Unverified Voracity Waits For Franz
RIP baseball. It was fun!
Memories that will last a lifetime.
— Michigan Baseball (@umichbaseball) June 27, 2019
We are so proud of #Team153! pic.twitter.com/faayUvnYz8
Franz time. Alba Berlin's season is over, and now FranzWatch begins.
Last thing I was told by someone close to Franz Wagner is that he's still undecided. He's supposed to sit down with his family. A decision should be made "very soon."
— Brendan Quinn (@BFQuinn) June 24, 2019
Franz would obviously be a big deal, especially as he's started to become a real contributor to Alba:
Here's Franz Wagner, not your typical 17-year-old, scoring 14 points on 100% shooting in Game 2 of the BBL finals against an Euroleague team in Bayern Munich. He also hit a couple of clutch shots in the 4th quarter. Not afraid of the moment. pic.twitter.com/fGGTwpT11R
— NBADraftProspects (@draftprosnba) June 21, 2019
As a reminder, this is a league where a 24-year-old Derrick Walton can't get on the court. Wagner is reportedly up to 6'9" and headed for the first round of the draft. He would be a gamechanger for Juwan Howard's first team.
[After THE JUMP: keeping various baseball persons]
Also in recruiting. 2020 GA C Walker Kessler's eliminated Georgia, his ancestral homestead, and seems about as interested in Michigan as he was previously:
Chatted with Woodward Center Walker Kessler for a bit after his game vs McEachern. He loves the hire of Juwan Howard at Michigan and the idea of a coach who played big with such NBA experience. He says he and his family have also decided that UGA is not a good fit for him. pic.twitter.com/2lGujhgaH0
— HoopSeen Georgia (@HoopSeenGA) June 22, 2019
That's from a Georgia-based scouting service that would have no particular reason to ask Kessler about Juwan Howard, might mean a little something.
Go, bill, go. A California bill that would restore the name and image rights of college athletes is zipping through a stunning number of committees:
Early this year, the Majority Whip of the California state Senate, Nancy Skinner, introduced the “Fair Pay to Play Act” (Senate Bill 206) which would prohibit California colleges from preventing their athletes from earning NIL money. Her bill, which quickly received bipartisan sponsorship, directly challenged the NCAA’s own NIL prohibition (more about the NCAA’s views about the bill soon). Remarkably, on May 22, the full Senate approved the bill by a lopsided margin of 31-4.
On Tuesday the first committee in the California State Assembly to consider the bill, the Arts, Entertainment, Sports, Tourism, and Internet Media Committee, approved it unanimously, 5-0. It now goes to the Higher Education Committee for a vote on July 9, and if approved then, from there to the Appropriations Committee, which if it approves, sends the bill to the floor sometime in August, or before the California legislature closes its 2019 session in mid-September.
So this thing has to get through 5 different votes and is through 2 with a total score of 36-4. It's happening. Mark Emmert roused himself from his Scrooge McDuck vault to threaten the California state government with reprisals against NCAA schools in the state, but law-talking guys say that's gonna be a no:
As a private trade association, the National Collegiate Athletic Association is generally free to adopt any bylaws that it wants. But there are two important caveats to the general principle of non-interference with trade association rules. First, a trade association such as the NCAA may not enforce any bylaw that violates federal or state law. Second, a trade association must enact its bylaws in good faith, and in compliance with the "basic rudiments of due process."
With these two caveats in mind, there is a strong argument that any attempt by the NCAA to ban California member colleges from competing in postseason events based on their compliance with state laws around names, images and likeness would violate both federal antitrust laws and state common-law rights.
The likely impact of California passing this bill would be the NCAA leaping into a lawsuit that they lose and then a cascade of identical bills across the country, followed by the Formation of the Michigan Name And Image Money Cannon Committee. LFG.
This is what we're up against. LSU doing LSU things:
An LSU booster named John Paul Funes, who pleaded guilty to stealing more than a half-million dollars from a foundation where he worked as a fundraiser, paid $180,000 to a man that Yahoo Sports confirmed on Friday is the father of former Tigers star lineman Vadal Alexander.
In federal documents, a man identified as “individual C” allegedly received “approximately $180,000 in Foundation Funds” from Funes. That man is James Alexander, the father of Vadal Alexander. His identity was first reported Thursday by the Baton Rouge Business Report.
LSU will not get meaningfully punished for this, so what's the point of banning payments only for guys who go to schools that bother to follow the rules?
Baseball retention. Eric Bakich on the inevitable rumors he's headed elsewhere:
Bakich made one thing clear after his players went through a lifting session at Creighton University on Saturday — he’s not going anywhere.
“Where am I going? You got a job? Are you hiring me? Huh?” Bakich said, laughing, before boarding the team bus and turning serious regarding his future.
“I love Michigan, and I love the Block M, and most importantly, I love the kids on that bus. I wanted to see this through. I didn’t want anyone else to coach them. I wanted to be here for this type of run. Having tasted this in 17 years, these guys have never tasted it. Once you taste it, you want it every year. Yeah, we do need some help, but I know that this is gonna get us over the hump.
"An experience like this is going to move the needle and get us over the hump to where our program is here to stay and we’re here to build.”
There's always an element of "I have to say this to recruit" in any of these statements, so don't take that as gospel. It's certain that Bakich will be around next year since the baseball coaching carousel has already come to a halt, and he's already turned down Stanford.
Also in "let's keep this guy," former Michigan pitcher and now pitching coach Chris Fetter:
Fetter thought he was well-versed on the analytical side of the game – until he joined the Dodgers. With L.A., he learned how to evaluate numbers with the most advanced technology, and has made that a focal point of the Wolverines’ pitching development.
At the time Fetter returned, U-M was in the final stages of readying the TrackMan, which measures things like spin rate and launch angle, after the legal red tape on how the information would be disseminated was unwrapped.
“With their arsenals, we just tried to build each individual player and just kind of iron those things out,” Fetter said. “Just help them understand who they are to a greater level.
“If I know what pitches I have that separate me from the average, then I should go out to the mound and be the most confident version of myself.” …
“It’s a direct correlation to having Coach Fetter working with me day-by-day,” Henry said. “I cannot stress enough how much I’ve learned from that guy. I sound like a broken record right now, but seriously, I mean every bit of it.
Fetter says "“I would love to stay here for as long as they’ll have me," and, uh, yes, here is a Ricewood coupon. Stick around.
Michigan wins Directors Cup (Non-Stanford Edition)! Just name it the Stanford Cup and give it to us.
Stanford wins 25th consecutive Directors’ Cup, signifying nation’s top athletic program.
— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) June 28, 2019
Top 20:
Stanford
Michigan
Florida
Texas
USC
UCLA
Florida State
Virginia
Duke
North Carolina
LSU
Ohio State
Penn State
Kentucky
Texas A&M
Wisconsin
Notre Dame
Cal
Arizona State
Minnesota
It is ours. Stanford does not exist. It was expunged after Ed Feng's crimes became public knowledge.
Hockey things happened. Been a while since there's been a UV, and in the interim various hockey things happened. First the NHL draft. Four guys were taken:
- D Cam York went 14th overall to the Flyers.
- F Johnny Beecher went at the tail end of the first round (30th) to Boston. That's two or three rounds higher than his CSB ranking suggested he'd go.
- 2020 G Erik Portillo went in the third round to Buffalo.
- F Eric Ciccolini went in the seventh round to the Rangers.
2020 F Austen Swankler did not get picked. Some York scouting:
FWIW, when you’re done crying over Caufield, here’s some info on Cam York. Flyers got themselves a really good player. I ain’t keeping receipts, but a lot of Flyers fans need to go rub one out & relax pic.twitter.com/O2Nb2UZqoO
— jsaquella (@jsaquella) June 22, 2019
Meanwhile Yet Another Junior Draft happened and you might be striking another name off Michigan's 2020 list. Andrei Bakanov went 38th in the CHL "import" draft. Sometimes these picks are swings in the dark but in this case it seems pretty ominous that Cedar Rapids, which signed him as a tender* last year, recently traded Bakanov to Des Moines for a single conditional draft pick.
Also in meh: distant future D commit Mats Lindgren signed with Kamloops. Connor Levis is one of four WHL first-rounders left unsigned.
*[Tender == you get to sign a guy who's a year younger than USHL draftees are. Generally reserved for high-end prospects since signing one costs you your top draft pick and you have to play the kid in 55% of your games.]
Etc.: Big year for college at the NHL draft. Nine first round picks and 71 overall. Iowa's really into falconry now you guys. Fold UConn football, which never should have existed in the first place.
I haven’t looked in a couple of months, but I don’t think Walton “can’t get on the court” in Euroleague due to play. I could be wrong, but he appears to get healthy minutes in the domestic league for Alba. The problem is that he was acquired midseason, which I think renders him ineligible for Euroleague games.
Again, I could be wrong here, but I think that’s the situation.
The likely impact of California passing this bill would be the NCAA leaping into a lawsuit that they lose and then a cascade of identical bills across the country, followed by the Formation of the Michigan Name And Image Money Cannon Committee. LFG.
From your computer to Gods ear.
So then what happens? Agents and boosters funnel thousands of dollars through student athlete NIL fronts making the NCAA the new NBA/NFL/NHL/MLB JV League?
Edit: Not trying to be a jackass just trying to understand what it's ultimately going to do to the college sports I love.
The NCAA is already the thing you fear it is going to become.
Agreed. Even the pro sports have caps on spending. Let’s say you allow unfettered Likeness money. You know damn well the boosters will flow cash through. So what, it becomes a spending war for all of these guys and the school with the most money wins. Screw that. I’m not saying I oppose the kids getting some money but it has to be capped or somehow regulated.
LFG may be the dumbest thing this site has promoted since Seth’s Penn State excuses t-shirt. It’s an abbreviation for “lose football games.” If you put a roomful of Spartans and Buckeyes in front of typewriters, they are eventually going to figure that out.
false. you have an incorrect and bad opinion
This is a stupid take. You should feel bad.
The NCAA needs California more than California needs the NCAA.
This law will get things changing much quicker than before. I'm all for it.
"The NCAA needs California more than California needs the NCAA."
This is legitimately the dumbest thing I've read on this site in at least a month.
Yeah no. Your steroids take is the dumbest shit I've read all day.
California schools will be just fine attracting athletes who want to get paid for their work. They can set up their own league. The NCAA is toothless and won't do shit about it.
WE ARE ALL FANS OF THE SAME TEAM.
Last I checked the Rose Bowl is in California. Therefore, the NCAA needs California.
I fail to see how this matters. Just because USC/UCLA/Cal/Stanford/etc. couldn't participate in the rose bowl, shouldn't mean that the venue couldn't host the game.
Similarly, the Staples Center could still host NCAA tournament games I would think.
Are these people real?
Your understanding of government seems off if you believe a private organization not being able to supersede a state's laws is the wrong outcome here.
It's been shown time and time again that the NCAA can't enforce it's own rules. Bagmen rule the landscape and the NCAA can't be bothered to do anything. They're happy to continue collecting money.
This is probably going to be like weed legalization or any number of other political substances that start at the state level. California will be first, but a landslide of other states will follow and the NCAA won't be able to do anything but change their ways
I agree with this take... The NCAA will be like the feds fighting a losing battle against cannabis legalization. The schools in Cali are public institutions. They have to pay a little bit of attention to state laws considering they are funded, in part, by state tax money. What is fair generally wins out in the long run. The NCAA could try to take a hard line, which they have never done, ever, but what happens if they do? The California public institutions are no longer able to compete in NCAA sanctioned events? Or, they need to violate state law in order to take part?
Ask Nebraska how much keeping cannabis illegal has benefited their state. It's a matter of time. Same principle applies here.
What the fuck does the NCAA have to do with the functionality of our government?
The NCAA is to state colleges paying players as the federal government is to states legalizing pot. A bloated, corrupt, greedy, bullshit institution enforcing rules people don't agree with will give way to a reasonable solution. The NCAA won't have to advocate paying players, they will tacitly agree to it out of necessity which saves face on all sides.
This comment is so dumb that I’m not sure if you’re serious but I’m pretty sure you’re serious. It’s either A+ level trolling or just really really dumb.
This is the clearly sarcastic take I was looking for
The NCAA isn't "the government."
Thank God.
Thought this was poorly constructed sarcasm, but then I read some of your previous comments. Downvote away folks
I logged in just to down vote you.
I'm obviously missing something in this argument.
California can pass their law and that prevents their schools from punishing players who profit from their likeness. It can't bar the NCAA from punishing them.
If they truly want to force the NCAA to change, why not coordinate with other state legislatures? Unless other states quickly follow suit, they're inviting a protracted battle in court they may well lose.
I can just see the legislatures of a few states going a step further. What if Kentucky and Alabama pass a law that Power 5 football and basketball players in their state must be paid a minimum salary? Does the NCAA have to go along with that too?
That's what I don't get either. There is no constitutional right that demands that California schools be allowed to participate in NCAA sanctioned events....so if the NCAA bars them because it would technically be an uneven playing field if no one else (outside of the SEC) is getting paid. What exactly is the recourse that the state will have to force the NCAA to allow their athletes to get paid and play with others who don't?
Not thinking long term. If California passes this law and the NCAA tries to somehow punish schools for following the law, California courts will find against the NCAA. So assume the NCAA plays hardball and kicks every California school out of the NCAA. Since the PAC 12 is dominated by California schools the whole division would probably leave the NCAA. Now if you’re an athlete you have a choice to go to the PAC 12 that lets you benefit from your talents while the NCAA doesn’t. How do you think that is going to work out for the NCAA. The vast majority of the most talented athletes will head to the PAC 12 and they will become the dominant college experience in the country their champions will be considered the national champion and the NCAA will loose any authority it presently has as every serious athletic programs wants to level the playing field.
The PAC-12 has four California schools. That's 1/3 of the conference. It's not a foregone conclusion the rest of the conference will side with them and leave the NCAA.
I'm not really following the logic that leaving the NCAA is a brilliant strategy. They'll have dominant teams that never play anyone else. I'm not sure that will boost their revenue in any way. We'll see about that.
The NCAA won't play serious hardball, imo. They'll ban schools from post-season play rather than boot them out altogether, giving California the opportunity to rethink it's law. How easy would it be to leave the NCAA? The biggest paydays in college sports are the football playoffs and the NCAA basketball tournament. That revenue is hard to replace. Then what happens if the NCAA follows suit a couple of years later? Those schools are going to be begging to rejoin the NCAA. They go from having an advantage in attracting players to have a big disadvantage in a hurry.
Certainly, they aren't going to allow California schools an institutional advantage over everyone else. I don't believe they're going to let one state dictate their rules either. They may be widespread sentiment for change and California will be the catalyst for making it happen. But maybe not. Maybe the NCAA will find a consensus for compensating players in a somewhat different way.
You're not missing anything. You are 100% correct. The people missing things are those who think that paying players will not destroy college athletics. Yet they still insist that 18-year olds who willingily enter into an agreement for free education in exchange for athletic participation is somehow exploitative, using analogies like indentured servitude or even slavery. These athletes have an option to study hard and get into their school of choice and pay for their degree like the other 99%. No one is putting a gun to their head and making them play sports.
And Title IX looms as the biggest hurdle that exist to pay-for-play anyway. The day someone pays a football or men's basketball player on a W-2 is the same day that that same someone gets sued under Title IX.
lmao. gub'mint git off my property!
Ya know what man?
Fuck you! Take a hike!
Stop calling ANYTHING & EVERYTHING YOU don't like the thing that broke our gov't!
Asshat
Come on Franz, you'll barely even need to change your uniform. Germans love being efficient, right?
I didn't realize Wagner had such a varied skill set. In the video, he's really impressive not just shooting from the outside, but putting the ball on the floor and scoring inside as well. Ball handling looked pretty darned good for a 6-9 guy too.
He looks more and more like Mo. He has grown and can still put it on the floor with an inside outside game. He would be a critical get for next year and Juwan’s transition.
Cmon Franz!
What about Hanz? Aren't they a package deal?
Camp Sanderson - We want to pump YOU UP 
The NCAA could eliminate PAC-12 basketball from competing in the postseason and I'm sure nobody would notice.
PAC-12 basketball pretty much takes care of that itself.
If California schools allow athletes to profit from their talents where exactly do you think all the best players would be headed. California schools and probably all the PAC 12 would become the best college basketball in the country and the rest of the country would become their farm teams. You people have no imagination.
That truly is an enigma. That the west coast teams in general, blow at hoops, relatively speaking.
By your logic, if California legalized steroids, the entire country would have to legalize steroids.
If they pass this bill, California is going to get kicked out of postseason play, and that's for the best. These athletes knew they wouldn't be allowed to make money on their athletic ability when they signed up to play college sports. If they want to get paid so badly, they should go to a minor league.
I Am Not A Lawyer.
Let's say Delaware passes a law prohibiting discrimination by sports leagues on the basis of age. At that point, does the Little League World Series have to permit an entry by a Delaware team of 25-year-olds?
That...seems wrong. Is there a fundamental difference that I am missing? It seems like we are giving the power to state governments to destroy voluntary national associations by enacting laws that prohibit them from enforcing their basic bylaws.
(Note: I am all for giving NCAA athletes the right to profit from their name and likeness; I just want to understand this legal principle mentioned in the UV).
The NCAA can throw California out. In doing so it would open itself up to all sorts of antitrust lawsuits. That’s the key issue.
Yes, that certainly seems like the key issue.
So...the Little League World Series, obviously wanting to avoid getting sued just like any other reasonable organization, allows the team of 25-year-old Delawareans into the tournament. And nobody ever watches the LLWS again, for obvious reasons.
Is the Little League World Series really obligated to choose between destroying their own mission on the one hand or allowing antitrust lawsuits on the other hand? Just because the Delaware legislature passed this weird law?
I do think you are missing something here. As far as I can tell LLWS and Little League baseball do not have antitrust exempt status. Apparently the LLWS is one of 16 similar tournaments. Therefore if they don't allow a team of 25 year olds they aren't risking their protected status.
The NCAA is absolutely allowed to punish California schools. But in doing so they could lose antitrust exemption. Not only would a competing league of schools paying their players form, but the NCAA would lose a key defense against lawsuits. Eventually that competing league would overtake the NCAA in terms of revenue. So its an adapt or die thing.
No, the premise behind this argument is wrong. The NCAA is not exempt from antitrust laws.
Let’s say california pass a law against discrimination on transgender in sports. Will NCAA be forced to let anyone who identify themselves to be women compete in women’s events. Will IOC be forced to let anyone who identify themselves to be women compete in women’s events.
Some one that gets it.
This is an excellent point, and you're not missing anything. The simplest answer to your question is that the legal argument that Brian linked to isn't quite as straightforward as the law-talking guy made it seem.
Antitrust law allows for coordination between competitors in the same market when the coordination is necessary to create the market itself. College football is a good that can't exist unless all the schools got together to agree on the rules of the game. This is why we have an NCAA.
The question is which rules are necessary. In the Little League example you gave, a court would probably rule that there is no antitrust problem with excluding the Delaware team because the age rules are necessary for the good (the LLWS) to even exist in a viable form.
Lawyer guy is betting that a court would find that the NCAA rules on NIL are not necessary to create the good known as college football. Maybe he's right, but it's not a sure thing.
Thanks for this very clear response. Everything you say makes sense--more sense than the OP.
So it seems that the questions would be (a) is amateurism a fundamental part of NCAA membership and (b) is denying players NIL rights a fundamental part of amateurism?
Comments