WTKA Roundtable 2/8/2024: The Antithetical NCAA
Things Discussed:
- Clink back! Outbid Harbaugh.
- Wink Martindale: If you want a Ravens guy he invented the Amoeba. He's not young and not gonna stick around, but he holds this team together, and when he leaves he might have Clinkscale ready to take over, which he isn't now.
- Matters if he's going to take one or two jobs (IE bring his guy) on staff because they need some recruiting juice if he's going to be a Mike Macdonald-level recruiter.
- Lee Aaliya: This should be the last straw for the NCAA. NCAA strung him along for five then came up with ridiculous demands: wanted an 18-year-old to have all of his grocery receipts and pay $15,000 (was it $1500?). Jamal Crawford, Mitch McGary: The NCAA is preventing kids who want to come to Michigan FOR THE EDUCATION from coming here, and it's hard at this point not to believe it's out of hatred for Michigan. Michigan should have signed him and dared the NCAA to come after them.
- NCAA vs Everybody: Dartmouth ruling will either stick if Dems retain White House, or get overturned by federal NLRB if Reps do, because of the party differences on unions (Craig: and grift!).
- Expect to see some legislation in the near future in Southern states that protect the donors who were paying kids under the table for all these years, because they have some big tax liabilities.
[Hit the JUMP for the player, and video and stuff]
You can catch the entire episode on Michigan Insider's podcast stream.
Segment 2 is here. You can watch the video here:
The Usual Links:
- Helpful iTunes subscribe link
- General podcast feed link
-
Direct download link (right-click/save as)
- What's with the theme music?
It's clear they wanted us to sign him and fight them in court.
February 8th, 2024 at 11:15 AM ^
I don't agree with this talk of grooming Clinkscale in two years. He has been co-DC and if there was a time to be DC, its now. Some coaches are comfortable in their role and do not want the extra responsibility or accountability, but yet it seems some don't accept this and keep pushing that narrative.
February 8th, 2024 at 11:18 AM ^
Some reports suggest that he did want the role but was not ready....but then again we know nothing.
February 8th, 2024 at 11:22 AM ^
We're not in the room(s). If Sherrone thinks Clink needs more development time before being the full-time DC, then that's really the only data point we have.
February 8th, 2024 at 11:34 AM ^
You have absolutely zero knowledge how much input he had in that co-DC role. Same as the rest of us.
February 8th, 2024 at 11:50 AM ^
Well we know what Sam says. And this is how he has described the situation.
So if you're saying Sam also has zero knowledge, then ok. But is there anyone who doesn't think Sam has someone feeding him info from inside the program (for whatever their own purposes are)?
Put it this way:
At right around the same time last night one site reported Cullen was a done deal, and would be announced today.
Meanwhile Sam reported Cullen was slow playing the job, likely to wait to interview with Seattle, which he could not do before the SB. And Michigan, obviously having read all these posts & comments here, knew that they could not wait over the weekend just to be rejected again!
So let's see who, if anyone, has insider info...🤷♂️
February 8th, 2024 at 11:46 AM ^
Id imagine with Moore being a first time HC, it might help ease his worries knowing both his coordinators aren’t first time coordinators calling the shots. Minter called the shots on defense last two years, Clink didn’t and Wink has. Campbell has been an OC for programs in the past, plus our new TE coach was a OC. A year with Clink being more involved and learning will be huge. Clink has coached under McDonald and Minter, he should be ready.
February 8th, 2024 at 11:27 AM ^
Is there a reason to go with Martindale rather than Cullen who was the previous rumored candidate other than maybe Cullen is too hot a commodity right now?
February 8th, 2024 at 11:41 AM ^
Cullen has options, Wink doesn't? Might be that simple 🤷♂️
I've said this over several related threads over the past week, but coaching in the college game is distinctly less desirable than the NFL at this stage, because of the unlimited transfer portal & "NIL".
A college coach has to recruit, negotiate, close, and now re-recruit many of the players each off-season. There isn't just no off-season, there's no off day - Hell, no off second for those really tasked with crootin!
Talk was Cullen wanted play calling responsibilities, which made Michigan a better job than Seattle. But when you add in all the BS, looks like he decided taking over play calling from MM over time was a better deal than the mess they've let college get into.
And there's always the distinct possibility that Michigan was just plain outbid too! That wouldn't be surprising at all!
February 8th, 2024 at 12:05 PM ^
I don't know but am not shocked the fan uproar over Wink. They did this to a lesser extent with both MacDonald and then Minter, and were spectacularly wrong. Wink would be a good hire.
February 8th, 2024 at 12:59 PM ^
I will admit to having been concerned that Minter would be a step down from MacDonald based on the performance of his Vandy defenses (though I did leave room for the consideration that Vandy just doesn't have talent). Minter worked out substantially better than I'd hoped in the winter of 2022, and I'm not afraid to admit that.
February 8th, 2024 at 1:12 PM ^
I think there are valid concerns about the ways in which Mac and Minter evolved Wink's base defense. He blitzes a lot more and leaves DBs out on in coverage way more than we've been. Just repeating "he invented the defense!" doesn't really address those concerns
February 8th, 2024 at 6:45 PM ^
Many coordinators are forced to adapt to their strengths and weaknesses. If Michigan didn't have an insane front 4, I promise you would've seen a hole lot more blitzing in the NC game. Just how it is.
If Martindale had the '07 Giants D Line, you would've saw a helluva lot less blitzing. I can promise you that.
February 8th, 2024 at 3:54 PM ^
Let’s get Bob Stoops or Les Miles instead of Wink. Maybe Bill Belichek is interested too!
February 8th, 2024 at 11:29 AM ^
I agree that it's time to push back hard against the NCAA. The NCAA needs to realize that--like Tinkerbell and money--it only has power if people believe it does. And Michigan is one of the most significant parties who still treat it as if it is unquestionably legitimate. But the NCAA has proven that, like British government of the American colonies, it is not.
Michigan needs to say, "Hey, you live in our house, and we're just about done with you." The SEC would presumably be happy to ditch the college sports' current rules. Michigan and maybe a handful of similar schools can give them cover to start the system over. The NCAA needs to understand that. And if they won't, it's time to ditch them. Queme los barcos.
February 8th, 2024 at 11:38 AM ^
Because money laundering is A-OK but paying taxes is a bridge too far, as they go in the South.
And if anyone wants to whine about "no politics", the NCAA unfortunately made that untenable. They're getting socked around in court and legislatures are crafting laws to keep the house of cards from collapsing.
Remember Title IX? Know anyone who likes Title IX? No, everyone hates it. Everyone wants to get rid of it. But it's here to stay, because college athletics had OVER AN ENTIRE FUCKING CENTURY (!!!!!) to fix the rampant institutional sexism and did absolutely nothing until the federal government finally stepped in. No matter how much you might detest Title IX, to get rid of it you have to convince people the NCAA -- the institution that didn't lift a finger for over a hundred years and nailed Lee Aaliya over grocery bills -- would do better.
This is the exact same thing. The NCAA will not fix NIL, even if you gave them a century, because fixing problems is what they don't. So the governments (state and federal) will eventually step in and write a string of horrible laws that everyone will hate, but it will be unavoidable because the NCAA for decades and decades and decades had every opportunity to fix this shit and did absolutely nothing. All to keep the money train going for one day more.
February 8th, 2024 at 12:09 PM ^
Everyone does not hate Title IX. Source
February 8th, 2024 at 12:12 PM ^
How would you be able to "fix" NIL? The pro sports leagues have no control over what income their players earn off the field, so why would colleges?
The only thing I could see would be to outlaw any direct involvement between schools and NIL payments, but then you'd just see teams go through middlemen.
I think rules about the portal and eligibility can be made more rational but I don't see how you rein in NIL.
February 8th, 2024 at 1:14 PM ^
Exactly, NIL is a fundamental right and it cannot really be restricted in any way. No court is going to allow it. The only thing that could change things is employment and high enough salaries to make NIL less compelling as a factor, but nothing is ever going to be able to put the legal bagman aspect to bed forever.
February 8th, 2024 at 1:17 PM ^
But what is "NIL"?
There's no agreement among schools what it even means.
When Saban called out Jimbo Fisher for blatantly paying players to sign (or rather, encouraging aTm boosters to do so), you know you have a fucked up situation.
Nick Saban questioning someone's integrity!
What it was supposed to mean I'm so in support of. But if 1 school says "come to our school & we'll show you opportunities to capitalize on your Name, Image & Likeness", while another school says "here, have some cheddar, your name etc etc are already valuable to us, because they're attached to your arms & legs!"
I mean, inevitably method 2 is gonna prevail! But really, to no one's long term benefit!
February 8th, 2024 at 3:49 PM ^
There's no agreement among schools what it even means.
My understanding of the Supreme Court ruling is that NIL isn't even something that the "schools" could or should decide or agree upon. The term "NIL" is just a loose approximation for what are essentially private, third party financial dealings between students and outside individuals/groups. The Court basically ruled that the schools (via their extension being the NCAA) cannot infringe upon a student's right to have private business dealings... regardless of how flimsy they may be (e.g. giving an incoming freshman 7 figures for a signed football or such nonsense).
While this is horrible for the integrity of amateur athletics, it is not something that the schools/NCAA are *supposed* to "get a handle on" per the unanimous opinions of the court.
February 8th, 2024 at 12:15 PM ^
Wait...I like Title IX. I like it a lot.
And really, its adoption had almost nothing to do with The NCAA's shortcomings. That was going to become a law in the early '70s no matter what, and its adoption had very little to do with sports in general, or college sports in particular.
February 8th, 2024 at 12:21 PM ^
You're just telling on yourself with the wild claim about Title IX.
February 8th, 2024 at 11:59 AM ^
I wanted Clink, Hart, and Elston to stay. Glad we got Clink, and hoping Hart stays as well.
February 8th, 2024 at 12:18 PM ^
For Aaliya, the amount was $1,155.
Aaliya had been paid less than $900, yet the NCAA wanted him to pay back $1,155 and sit out 20 percent of games his first season.
Death to the NCAA.
February 8th, 2024 at 12:29 PM ^
I can't tell if Seth actually loves the Amoeba Defense or if he just loves saying Amoeba.
February 8th, 2024 at 12:47 PM ^
I'm not sure how state laws could protect donors in Southern states from from Federal tax liability if donations were deducted and the entity receiving the gift didn't have Federal charitable status.
February 8th, 2024 at 1:58 PM ^
Seth needs to stop talking like he knows the ravens. Wink left Baltimore because Baltimore was done with him and his inability to be flexible and responsive to what was happening on the field. He was also an asshole.
February 8th, 2024 at 3:01 PM ^
Could it also just be he was there nine years and things just built up over time?
February 8th, 2024 at 2:04 PM ^
Is there any documentation that Jamal Crawford wanted to come to michigan for the education? That seems like something that is not remotely true but I didn't follow michigan basketball at the time.
February 8th, 2024 at 2:35 PM ^
Yes.
He was in my niece's classes and he was a serious student (and a nice person) according to her.
After the NCAA tossed him and he made millions in the NCAA draft he was interviewed by the Chicago Tribune, where he said he would rather be in school than the NBA. I don't have a link to it right at the moment.
February 8th, 2024 at 3:49 PM ^
Asking for documentation, what is this an audit? are you with the NCAA? are you a cop?
February 8th, 2024 at 2:32 PM ^
Im so tired of talking/listening about the NCAA and hypocrisy of it all, in relation to M. Same conversation on repeat...and I am sure roundtable hates it as well.
Im surprised basketball is still not going to be talked about with this crew, Im assuming Brian just doesnt want to talk about it. Which is fair.
Also...if agents of current M players are shopping them, and that will be the norm until contracts are a thing, Im so freakin done with CFB.
CFB is changing so fast in some areas, but deathly slow in the areas that need to change asap to get a hold of this shit storm. To the OPs post earlier this week on riding off into the sunset.... this is exactly his point.
There will be a new generation of CFB fans that will have only known this new CFB world...they can take the torch and run with it because this shit is going to push so many fans away. To the ride or die fans out there that will still have the same amount of emotional energy attached to CFB going forward, I commend and applaud you, but the CFB world is kidding themselves if they dont think overall engagement from fans is going to severely decrease for a period of time.
My son being one, he is a M fanatic and I love it, he will be the new fan very soon...he is only 7 at the moment.
February 8th, 2024 at 3:46 PM ^
the big question in my mind, re: the NCAA, is this: do they have it out for Michigan because they’re just petty, or is it because Michigan doesn’t bribe them?
February 8th, 2024 at 4:56 PM ^
I don't normally listen to the podcasts but did play this one over lunch today (since I wanted some clarity on the coaching situation).
Interesting discussion, but I immediately tuned out after hearing some of the rants about how the players are "employees" and the schools are just laundering ill-gotten money from them.
People railing about this (mostly) simply view it as "the schools are making money off these kids, hence they should be considered paid employees"... yet that is *not* the relationship here.
Yes, the schools are making revenue off the *production event* of these sporting events... which the players are a large part, but includes much that the university is putting into it as well. But this issue needs to be considered more fundamentally than just whether or not the sport "makes money". If football/basketball (varsity sport) players should be considered "employees" - regardless of if on scholarship or walk-on - then why not gymnastics, rowing, swim/dive or any other other varsity sports (men's & women's)? The fundamental nature of the relationship with the school is exactly the same as with the football players... the only difference being the "market value". Also, what about other activities such as marching band, symphony groups, theater groups, etc. that have students "performing" for the public, with university staff leadership/instruction, but outside of a coursework setting?
The moment any school states that a student is an "employee" for simply participating in a school "revenue" sport, this would & should open a much larger can of worms about all of these other student-university activity relationships.
February 8th, 2024 at 6:43 PM ^
Finance bros make many times more than teachers....so why should rowers get paid the same as football players???
In all seriousness, there are obviously levels to this financially but the 'employee' route is why you'll ultimately see the death of olympic sports at most universities unless a major change happens. They're simply not popular enough to forking over the level of money for these universities. How many kids seriously attend Michigan because of rowing, gymnastics, etc.
That's why I think many people are pushing for football and basketball to break off entirely from the universities and just associate in name only, not school...that itself is another giant can of worms.
February 8th, 2024 at 9:50 PM ^
I didn't say that all "employees" would be paid the same (although an argument could be made for that... it would be amusing to see some people try and justify paying "employee" men's bball players 7+ figures while giving the women's counterparts at the same schools a mere fraction of that... see how well that stands in the courts of law and public opinion). That wasn't my primary point.
The point was that it would be logically unsound to declare football (and maybe basketball, hockey and baseball) players at these schools as "employees" without doing so for every other student athlete (and potentially even other groups beyond varsity sports). It would create an uneven scenario that would quickly result in litigation.
February 8th, 2024 at 10:51 PM ^
Why not just pay people based on their market value? Isn’t this how America works?
February 9th, 2024 at 6:43 AM ^
There are two separate questions:
1) who qualifies as an "employee" and
2) what should they be paid?
My point is that a public university cannot rationally declare only a small subset of student athletes as "employees" simply because they participate in their sport.
February 9th, 2024 at 6:59 AM ^
It is also an interesting question about "market value"... which market are we actually talking about?
If it is the market for them to play college football, the universities *are* already "compensating" most of them with tuition, room, board, stipends, books, tutoring, etc. (the real value of these academic-oriented awards being ~$50k - $100k/yr depending on various factors such as in-state vs out-of-state residency, etc.) There are also additional benefits such as the physical training, professional networking/development, and other athletic-oriented skills/services provided to them that are not as easy to quantify (how much is one year worth of pro athlete caliber personal training, or being coached NFL/NBA level schemes and skill sets, or having the personal PR/branding services that universities provide these days)? That is what they already receive before the whole NIL discussion.
Yet, many now are being paid as well... but paid for what? They are not technically being paid to play their sport (or even to attend their university). NIL is "name, image, likeness" and, while the organizations/people offering the deals may heavily push for those students to play somewhere, the actual transaction taking place is for that NIL deliverable (making commercials, endorsing products, signing autographs, etc.) So... what is the market? Their true NIL "market" is thus their *advertising value*, not their play. While the former is a product of the later, this is still a separate business proposition (which is why *pro* athletes can receive separate revenue streams from both).
February 8th, 2024 at 11:21 PM ^
Why has there been no chatter about hiring an up and coming college DC?
February 9th, 2024 at 5:56 AM ^
"Michigan should have signed him and dared the NCAA to come after them."
I believe Harbaugh was gone if he got an NFL offer but I also believe Harbaugh was frustrated by Michigan's willingness to roll over every time the NCAA elected to escalate a trivial offense.
Comments