PDB26

Again, this is all based on my recollection, but the definition I gave for wealth is the rule for the federal interpretation of income. I imagine all the states subscribe to the same general idea of income. So far as gifts are concerned (labeling error when working on my previous post), the gift exemption, or loophole in this case, requires the donor not to have an interest in the donee doing something or having done something. So, athletes are getting income under the federal definition regardless of who it’s coming from. You’re right, the Mississippi legislation will have no effect on federal income tax. So far as getting on level footing with no-income-tax states is concerned, I think it’s fair to say they are, although I think it’s also a negligible difference in most cases given that most jurisdictions have fairly marginal state income tax.

As best I can recall, NIL money fits neatly within the definition of income, essentially a gain in wealth that you have control over. This would include money from NIL groups and donors, which I doubt sufficiently fit within the gift exemptions. I think, again as best as I can recall, that a gift for a non-family member will face higher scrutiny and there is a requirement for the donee to have a disinterest in the beneficiary, clearly not the case when trying to induce an athlete to play at your school.

Granted, but it's not much different than a lot of ACC and Big 12 schedules, nor is it all that different from some Big Ten schedules––Penn State comes to mind. SC could easily have five losses going into week 12, and it's possible that BYU is the better team head to head. Under the current circumstances of bloated conferences and, likely, an ever-expanding playoff, the most ND needs from SC is to fill a week on the schedule. Notre Dame needs to be 11-1 or 12-0 to get into the playoff which isn't all that dissimilar from previous formats. I think college football needs games like ND vs. SC more than either of these two need the game and both programs choosing to walk away from the rivalry demonstrates that clearly.

Neither team needs the other right now, which is why both teams were able to walk away. The relationship would carry more risk for SC in many years while not playing exposes ND to more risk should they lose more than once. Big 12 and ACC membership doesn’t confer much of a benefit except in years where the conference champions get a bid, which puts ND basically in the same position as all of those programs.

Just a classic barely-professional hockey promo night.

There’s a dad who knows how the DIII football sausage is made.

I guess I wouldn’t be too bothered; at least 4v4 occurs with regularity in the game. There is no way OT gets through one period at 4v4, and the odds of the game coming down to a bad line change probably drop significantly.

Love the result but it’s insane to play 3v3 OT in medal rounds, especially in the women’s game where a defender is already at a huge disadvantage 1v1.

The article said IU distributed the maximum rev-share amount, so the players coming in won’t make any difference against the athletic department’s ledger.

I imagine it comes down to whether one puts rev share in the financial assistance (equity) or the program benefit (equality) bucket.

It looks like 17 teams won ten or more in 2024 as well. I wonder if that number goes down now that the SEC will play nine league games and LSU has solved their BK problem. Though inevitable, engineering the playoff format so that the fewest number of “good” teams are left out is a mistake. Lots of whining, crying, and tinfoil hat wearing after the selection of the playoff field, but of all the teams whose bubbles burst this year, only Texas had a win—multiple—over playoff teams.

@Coach Nowlin I don’t think the jerseys are Nike’s and others’ property at that point, and they would be unlikely to have any say in additional sponsors on the jersey short of a competitor’s mark or something potentially damaging to the marketing rights they’ve secured in the agreement appearing on the uniform. They could negotiate with athletic departments to limit additional sponsors if they wanted to, but I’m fairly certain this is all depends on the terms of individual contracts. It’s possible, however unlikely it might be, that there are deals out there already that restrict additional sponsors appearing on the uniform.

No surprise half the teams went through a coaching change/mass import this cycle. Also interesting, the On3/rivals algorithm actually has IU at #1, for what that’s worth.

I guess it shouldn’t be too surprising that the media has glommed onto this story now. To me, it illustrates the difference between the coaches and the fans/media. Some thoughts: 1. 1/3 of all portal entrants are grads, and there has been a clear preference to take developed players to plug gaps on rosters. 2. coaches would always prefer to be as old as possible without sacrificing production—no college team needs to get younger if they’re trying to compete. IU’s roster build isn’t some novel approach. 3. I’d wager that the teams that recruit the most portal guys will naturally skew older. 4. I’d wager that the national champion has typically been among the oldest teams each year. 5. IU’s story confuses people, and the relative age of the roster has been put forward as a novel and simple explanation as a media product. 6. it is easier to get older during transition periods and most likely to happen at places where the program has been moribund. 7. Cignetti and staff deserve a ton of credit for player evaluation and culture building.

Inevitable. The only question is: will there be more than one major program that passes up the opportunity?

Definitely easier to have the alternating home/away structure.

Nice idea. Coin toss for H/A.

Yes, and the SEC wants 16. So if the SEC and B1G can’t agree on how next to try and ruin the sport, my hope is that the playoff field will stay fixed at 12.

I hope the Big Ten and SEC stick to their guns for a long time so that this thing stays at 12.

I’ve always believed that pass interference could and should be much more objectively officiated than it is.

I'm not going to say that IU's schedule is easier next year, but going to Autzen, Beaver Stadium, and Kinnick gives the '25 schedule a different feel to me. Unless next year's team isn't up to Cignetti's standard, Northwestern and Minnesota at home will be a splattering. Similarly, I would expect IU to embarrass SC and Nebraska even if they're only as good as they were in '24.

A variation of the old 21/22 year-old freshmen college hockey strategy. I think it will be much harder to pull off in football.

I think it’s because athlete employment is the necessary condition to a hypothetical P4 breakaway.

They don’t even need to start earlier. The problems are two: 1) the conference championship games exist, and 2) playoff expansion to 16 or more is inevitable.