24-25mm. Which is what Greg and Zinn have eluded. Greg in an early presser said he was given full allotment of rev/share and additional NIL funds. And he said I have been given funds to be competitive and to succeed He wouldn’t give an exact number. They asked Kelli if the 23.6mm whisper numbers were correct and she said that’s in range and they are working on additional NIL deals. You are now denying any of this. Crazy.
“Asked about a report that Rutgers is somewhere between $20-$30 million in NIL spending on football, Zinn said that "I won't close the range, but I'll tell you that report's accurate."
Also I wanted Greg to be competitive and succeed this year. He didn’t live up to that end of the bargain. At what point does a person with a sub500 coaching career get set free? If he was your employee would you continue to fund a 20+year track record of mediocre performance?
Last edited:
I am def not a GS fanboy so not in that group. I am also not a Flood apologist.
RU needs to do better.
I'm not an apologist either, just a realist.
Funny how Flood has been successful (yes as a coordinator and not a HC) at both Alabama and Texas and Sarkisian has kept him around for so long, whereas Greg had few opportunities after he was fired at Tampa Bay. Provided with the right resources, Flood obviously can do a good job.
Success riding Sark’s coattails at each stop. He’s a coordinator in name only. Sark does the play calling.
Also… ala Hilary Clinton hang a personal email account which in any company gets you fired period….
Concealment Efforts: Flood also used a private personal email address (rather than his university account) to contact the professor in an attempt to bypass open-records requests and hide the communication.
firable offense
Whatever, dude. Many people would love to make $1.5M/year for a low pressure gig and a boss that appreciates him.
Not defending what he did, just correcting the exaggerations that have grown from when that went down. Helpfully fueled by the scum at the Star Ledger. Nadir Barnwell was a knucklehead that was given way too many chances. Flood should have cut him loose for the good of the program - sometimes as a leader you need to make the hard calls.
Using personal emails alone is a serious violation. Let’s not downplay what he did
but he’s a great OL coach though
DeadbeatAL is doing a lot of lurking and a lot less posting than he used to. His idiocy has finally broke him here.
My comment was that the way the expenditures were being described in the individual schools' reports was nefarious in nature, not the expenditures themselves. I was not saying the funds were being misappropriated.
That's swell ... now explain the SEC model NIL revenue sharing agreement that was approved yesterday. LINK
So you are admitting you know very little about what you are taking about. Great work counselor! I don’t need to explain anything. I’ll wait for you to make some ridiculous claim using outdated sources and counter.That's swell ... now explain the SEC model NIL revenue sharing agreement that was approved yesterday. LINK
You said the Big Ten model contracts that were being discussed in the articles were no longer being used ("blown up") after June 2025. Do you have any evidence suggesting that? Do you have an explanation for why the SEC approved a model contract yesterday using near-identical language?
Did you read any of the house settlement agreement? If you did you would know the answer to that question.
Yes. On what page is the language invalidating the Big Ten's model contract being discussed in the links I provided? On what page is this portion of text that says when a Big Ten school participates in revenue sharing payments to players, it's not NIL, but when the SEC participates in revenue sharing payments to players, it is?
I’m not your paralegal. You can read the agreement and get back to me. And at no point did I say anything about invalidating “the Big 10 model”. This is my direct quote:
“You do know you linked 3 articles that are dated before the official start of the house settlement agreement? These contracts were all pretty much blown up as of June 25, 2025.”
You cited sources thinking you had a gotcha moment. Prior to a very important date. Meaning the contracts had to be retooled to fit within the new framework. .
You said the contracts referenced in the articles (the Big Ten model NIL revenue sharing contract) I provided were "all pretty much blown up as of June 25, 2025." I asked you why you believed that. You said it was in the settlement agreement. Since the document approving the settlement agreement is 76 pages long, I asked you to provide the page number of the language that "pretty much blew up" these contracts. You responded by telling me to find it myself.
Now, I already know you're wrong, so I'm not asking you to provide this information because I think you have discovered something nobody else is aware of (including the Big Ten and SEC school presidents). I'm asking you to provide this information because I'm mocking you and allowing you to demonstrate to the remainder of the message board that you have no idea what you are talking about.
Everyone involved (except for Caliknight's expert insiders) is referring to these revenue sharing payments as "NIL payments" for an important reason. This is because if everyone involved does not agree that they are NIL Payments, then a legitimate legal argument can be made that these players are school employees and that opens up a humongous can of worms that nobody on the university-side of the issue wants to deal with or acknowledge. Hell, a legitimate legal argument can still be made that these players are employees even if both sides of the contract agree that they are not NIL (publicity) payments. But that doesn't change the fact that these payments are being referred to by the schools and the players as revenue sharing NIL payments (including as recently as yesterday when the SEC chose that language). It's not my fault you followed the know-nothing traveling clown show.
Yea I’m wrong. Show me one place where I’ve been wrong. You have been wrong multiple times in this thread. Stop digging dude. You hit water. You are showing that you didn’t read the findings or the contracts themselves. Because they have very specific language showing regarding what you are implying.
Again you are “implying” what I meant by blowing up the contracts. Just like how you didn’t mean anything nefarious when you said “cook the books”.
I'm having a hard time finding one assertion you made that is actually correct.
Now I know you’re an attorney. I haven’t said much at all. You keep inferring (falsely) or implying what I meant.You don’t know where I stand on any of this. I could be siding with you.Hahaha. Explain to me what the rev share is?
Last edited:
Where’s the ZINN bucks??? Where’s the money…
Until someone (Zinn) proves otherwise, we don’t have the $$$$$$$$
Until someone (Zinn) proves otherwise, we don’t have the $$$$$$$$
This argument is pedantic (not an attorney but I can use fancy words too).
University payments to student athlete's are for use of the athlete's NIL.
Technically they are "NIL payments".
The cap on these NIL payments is calculated based on revenue generated by certain universities (P4 schools).
So correct, they are revenue based NIL payments.
However, colloquially (
) these payments are just referred to as "Revenue Sharing".
This is to easily distinguish from "3rd Party NIL" agreements between the athlete and a non-university entity.
These agreements are monitored by the CSC and are uncapped.
This is where the discrepancy in "Total Roster Cost" comes from.
Revenue Share + NIL = TRC
Revenue Share is nearly equal among the B1G and most other P4 schools.
However, 3rd Party NIL (or "fundraising") is where Rutgers (and others) get left behind.
University payments to student athlete's are for use of the athlete's NIL.
Technically they are "NIL payments".
The cap on these NIL payments is calculated based on revenue generated by certain universities (P4 schools).
So correct, they are revenue based NIL payments.
However, colloquially (
) these payments are just referred to as "Revenue Sharing".This is to easily distinguish from "3rd Party NIL" agreements between the athlete and a non-university entity.
These agreements are monitored by the CSC and are uncapped.
This is where the discrepancy in "Total Roster Cost" comes from.
Revenue Share + NIL = TRC
Revenue Share is nearly equal among the B1G and most other P4 schools.
However, 3rd Party NIL (or "fundraising") is where Rutgers (and others) get left behind.
Did Schiano raise any money previously?
Do you believe Zinn is raising less money than Schiano? Such as $0?
If yes, then why is Schiano allowing such a situation and not taking back the NIL fundraising himself?
If Schiano is so great, then surely you must trust his judgement to step back and let Zinn do the fundraising.
The media refers to it all as NIL out of laziness because they don't want to write both pieces in every article or comment they make. That said, they are still two different buckets of funds (one funded by the university and the other funded by businesses and subject to review by the clearinghouse).
Ding ding ding. That’s why I asked him to read the settlement agreement. The university sides represents the athletes portion of the outside contracts they have. And the athletes are being compensated for their use of Name Image Likeness as part of the settlement agreement. Thought it was all cleared up when he posted the Minnesota scholarship article.
Posed that question multiple times. Schiano wouldn’t have glazed Kelli prior to the season if she didn’t deliver. And he would be screaming from the mountain tops if the reported numbers weren’t true.
Latest
-
01
The Knight Report
Rutgers vs. Maryland Preview: Early Thoughts on the Terps - TKR Pod
-
02
The Knight Report
Join The Knight Report TODAY and get it for 60% off!
-
03
On3 Football
Report: NIL payments put future of EA Sports College Football in jeopardy
-
04
The Knight Report
Rutgers Football HC Greg Schiano talks Maryland game week
-
05
The Knight Report Football
ESPN FPI projects Rutgers Football's 2026 schedule - Week Seven