Any chance of Conyer flipping ?

[Uncle Adolph]

Matt Jones said this morning there is movement on the part of the UK athletic dept on the NIL situation
Maybe that ship has sailed on Conyer but hopefully we are getting in the ballgame now with other schools doing it

 

[Uncle Adolph]

Dollars

 

[Rembrandt90]

Any committed prospect can flip. I do not expect Conyer to flip, but anything is possible.

Conyer made his choice. My focus will be on other players. UK just picked up a commitment from Avery Stuart. On the merits, this development should turn people's attention off of Conyer. Stuart is the better player, and his commitment proves Stoops is still getting high quality players.

 

[Uncle Adolph]

Any committed prospect can flip. I do not expect Conyer to flip, but anything is possible.

Conyer made his choice. My focus will be on other players. UK just picked up a commitment from Avery Stuart. On the merits, this development should turn people's attention off of Conyer. Stuart is the better player, and his commitment proves Stoops is still getting high quality players.

I agree with you but I just hate to miss out on in-state kids

 

[SpamburgerHamburger]

Always a chance. Although it's not something I'd spend anytime thinking about until it actually happens.

 

[cateyes]

Conyer just got recruited over with Stuart. Next up.

 

[UK2KJAG]

In football no commitment is safe until they enroll so there’s always a chance. Not sure I’d want someone who’d voluntarily pick the orange people tho

 

[Catluv]

I read where Conner plays in a 7 on 7 league in Tenn maybe he just has ties to Tenn. I care about Stewart more than him now. If he flips I will care about him.

 

[Dallas-Wild]

Info from Rock cat

Looking at the On3 consensus which takes all four recruiting services into account, here is the national ranking:

Stuart - 222
Conyer - 627

 

[Tnvol77]

I know I’m a visitor on this site and I enjoy discussing college football and all the new NIL stuff. The way I understand some of it is if a recruit signs with a group for their rights such as spyre for UT or whoever any other school is using that group owns the athletes rights. They pay them to use them. If that recruit were to flip or transfer after signing their rights still stay with that collectives group depending on the language in the contract they signed. If they did that then the collective would not really be able to use the athlete and then won’t pay them anymore (again depending on how the payments are structured). That athlete won’t be able to sign a deal with a new collective because someone else owns their rights. Basically if you flip after signing or transfer that’s the end of your money and you can’t make more. That’s not 100% and will depend on what they signed but in the case of conyer if he signed he might not be able to without losing all his money and not being able to make more.

 

[cathouse]

Conyer just got recruited over with Stuart. Next up.

And this is probably a big reason he chose the Vols.....
Hate it for the kid, but will probably get recruited over by the Vols also. If not, Vols are going to be hurting at DB next year.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

I know I’m a visitor on this site and I enjoy discussing college football and all the new NIL stuff. The way I understand some of it is if a recruit signs with a group for their rights such as spyre for UT or whoever any other school is using that group owns the athletes rights. They pay them to use them. If that recruit were to flip or transfer after signing their rights still stay with that collectives group depending on the language in the contract they signed. If they did that then the collective would not really be able to use the athlete and then won’t pay them anymore (again depending on how the payments are structured). That athlete won’t be able to sign a deal with a new collective because someone else owns their rights. Basically if you flip after signing or transfer that’s the end of your money and you can’t make more. That’s not 100% and will depend on what they signed but in the case of conger if he signed he might not be able to without losing all his money and not being able to make more.

This is all new, wouldn't it depend on what the individual states adopt as NIL laws? Players want freedom of movement like coaches have, I don't think they understand those movements aren't free, someone has to pay a buyout. So if a kid wants to transfer, the 2 groups have to agree on a buyout figure not to exceed the original amount.

 

[Tnvol77]

This is all new, wouldn't it depend on what the individual states adopt as NIL laws? Players want freedom of movement like coaches have, I don't think they understand those movements aren't free, someone has to pay a buyout. So if a kid wants to transfer, the 2 groups have to agree on a buyout figure not to exceed the original amount.

I’m sure they could come to terms with a buyout. No different than like a cell phone contract if you want out early you pay a fee. I’m not so sure how much states have say over a lot of it. Some of it yes but I’m the end it’s a legal binding contract between the athlete and collective or whoever is paying them and what they put in the language of it. It’s all really interesting. To me it’s a different form of like before when you signed a scholarship and they penalized you by making you sit a year if you wanted to transfer. Now the penalty from schools and the ncaa is pretty much mute but that penalty from losing your nil money is gonna be there a lot of times. The collectives aren’t just gonna fork over a ton of money and a kid a year later say thanks now I’m going to a different school. That’s sort of how I view it. Now of it was a company with no school affiliation who wanted the athlete endorsing whatever they have then there’s no penalty I’m sure but signing with a collective that is in with a school is most likely gonna be a different game. Just my guesses and observations

 

[Cazwheel1072]

Nah. He deserves to be stuck in pumpkin orange colored clothing for the rest of his life for making me miss 15 minutes of my 4th of July vacation....

 

[K_TIME]

I know I’m a visitor on this site and I enjoy discussing college football and all the new NIL stuff. The way I understand some of it is if a recruit signs with a group for their rights such as spyre for UT or whoever any other school is using that group owns the athletes rights. They pay them to use them. If that recruit were to flip or transfer after signing their rights still stay with that collectives group depending on the language in the contract they signed. If they did that then the collective would not really be able to use the athlete and then won’t pay them anymore (again depending on how the payments are structured). That athlete won’t be able to sign a deal with a new collective because someone else owns their rights. Basically if you flip after signing or transfer that’s the end of your money and you can’t make more. That’s not 100% and will depend on what they signed but in the case of conger if he signed he might not be able to without losing all his money and not being able to make more.

You might be right with all the complexities....but let's be real about this playing out.

1. Kids are going to take NIL to go to a specific school...that is happening today.
2. Kids are going to want to leave original school for all the same reasons they leave today. They are beaten out on depth chart is the main one but also homesickness, injuries, etc...
3. Then the collectives are not going to want to pay out for kids that don't pan out....so they'll be more than happy to kick them to the curb per se. So are these NIL 1 year at a time deals and once you leave the $$$ stops? If so, then they should be able to freely move as they do so today. If not, then the burden is going to be on the collective. These are teenage kids...you can legally lock them as much as you want....but they're not going to honor all the NIL commitments (which is funny to see all this money starting to be thrown away and the collectives are just screwed...which I hope happens a ton).
4. If downstream transfers are held up due to legal contracts....this will be another breaking point in this corrupted system. Many times the kids and schools are more than happy to have transfers leaving to free up space on 85 scholarship limits....so the collectives are going to be pissed over NIL $$$ being thrown away....they might have to just get over it

 

[Tnvol77]

1)agree
2)agree
3) all of that is gonna depend what they signed in that contract. I don’t know for fact but I’ve heard a lot of these nil deals say that the player can make up to x amount for year one and up to x amount for year two and so on. Who knows what stipulations are built into them such as maybe they have in there there’s a minimum amount they have to pay but have an option to pay more if they elect to do above 10 advertisements with said athlete. That would limit damages if the company only had to pay out say 2k a year and not the full 50k. (Just making these low numbers up) kids can not honor them and that’s true and their can be legal ramifications such as back payment on monies already earned and such. Lawyers are so crooked man and a lot of them are really really good with contracts and how they word things.
4) you are right in a lot of cases they will tell them to go on I’m sure but a highly rated kid that the coach doesn’t want home won’t be let go so easy. There’s a whole lot of unknown in all of these that remains to be seen and played out. I’ve got mixed feelings about it. Mostly I feel like all the stuff that’s been done in underhanded ways and behind closed doors and hidden for years is just out in the open now and it will flip some of the dirtier schools who don’t have as much money as others but have been allowed or are better at cheating than others back to where they can’t just cheat and get a kid with someone like Texas writing blank checks. I think in time it will all level out but the next 4-5 years will be wild. I think it will keep teams like Ohio state and Alabama from stacking quite as deep because maybe that kid who is gonna have to sit a couple years and doesn’t get but 1/3 of the money from those schools would rather start as a freshman or sophomore and make a whole lot more money at say Kentucky or Tennessee. The cream of the crop will still get theirs from the school they have always wanted anyway. Most all these collectives can pay huge amounts if they want. Someone like arch manning (family money ignored) is gonna make millions anywhere and if someone wants to break the bank for him and he likes them he may just chose them over one of the 4 or 5 power schools we have right now.

 

[The-Hack]

That’s not 100% and will depend on what they signed but in the case of conyer if he signed he might not be able to without losing all his money and not being able to make more.

Possible, but entirely speculative.

 

[Tnvol77]

Possible, but entirely speculative.

Very true and that’s why I said he might not be able to without losing his money. I would love to see some of these contracts just to see the wording and language in them and see how they are structured and set up. It’s almost like the wild Wild West now in recruiting. I know if I ran one I’d be protecting my investment in players when we are talking some of these huge amounts that are speculated

 

[BluegrassSportsNet]

He isn’t the type of player you beg. It’s do you wanna run with us or not, and he chose not.

 

[CatPatrick13]

Still another DB we are recruiting that is better than him.. so prob not right?

 

[BluegrassSportsNet]

Still another DB we are recruiting that is better than him.. so prob not right?

There's quite a few DB's we are recruiting that are better than him. On3 consensus combines on3, 247, rivals, and espn rankings all into one with their formula. According to On3 consensus, Conyer is ranked 628th player in the country and 5th ranked player in the state of Kentucky. His rivals ranking has misled a lot on this board as to how good he is. He's a mid 3 star player. Very replaceable.

 

[un4getables]

Just so you guys know. NIL was NOT the reason we lost out on Conyer. It was stated in House of Blue our NIL was a better deal then TN.. He just felt more comfortable with UT.. Sometimes believe it or not money doesn't drive everything.... Carry on.

 

[Bereacat420]

Just so you guys know. NIL was NOT the reason we lost out on Conyer. It was stated in House of Blue our NIL was a better deal then TN.. He just felt more comfortable with UT.. Sometimes believe it or not money doesn't drive everything.... Carry on.

Idk his reason and doesn't matter. The posts I read stating UK offered him more was a UT fan. Believe what you want but I'm not buying it. He probably did like them better. He was also on two visits with some big name recruits that were prob swaying him. There are lots of reasons guys pick one school or another. We got a surprise commitment from a better CB so as you said carry on. We are good

 

[bballcat4]

If a kid wants to play for a team where the defense gets plenty minutes then UT is the right school. Their defense is on the field about 40 mins a game!

Huephel can sell minutes to defensive recruits!

It will be interesting to see how SEC defenses respond to UT the 2nd time around and moving forward.

They can boat race you in a very short time. But ... I don’t think it is sustainable long term. I like the strategy if you’re short handed on good players. (Huephel did a good job with last year’s roster.) At some point, you have to be able to line up on both sides and enforce your will.

Excited for season to begin.

 

[cathouse]

Just so you guys know. NIL was NOT the reason we lost out on Conyer. It was stated in House of Blue our NIL was a better deal then TN.. He just felt more comfortable with UT.. Sometimes believe it or not money doesn't drive everything.... Carry on.

OK. So CMS goes on live radio and states 100% that NO recruit has been offered NIL money by UK, which according to CMS, schools that we are recruiting head to head with (UT, cough, cough) is paying recruits NIL money TO COMMIT.

Then some anonymous mustard throwing, lying, cheating, low down dirty snitching UT fan that knows ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about UK football, comess on a fan site and says UK offered more money than UT.

And then, you believed it. WOW.

I'm going with Mark Stoops on this one.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

I’m sure they could come to terms with a buyout. No different than like a cell phone contract if you want out early you pay a fee. I’m not so sure how much states have say over a lot of it. Some of it yes but I’m the end it’s a legal binding contract between the athlete and collective or whoever is paying them and what they put in the language of it. It’s all really interesting. To me it’s a different form of like before when you signed a scholarship and they penalized you by making you sit a year if you wanted to transfer. Now the penalty from schools and the ncaa is pretty much mute but that penalty from losing your nil money is gonna be there a lot of times. The collectives aren’t just gonna fork over a ton of money and a kid a year later say thanks now I’m going to a different school. That’s sort of how I view it. Now of it was a company with no school affiliation who wanted the athlete endorsing whatever they have then there’s no penalty I’m sure but signing with a collective that is in with a school is most likely gonna be a different game. Just my guesses and observations

State legislators can write and pass any law they choose. Then it goes to court to see if it's constitutional. There will be kids getting big deals that won't be happy with their position on depth charts and NIL will get tested. Pretty sad when you have such a sorry program the only way to get good players is to buy them.

 

[MrHotDice]

I agree with you but I just hate to miss out on in-state kids

True instate kids would rather be broke than play for Tennessee.

 

[megablue]

Money for nothing and chicks for free.

 

[satcheluk]

I know I’m a visitor on this site and I enjoy discussing college football and all the new NIL stuff. The way I understand some of it is if a recruit signs with a group for their rights such as spyre for UT or whoever any other school is using that group owns the athletes rights. They pay them to use them. If that recruit were to flip or transfer after signing their rights still stay with that collectives group depending on the language in the contract they signed. If they did that then the collective would not really be able to use the athlete and then won’t pay them anymore (again depending on how the payments are structured). That athlete won’t be able to sign a deal with a new collective because someone else owns their rights. Basically if you flip after signing or transfer that’s the end of your money and you can’t make more. That’s not 100% and will depend on what they signed but in the case of conyer if he signed he might not be able to without losing all his money and not being able to make more.

It totally depends on the wording of the contract. Also, if the kid has representation, then they aren’t going to allow an NIL deal that restricts future earnings if the player transfers. I suspect, unless they are trying to screw the players, the contracts will be written to say if you continue to play here, then you get $X, but if you transfer the agreement is void.

 

[Rembrandt90]

Money for nothing and chicks for free.

That ain't working, that's the way you do it. You play guitar on MTV!

 

[Tnvol77]

It totally depends on the wording of the contract. Also, if the kid has representation, then they aren’t going to allow an NIL deal that restricts future earnings if the player transfers. I suspect, unless they are trying to screw the players, the contracts will be written to say if you continue to play here, then you get $X, but if you transfer the agreement is void.

Who knows? None of us know what’s in those contracts but I’d say the one handing the money out has more leverage than the ones with their hands out. I’d just love to see the wording in some of those contracts. I bet the recruits like a manning have more leverage than say a low 4 star

 

[Wildcats1st]

It’s doubtful that an nil contract will prevent verbal decommits. They may sign with a “collective” but any language in the contract pertaining to the player attending a specific college well it’s going to be non binding. 50 states with 50 different nil laws the only binding agreement across those 50 states would be an LOI to play for the school. So until signing day it’s gonna be the same crap with kids flipping to other schools. Whatever a prospective player signs with an agency from what I understand cannot stipulate they are playing for X school. It would only be for the sole purpose of securing deals pertaining to nil. I doubt any federal judge in the country would uphold an nil contact binding a player to the school they verbal to. That would be a breach of ncaa amateurism rules.

 

[Tnvol77]

They won’t bind them to a specific school. Probably will be a well known collective specifically to that school that will own the nil rights to that player that will specify payments of certain amounts for appearances and things like if the collective so chooses to use the player and no payments if they don’t. Said player should realize they have sold their rights and can’t sign with anyone else and that collective or whatever is not gonna use them for advertisement if they aren’t going to the school they are aligned with so they won’t make any money. So many different angles to this thing. It’s all really interesting. Players will be trying to protect themselves and collectives will be protecting their investments. In the end of a player wants the money they will have to open theirselves up to some “risk” I would think. Maybe not as much so for the very top prospects like arch manning and other high ranked 5 stars who command more leverage but for lower ranked prospective they are gonna have to give to get. I think Kentucky and every other school will come around. They won’t have a choice and because it’s a free country built on capitalism and the Legal court system made its ruling on not being able to prevent a player from earning money off their self it’s here to stay. Everything will settle out in time. A few key players will change places as we are already seeing such as A&M asserting that they have a seat at the big table. Other schools that have a lot of money but maybe not as much as them or USC will go to second tier and on and so forth. Some players will be worth more to a certain school that needs their position more than say an Alabama and that school will over pay and get that player if that player is about money. A lot of this has just uncovered things that have been going on a while and the money has grown exponentially. Before you couldn’t give a 18 year that kind of money without them getting way too showy and the NCAA having no choice but to bust you. It’s obvious what is going on when a poor kid who comes from nothing to all of a sudden driving a new charger. The ncaa has been looking the other way on that. Hard to ignore that plus a new home and instagrammed trips to Las Vegas

 

[satcheluk]

Who knows? None of us know what’s in those contracts but I’d say the one handing the money out has more leverage than the ones with their hands out. I’d just love to see the wording in some of those contracts. I bet the recruits like a manning have more leverage than say a low 4 star

Recruits have a ton of leverage. Just ask UT and UL.

 

[kb22stang]

Possible, but entirely speculative.

Not possible. Either the agreement with the collective is binding for both parties, hence they get paid whereever they go or the contract is dissolved and they sign a new deal at their new school. The collective won't be able to hold players hostage by keeping their rights but not paying them.

 

[The-Hack]

The collective won't be able to hold players hostage by keeping their rights but not paying them.

I hope that is right, and by equitable principles, it makes some sense.

But what if the collective pays out a significant upfront amount, say 50K, in order to "buy" the future rights, even with a transfer?

Corporations/collectives and 18+ year olds can sign contracts with about any terms they desire, short of violations of criminal law, without District Court (Ky), or parental oversight.

If sufficient consideration is paid, could a collective--by contract--prohibit a player from transferring to a particular competing school, or to a school in the same conference, in the future? If you think not, how would you differentiate collective/athlete contracts from "non-compete" clauses frequently enforced by civil courts?

I would love to see a few of these contracts, and their language.

They might be more one-sided than any of us anticipate.

And knowing the broad extent of contractual enforcement from 35 years of drafting and interpreting them, I find it hard to define much as "not possible." It all depends on the contractual language, and the conventions of interpretation developed primarily through both English and American Common Law (like "the four corners" doctrine), and partially codified in individual state's UCC's (Uniform Commercial Codes).

 

[CatPatrick13]

Heard a story from a guy close to the UGA staff yesterday. Said a kid's "team" told them he was offered 2 million in an NIL deal. Kirby told the kid that "we don't do NIL things that way " and said no thanks . Kid called a week later and said, "what about a million?" Again, Kirby says "not our style". Kid called back a week later and asked for 600K. UGA said, " we are not interested. "

 

[The-Hack]

Again, Kirby says "not our style". Kid called back a week later and asked for 600K. UGA said, " we are not interested. "

Kid calls back and asks for 50K, and Kirby says "hold my beer!"

[I'm joking, Grumpy, I'm Joking!]

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

Kid calls back and asks for 50K, and Kirby says "hold my beer!"

[I'm joking, Grumpy, I'm Joking!]

You might as well accuse us too, everyone else was. Kirby has said what NIL we had was going to be kids in Athens already, not to get them there. I hadn't heard the storey Catpatrick mentioned, but it falls in line with what we are being told. Sure we will lose some kids because of that route, it remains to be seen how bad. I think we have an elite defensive staff. I am sure I am more than a little prejudice but I think our DL coach and ILB are the best in college, Scott's DL had 3 1st rounders, barring injury will have at least 1 next spring, Every ILB who has started a game at UGA since Schuman arrived has been drafted, including a 3* RB that changed positions as a Jr, including 2 Butkus award winners, Muschamp sucks as a head coach, but he has been an elite DC for years. We lost Lanning to Oregon to be their head coach and the DB coach was told to look around, ended up at UF, I don't know anything about the replacements other than both are young and hungry, which I am all for. We brought back McClendon at WR coach, he is OK, but I was hoping for Hines Ward. Kirby made the worst hire of his career at OL, Stacey Sereals is an old retread, I couldn't believe we hired him.