DuckHeart

I can't understand why anyone who is legally an adult (18 years old) should not be able to profit from their name, image, and likeness. These are not legally kids. Yeah, lots of downside to money at an early age. The young immature adults may blow it on cars, expensive apartments and so forth. They may not pay their quarterly estimates of federal and state taxes. But that is where the school can provide guidance. The school can----gasp----educate the student athletes on contracts, money management etc. As I see it, the major problem is that the governing bodies stuck their collective heads in the sand and pretended that the Supreme Court would rule in the NCAA's favor in the Alston case. I disagree with a lot of what Justice Kavanaugh says in other cases but I agree with what he had to say in his concurring opinion: “Nowhere else in America can businesses get away with agreeing not to pay their workers a fair market rate on the theory that their product is defined by not paying their workers a fair market rate. … The NCAA is not above the law.” The NCAA basically was saying that a very big business could exempt itself from anti-trust laws, reap huge benefits for coaches and others and agree (conspire in other words) to pay the players nothing but tuition, books and room and board. The NCAA's position created the mess; can the NCAA come up with legal regulations of NIL payments? Possibly but don't count on it. Is this bad for the traditional college sports fan? Well, maybe. But so what? And let's not forget the rampant cheating (paying the players) that has always been part of major college sports. And the Ducks have not been innocent. I was at Oregon 1972-1976. I saw Ronnie Lee in his new Chevrolet Monte Carlo. I was told by an employee of Joe Romania Chevrolet that the basketball team was on the dealership's payroll.

Kids should not be allowed to transfer? Give me a good reason other than you don't like it. (And most recruits never ever make the starting line up. They can work their butts off, do everything right and still not start.) Kids should not be allowed to profit from their own name, image or likeness? The US Supreme Court disagrees with you 9 to 0.

The DC elected to bring pressure and cover Krupp with a saftey---a bad idea. Not just a bad idea but a really stupid bad idea. That play doesn't happen but for the boneheaded defensive call.

Would not be surprised if the top OCs know and talk to each other. And I would not be surprised if Joe Moorhead is well known and respected in coaching circles. So there you go..........

Alabama is so much better at quarterback than Georgia. Bryce Young negates Lanning's aggressive defense. In my opinion that's pretty much the game.

Here is Locklyn's tribute to Gary Campbell. I for one have totally been hooked by this new staff. University of Oregon Running Back Coach @Locklyn33 Respect should be the first thing you give. #CoachCamDaStandard4Me 8:56 PM · Jan 4, 2022·Twitter Web App

LaMike and he have talked. LaMike put Coach Locklyn in touch with the best RB coach ever, Gary Campbell. My guess is that The Michael or Campbell gave that list to Coach Locklyn.

I don't think anyone is asking Lanning to run the Chip Kelly offense circa 2007-2012. Hell, Chip Kelly doesn't run a pure form of that offense; he has changed and evolved as any good/great coach will do. The history of college football is innovation on offense, changes to defense to catch up, with further evolution to follow. Think of Mike Bellotti. He had a highly successful team with an offense he knew inside and out. But he knew the offense had to change. So he went outside the box and brought in Chip Kelly and, most importantly, let Chip Kelly run the Chip Kelly offense. I distinctly remember Bellotti saying in an interview that while he reserved the right to decide between a pass or run that Kelly did the planning and called all the plays. Fast forward to Cristobal. His offenses were (all of them) conservative (to say the least). As we all know he even managed to hold an NFL pro bowler in check! The results of the Cristobal approach: 1. Games were close giving lesser teams the chance to win. 2. The games were boring. They simply were not fun. All I (we) want is for the Ducks to put away lesser teams; battle to the end against equal teams (like Utah) and have fun.

Uhhh, I have reason to believe that LaMike would be a great or good assistant coach. He was a truly great back and he had a great position coach in college. As far as I know he has never done anything to prepare himself to be a coach. I think Lanning will pass.

It would be a long and hard stretch to call it domestic abuse.

I really hope the players understand that they will be required to file returns and pay taxes on their NIL money. In the old days the guy handing the bags of cash probably didn't send out 1099s!

Cristobal owes Oregon $9 million as liquidated damages----that's his "buyout" per the contract. No doubt his contract with Miami provides that the school will pay it plus any income taxes Cristobal owes as a result of the school paying his liquidated damages. Remember, it is Cristobal who owes Oregon the money, not the University of Miami. However, the new school always agrees to cover the buyout. Since that is Cristobal's legal responsibility it is taxable income to him. Miami will then have to pick up the incremental taxes caused by the $9 million in taxable income! (Luck for UM that Florida doesn't have a state income tax.) And as pointed out in other posts Miami will pay a non-profit excise tax for all this. Wacko world isn't it?

Mike Bellotti was head coach at Chico State for four years, 1984-1988. His record at Chico was 21-25-2. Brooks then hired him to become Oregon's OC. (Thank you Wikipedia) Bellotti had a very nice background when he became Oregon's head coach. I'd prefer it if Lanning a few years as HC but I'm all in with him.

At this point we have no idea whether Lanning is an upgrade. I'll know, we all will know, about a year from now. Some things which annoyed me about Cristobal: His offense. His tendency to not put inferior teams away. Clock management. I was also tired of his macho bravado. Nothing about Lanning annoys me yet. We'll know in a year.

Something to do while I wait: Someone on this board asked whether the "buyout" in Cristobal's contract can be enforce---whether the school can get the $9 million. So this retired lawyer puts this out: Can the liquidated damages provisions in the employment contract between the U of O and Cristobal be enforced. Here is a link to the contract. Parties to a contract may (with qualifications) agree on what is owed as damages for certain types contract breaches. Those agree upon damages are called liquidated damages. This contract has two liquidated damages provisions. Section 6.2 Termination by University (not for cause) provides that if the school fired Cristobal without cause that the school must pay 80% of the base pay left on the contract. (base pay is called Guaranteed Salary in the contract). Note that per 6.2.c there is a duty of the coach to mitigate meaning that the coach has the duty to make reasonable efforts to get a job which would reduce what he is owed. Of course, we don't care about this liquidated damage provision as Cristobal wasn't fired. However this provision does show bargaining by the parties on how to deal with termination which is something a judge would likely consider if the U of O had to sue Cristobal in order to be paid the $9 million. Section 6.3 Termination by Coach is what we care about. And yes 6.3.c says Cristobal owes $9 million if he quits before January 14, 2022. Note the language in 6.3.d and e. Those words go to the enforcement of such a damage provision. Was the language bargained for by the parties? Are the actual damages to the university difficult or impossible to determine? Is this a penalty? (penalties usually can't be enforced). Is this an illegal restraint of trade? (which is more closely looked at in employment cases than other areas)? Other than Google, I don't have much in the way of research capabilities. I didn't find a case relating to coaching contracts. There are some journal articles but nothing definitive. My guess is that given the context and language of the contract that the liquidated damage provisions would be enforced.