By Kevin Lonnquist
Publisher
Now the RJB knows what Johnny Cash meant in his song, “I’ve been everywhere’’.
But while most of us associate that country song with the late great man in black, who covered it, it had actually been recorded by the Australian country star Geoff Mack in 1959.
When the song was offered to American markets in 1962, it exploded with popularity.
And this song is interchangeable. All artists have to do is switch out cities in one country for cities in another. There are versions in Australia, the United States, Great Britain and Ireland and New Zealand. Even Texas has one.
Finally, off the road for being gone six of the last seven days, the RJB gives you the most popular USA rendition of this hit.
*****
Just a note of thanks for your patience with me throughout the last week with traveling between Pittsburgh and then to Fayettville. It’s good be home. And I do appreciate your kinds notes on Kathleen.
The smile on her face on the picture I shared when she received her degree was filled with the satisfaction of knowing she saw something through to the end, relief that she endured the struggles to get there and accomplishment that this is something no one take away from her.
By the way, I don’t know about you but when I graduated from SMU, I was ready to get out into the world. I was over it with college. Loved my experience but it was time.
Now it’s back to regular schedule. Hope to build up again on the content as the week progresses with more Baylor coaching stops etc. recruiting targets and everything else that comes with this venture.
*****
But let’s dive into this week’s column regarding the NIL and the NCAA’s attempt at putting the tube back in the toothpaste.
We’re about seven weeks away from the one-year anniversary. It began July 1, 2021, and basically gave student-athletes the freedom to sell their name, image and likeness to anyone for a price to endorse a product or service.
There were weak guidelines the NCAA issued when this became a thing. Why? Well, as we know the NCAA was pretty much hammered in court over this with the Ed O’Bannon case.
Of course, when anything becomes available and there are practically no rules, the foxes get to run around in the hen house and do whatever they want.
As we have seen over these last 10-plus months the proliferation of creativity has reached a point where basketball players are allegedly using agents to broker deals for them. The reported value for some athletes is six or seven figures. However, the majority are five figures.
At one point, Baylor athletic director Mack Rhoades said there were about 307 NIL deals for student athletes across all sports within the university. That was a couple of months ago. That number is likely higher.
Coaches can’t entice recruits with NIL. Technically, the best they can do is tell them that there is the opportunity to get NIL deals should they come play football for them.
However, when this started, boosters learned they could pursue kids in a rogue manner and try and entice them to come to that school. Succinctly put, what you’re seeing now is what my alma mater SMU was doing in the 1980s when it had actual contracts with players. Pay-for-play.
This time, it’s all legal thanks to O’Bannon.
To the point about the policing this before it gets out of hand. I read the story last week where the NCAA Division I Board of Governors issued stronger guidelines that specifically said that boosters could not have any contact with prospects, their families or representatives. These booster-created companies, called collectives, would be breaking NCAA rules by enticing with contracts contingent upon that athlete attending school X.
What’s even better? The guidelines say the NCAA could pursue any school/booster which in the previous months had willfully done this. Then they admitted that it probably would be better to focus on those matters in the future rather than pursue those in the past. Why? Because the NCAA would get sued so fast its head spin and it would lose again.
Most people want to do the right thing. They want to understand the rules when something new is released. However, the NCAA launched this is in such shoot, ready, aim fashion that it led to all this confusion and chaos. They were so spooked by potential lawsuits that they released this with vagueness and not a clear path.
Now, outgoing president Mark Emmert, conference commissioners and other leadership are asking for the federal government to bail them out of the mess they created.
Indeed, moving forward there should be some clearly defined consequences for anyone contacting recruits to entice them to come to a school to play.
I guess I was a bit naïve about this last year when I thought that all the deals would come after a talented athlete would arrive on campus instead of these deals being leveraged to bring them on board.
The money and the terms of any deal can’t be enforced. That goes against free enterprise. And the number of deals crafted are off limits as well.
I understand how coaches in G5 schools would feel like the separation between them and P5 schools would widen. I don’t think it will. I think it will look the same. There are just recruits that are G5 material and those who are P5 material. The rub might between the borderline G5/P5 player. The pre-contact by power G5 school boosters vs. lower P5 school boosters – say like SMU going after the same player that Kansas is – could help that G5 school especially if there’s a chance it thinks it can get into the round of realignment.
Of course, we know that the bigger issue is when Baylor and Texas or LSU and South Carolina or USC and Arizona are going after the same player. That’s where the resources become a factor.
I’ll put it to you this way…if I can easily DM recruits on Twitter simply asking what they think of Baylor and why are they strongly considering the Bears, then there’s a person involved in a collective who has already done about 100x more than what I’ve done.
With all of these guidelines, the only value I see to them is to create a more even recruiting playing field until signing day and keep the boosters on the sidelines in the process.
Is it going to work? I have no idea. I have my doubts because there’s always a fringe group of powerful wealthy alums – and keep in mind these collectives have also given access to the middle-class alums to become involved – who are so consumed about their program winning big, they’ll burn the energy to exploit every loophole.
Then we’re back to the drawing board where the NCAA is chasing its tail…because of what it did.
****
Now, let’s take a look at other Baylor sports…
>A reminder to check this link for all of the men’s tennis and track and field results from this past weekend at the Big 12 meet in Lubbock.
>(RELEASE) FORT COLLINS, Colo. – Baylor softball was selected as the No. 2 seed in the 2022 National Invitational Softball Championship (NISC) that will take place in Fort Collins, Colo., as announced by tournament officials Sunday May 15th.
All games will take place at the TC Colorado Field, just outside the offices of Triple Crown Sports in Fort Collins. The NISC began in 2017 and ran through 2019 before stepping aside for two years because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The top four seeds have a first-round bye and will start on Saturday, May 21. Virginia (27-24) is the No. 1 seed for the 2022 NISC, with Baylor (28-24) chosen as the No. 2 seed, UNLV (38-13) seeded third and Central Arkansas (35-20 as the No. 4 seed.
Here is the remainder of the field:
No. 5 George Washington (36-15)
No. 6 North Alabama (38-18)
No. 7 Rutgers (25-28)
No. 8 Stephen F. Austin (31-25)
No. 9 Bowling Green (32-19)
No. 10 UC San Diego (27-26)
No. 11 Tarleton State (29-23)
No. 12 Kansas (16-34)
Teams had to have an RPI in the national top 100 or have a winning record if its RPI was greater than 100. Conference record, results against the RPI Top 50, last 10 games, notable wins, upset losses and player injuries also were taken into consideration.
This will mark Baylor's first trip to the NISC tournament, as it was established five years ago. The tournament includes four Power 5 schools and eight mid-majors. After the first-round bye, Baylor will take on the winner of Rutgers versus UC San Diego.
The event concludes with the Championship Round on May 25-26, with the last four teams competing for the title.
>Johnny Keefer will represent Baylor men's golf as the No. 1 seed at Jimmie Austin Golf Club in the Norman Regional beginning Monday at 9:50 a.m.
The San Antonio native is coming off a stellar season, entering the postseason as the No. 17th ranked individual according to Golfstat, making him the top individual seed at Jimmie Austin Golf Club.
Let’s make it a great week!
Publisher
Now the RJB knows what Johnny Cash meant in his song, “I’ve been everywhere’’.
But while most of us associate that country song with the late great man in black, who covered it, it had actually been recorded by the Australian country star Geoff Mack in 1959.
When the song was offered to American markets in 1962, it exploded with popularity.
And this song is interchangeable. All artists have to do is switch out cities in one country for cities in another. There are versions in Australia, the United States, Great Britain and Ireland and New Zealand. Even Texas has one.
Finally, off the road for being gone six of the last seven days, the RJB gives you the most popular USA rendition of this hit.
*****
Just a note of thanks for your patience with me throughout the last week with traveling between Pittsburgh and then to Fayettville. It’s good be home. And I do appreciate your kinds notes on Kathleen.
The smile on her face on the picture I shared when she received her degree was filled with the satisfaction of knowing she saw something through to the end, relief that she endured the struggles to get there and accomplishment that this is something no one take away from her.
By the way, I don’t know about you but when I graduated from SMU, I was ready to get out into the world. I was over it with college. Loved my experience but it was time.
Now it’s back to regular schedule. Hope to build up again on the content as the week progresses with more Baylor coaching stops etc. recruiting targets and everything else that comes with this venture.
*****
But let’s dive into this week’s column regarding the NIL and the NCAA’s attempt at putting the tube back in the toothpaste.
We’re about seven weeks away from the one-year anniversary. It began July 1, 2021, and basically gave student-athletes the freedom to sell their name, image and likeness to anyone for a price to endorse a product or service.
There were weak guidelines the NCAA issued when this became a thing. Why? Well, as we know the NCAA was pretty much hammered in court over this with the Ed O’Bannon case.
Of course, when anything becomes available and there are practically no rules, the foxes get to run around in the hen house and do whatever they want.
As we have seen over these last 10-plus months the proliferation of creativity has reached a point where basketball players are allegedly using agents to broker deals for them. The reported value for some athletes is six or seven figures. However, the majority are five figures.
At one point, Baylor athletic director Mack Rhoades said there were about 307 NIL deals for student athletes across all sports within the university. That was a couple of months ago. That number is likely higher.
Coaches can’t entice recruits with NIL. Technically, the best they can do is tell them that there is the opportunity to get NIL deals should they come play football for them.
However, when this started, boosters learned they could pursue kids in a rogue manner and try and entice them to come to that school. Succinctly put, what you’re seeing now is what my alma mater SMU was doing in the 1980s when it had actual contracts with players. Pay-for-play.
This time, it’s all legal thanks to O’Bannon.
To the point about the policing this before it gets out of hand. I read the story last week where the NCAA Division I Board of Governors issued stronger guidelines that specifically said that boosters could not have any contact with prospects, their families or representatives. These booster-created companies, called collectives, would be breaking NCAA rules by enticing with contracts contingent upon that athlete attending school X.
What’s even better? The guidelines say the NCAA could pursue any school/booster which in the previous months had willfully done this. Then they admitted that it probably would be better to focus on those matters in the future rather than pursue those in the past. Why? Because the NCAA would get sued so fast its head spin and it would lose again.
Most people want to do the right thing. They want to understand the rules when something new is released. However, the NCAA launched this is in such shoot, ready, aim fashion that it led to all this confusion and chaos. They were so spooked by potential lawsuits that they released this with vagueness and not a clear path.
Now, outgoing president Mark Emmert, conference commissioners and other leadership are asking for the federal government to bail them out of the mess they created.
Indeed, moving forward there should be some clearly defined consequences for anyone contacting recruits to entice them to come to a school to play.
I guess I was a bit naïve about this last year when I thought that all the deals would come after a talented athlete would arrive on campus instead of these deals being leveraged to bring them on board.
The money and the terms of any deal can’t be enforced. That goes against free enterprise. And the number of deals crafted are off limits as well.
I understand how coaches in G5 schools would feel like the separation between them and P5 schools would widen. I don’t think it will. I think it will look the same. There are just recruits that are G5 material and those who are P5 material. The rub might between the borderline G5/P5 player. The pre-contact by power G5 school boosters vs. lower P5 school boosters – say like SMU going after the same player that Kansas is – could help that G5 school especially if there’s a chance it thinks it can get into the round of realignment.
Of course, we know that the bigger issue is when Baylor and Texas or LSU and South Carolina or USC and Arizona are going after the same player. That’s where the resources become a factor.
I’ll put it to you this way…if I can easily DM recruits on Twitter simply asking what they think of Baylor and why are they strongly considering the Bears, then there’s a person involved in a collective who has already done about 100x more than what I’ve done.
With all of these guidelines, the only value I see to them is to create a more even recruiting playing field until signing day and keep the boosters on the sidelines in the process.
Is it going to work? I have no idea. I have my doubts because there’s always a fringe group of powerful wealthy alums – and keep in mind these collectives have also given access to the middle-class alums to become involved – who are so consumed about their program winning big, they’ll burn the energy to exploit every loophole.
Then we’re back to the drawing board where the NCAA is chasing its tail…because of what it did.
****
Now, let’s take a look at other Baylor sports…
>A reminder to check this link for all of the men’s tennis and track and field results from this past weekend at the Big 12 meet in Lubbock.
>(RELEASE) FORT COLLINS, Colo. – Baylor softball was selected as the No. 2 seed in the 2022 National Invitational Softball Championship (NISC) that will take place in Fort Collins, Colo., as announced by tournament officials Sunday May 15th.
All games will take place at the TC Colorado Field, just outside the offices of Triple Crown Sports in Fort Collins. The NISC began in 2017 and ran through 2019 before stepping aside for two years because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The top four seeds have a first-round bye and will start on Saturday, May 21. Virginia (27-24) is the No. 1 seed for the 2022 NISC, with Baylor (28-24) chosen as the No. 2 seed, UNLV (38-13) seeded third and Central Arkansas (35-20 as the No. 4 seed.
Here is the remainder of the field:
No. 5 George Washington (36-15)
No. 6 North Alabama (38-18)
No. 7 Rutgers (25-28)
No. 8 Stephen F. Austin (31-25)
No. 9 Bowling Green (32-19)
No. 10 UC San Diego (27-26)
No. 11 Tarleton State (29-23)
No. 12 Kansas (16-34)
Teams had to have an RPI in the national top 100 or have a winning record if its RPI was greater than 100. Conference record, results against the RPI Top 50, last 10 games, notable wins, upset losses and player injuries also were taken into consideration.
This will mark Baylor's first trip to the NISC tournament, as it was established five years ago. The tournament includes four Power 5 schools and eight mid-majors. After the first-round bye, Baylor will take on the winner of Rutgers versus UC San Diego.
The event concludes with the Championship Round on May 25-26, with the last four teams competing for the title.
>Johnny Keefer will represent Baylor men's golf as the No. 1 seed at Jimmie Austin Golf Club in the Norman Regional beginning Monday at 9:50 a.m.
The San Antonio native is coming off a stellar season, entering the postseason as the No. 17th ranked individual according to Golfstat, making him the top individual seed at Jimmie Austin Golf Club.
Let’s make it a great week!
