It’s a good thing we are teaching the yutes that contracts are
Completely worthless. Bodes well for the future
49 Replies
6mo
of which drives an individual's behavior.
(In response to this post by fordham)
6mo
Break a contract, pay a penalty. If there is no penalty, then was there ever really a contract?
(In response to this post by fordham)
6mo
The extension. Facts matter totally different situation
(In response to this post by AirborneHokie96)
6mo
"Lane Kiffin contract details
Kiffin's current contract with Ole Miss runs through Dec. 31, 2030. According to USA Today's list of coaching salaries, Kiffin makes $9 million annually. He is eligible for a max of $2.6 million in bonuses during the 2025 season.
Per the database, Kiffin's buyout is $36.6 million.
The way that Kiffin's contract is structured gives him an automatic one-year extension if his team reaches seven wins. This happened last season when the Rebels beat Arkansas last November to reach seven wins"
Another link saying it automatically extended to 2031.
https://www.clarionledger.com/story/sports/college/ole-mi...
** Edited by reestuart at 1/28/2026, 9:37:17 AM
Link:
Joey Freshwater
(In response to this post by fordham)
6mo
Not have that language in his contract
(In response to this post by NokieHokie)
6mo
at all for either side.
** Edited by reestuart at 1/28/2026, 10:53:41 AM
(In response to this post by fordham)
6mo
try to move the goal posts now that you were exposed...
(In response to this post by fordham)
6mo
On lanes contract length. From what I have heard reported there was no out clause in men’s as
(In response to this post by NokieHokie)
6mo
(In response to this post by fordham)
6mo
Contracts are not slave labor, candidate needed to file his intent to void the agreeement and follow arbitration, the agent didnt do it,. THe parties negotiated arbitration and settlement. That was signed before.
For Clemson, alot of the problem with the player leaving for Ole Miss, Clemson is new to NIL and did not have solid contract and expectations and solid NIL office. With vulnerabilities in documents, agents will take advantage. Thatis why VT NIL (and Franklin had it at PSU).
Nothing personal, its business for all arrangements.. more than just signing a scholarship
(In response to this post by fordham)
6mo
(In response to this post by 1947Sunbowl)
6mo
don't care about.
(In response to this post by MP4VT2004)
6mo
But I'm mostly here because I enjoy the TSL community.
(In response to this post by BG Hokie)
2
2hhoop3
6mo
boil down to a lot more money above the table in public view. The way it used to be was less money, mostly cash and out of public view under the table.
(In response to this post by MP4VT2004)
6mo
When players had to sit out a year after transferring, you didn't see anything close to the current volume of annual roster raiding.
College football could have survived the portal with no NIL. Or it could have survived NIL with no portal. The current bubble is completely unsustainable and when it ends, a lot of irreparable damage will have been done to the sport. One could argue it already has.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
6mo
Major college sports has been a business longer than you have likely been alive
(In response to this post by MP4VT2004)
E
EDGEMAN
6mo
..."slave labor?"
If so, then sign everyone up to receive "slave wages."
(In response to this post by 1947Sunbowl)
6mo
He makes more income than .005 of population but assumes most of the nation's wealth
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
6mo
And took on a lot of risk to do it and if they fail they lose it all. That is the problem saying business owners are paid too much. They take on all the risk. Alot of the population will not take on the risk
(In response to this post by 1947Sunbowl)
6mo
SpaceX had and still has utterly zero risk. Even in its startup days, Elon did nothing and was set to walk away from it all within a week if the government didn't give him billions in tax payer dollars. You should read the legal documents and the minutes from various senate meetings with John McCain before you talk about "taking on risk." Same with Starlink. He just invaded the federal government and fired everyone in any agency that was posing risk to Tesla (and there were SIGNIFICANT SIGINIFICANT risks that would result in billions in fines and potentially shut down the government).
Amazon was started with another "small loan" from Bezos's parents. There was almost 0 risk.
As a general matter, laws are structured so that companies have not taken on "true" risk for a long time. Laws and regulations allow and, actually, support this through various corporate-friendly hiring and firing laws, which limit exposure and risk (likewise on bankruptcy). Please read relevant information and articles before we chastise young men while glorifying companies that took on zero risk to squeeze workers out of their money and charge "rents" to absorb more "profit."
Not saying that young men shouldn't learn the value of honor. But America gave up on honor a long, long, long time ago. These "kids" learned the game; they aren't making the rules.
(In response to this post by fordham)
6mo
(In response to this post by fordham)
E
EDGEMAN
6mo
Are you also saying they're getting paid "slave wages?"
(In response to this post by 1947Sunbowl)
6mo
is just as likely to pull payments and cancel with no notice as a guy is to enter the transfer portal.
(In response to this post by fordham)
6mo
With half a brain can figure that out
(In response to this post by reestuart)
6mo
They didn't want to treat them as employees and now they have to deal with the legal ramifications of independent contractors walking around...just like in the real world.
(In response to this post by fordham)
6mo
Athletes employees ? If so then why would an employee pay tuition? But even making only the athletes employees means tuitions would have to increase to massive amounts and or state funding go way way way up. Employees are very expensive in benefits alone. Never mind the salaries
(In response to this post by AirborneHokie96)
6mo
It happens.
Yes, employee benefits are expensive but so are coaching buyouts and Athletic Department staff making 6 figures and coaches making 7 figures.
There is enough money to pay the student athletes as employees.
(In response to this post by fordham)
6mo
And the costs would make any college sports not possible as most schools would have to drop out
(In response to this post by AirborneHokie96)
6mo
Athletic Department salaries need to be reduced. NCAA Football needs to get inline with NFL pay "standards" where NFL players receive nearly half of all revenue (48%). Every team’s payroll is built directly from that revenue share.
Player salaries typically total $250–$300M per team per year. Meanwhile, most teams spend $20–$35M on coaches and football staff combined.
For college, for over a century, players received no salary and no share of TV or ticket revenue.
Where did the money go?
Head coaches: $5–$12M
Coordinators: $1–$3M
Strength staff: $500k–$1M
Recruiting departments + analysts: millions more
Many Power Five programs spend $25–$40M+ annually on non‑player payroll alone.
Even with NIL, most player compensation comes from third‑party collectives, not schools so the schools still still spend far more on coaches than athletes.
Result:
College football’s cost structure is built around expensive adults, not players.
(In response to this post by fordham)
2
2hhoop3
6mo
is a perfect example of what happens when a business model is subsidized and artificially propped up with other advantages. What is going on now only partially addresses the subsidization and artificial props and is in reality more a redistribution of revenue from one area of the business to another.
(In response to this post by AirborneHokie96)
6mo
** Edited by reestuart at 1/28/2026, 11:42:18 AM
(In response to this post by fordham)
6mo
The money that schools have is typically earmarked for specific things... they may have a substantial endowment, but can't use that money for certain things... and they may have an athletic department flush with cash and a coach that makes >$5M while their academic departments are poor and are being consolidated or canned altogether. Or some departments are wealthy while others are broke - and faculty in some disciplines make hundreds of thousands while those in others make peanuts. It's a mess.
The way money flows into and around universities is really, really complicated.
(In response to this post by reestuart)
6mo
They have a ton of ways to "hide" the money legally. By funneling money through booster organizations, the schools only have to report the revenue passed through. If the booster organization doesn't send all money they collect to the athletic department, then it isn't revenue. They want to keep revenue/expenses as close to even as possible, so they can beg for more.
(In response to this post by DurhamHokie)
2
2hhoop3
6mo
current employee discussion and also to yesterday's Rutgers story is another potential imbalance. In that story it was reported that fringes(health and retirement) constituted 79.2% of salary due to the NJ situation. If players become employees that likely creates a whole other concern and cost to be tackled. This situation is likely to get worse, maybe much worse, before it gets worked out.
(In response to this post by fordham)
6mo
And in some states graduate students are unionizing to get more pay + benefits and it now costs so much for a faculty member to support one that they just won't do it. It's cheaper in the end to hire a technician.
In this example, I worry these 'greedy' graduate students are pricing themselves out of existence... and perhaps less well-funded football schools will have the same problem, not being able to afford this pay-to-play model.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
S
saret
6mo
will NOT be considered employees.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
6mo
I was aware of that. My question was asked with an eye toward if it became a federal determination how that might impact things? We are fortunate so far that the Virginia cost structure is not significantly out of control like New Jersey.
(In response to this post by saret)
S
saret
6mo
@fordham .
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
6mo
this situation is like an onion or an old house restoration. Every time you peel another layer something else jumps out at you. I find the Rutgers situation really interesting. I realize that in the grand scheme of New Jersey corruption and fiscal mismanagement RU may be down the list but, a $500MM+ deficit is still real money and based on the AD's comments I do not believe they can see the bottom of the hole even if their contention that it will eventually not grow as fast proves to be true. A contention, I might add, that I view with skepticism.
(In response to this post by saret)
6mo
(In response to this post by reestuart)