Warning: LONG and rambling and sometimes without paragraph breaks
The Intercollegiate FOAI'd a bunch of requests for rules clarifications from universities to the NCAA (I didn't see any TTU ones): https://theintercollegiate.com/ncaa-interpretation-requests
I did find one from UT interesting:
So they naturally I Google RevGum since whoever decides what to redact in these things is an idiot...and lo and behold:
(former teammate and Denver Bronco Andrew Beck promoting them from the Broncos facility)
The RevGum instagram has a video of former Ehlinger teammate and current Seattle Seahawk Michael Dickson holding up Rev Gum before kicking a punt on the field at DKR this past March. But I'm sure the RevGum folks just have normal field access to DKR at any time, nothing to do with their connection to Ehlinger.
From the McCombs school of business magazine:
(sounds like a passive investor though)
Apparently his Snapchat and IG story (the stuff that deletes automatically) are filled with shoutouts to RevGum...
So someone explain to me how it's not a violation to be promoting a product that you have a financial stake in, on your social media that identifies you as a student-athlete and your profile photo is you on the field playing in a game, and 99.9% of your followers follow you because you're a student-athlete...?
Is there any way in hell these guys are getting a meeting with a regent and investor if the UT QB isn't setting it up? Is the governor coming to their launch party if the UT QB isn't involved?
I guess my point is that we really don't need to worry about the NCAA rule changes because the blue bloods are already doing it, and apparently with the knowledge and consent of the NCAA.
The Intercollegiate FOAI'd a bunch of requests for rules clarifications from universities to the NCAA (I didn't see any TTU ones): https://theintercollegiate.com/ncaa-interpretation-requests
I did find one from UT interesting:
Interpretive request: Football student-athlete (SA) is a passive [redacted] in a company founded by a close high school friend (CEO) called RevGum, which sells [redacted]. [redacted] has developed an FDA-approved product that is currently available for consumer purchase in several Texas-based stores. The SA and CEO met when the SA was in the ninth grade. The CEO started the company in 2017 while a student at the institution and the SA agreed to invest in the company in its early stages. The CEO is the majority owner; the SA now owns 2% of the company but is not involved in the general day-to-day operations. The company has not yet turned a profit but is continuing to expand and seek new forms of capital. There are currently 13 investors from a variety of industries. The CEO and SA attended high school in a [redacted] and both have connections with a member of the University’s Board of Regents (Regent), who is also a representative of the institution’s athletics interests, through mutual acquaintances. The Regent is the Executive Chairman of CapStar Partners, a private investment firm that invests in earlystage private companies in a variety of industries. His company has previously invested in several successful startup companies. The CEO and SA recently met with the Regent to seek his professional advice related to the company. The Regent has now expressed an interest in investing in the company but does not want to jeopardize the SA’s eligibility by doing so. The Regent has indicated that the SA’s involvement has no bearing on his interest in investing in the company and any investment would be in the same manner as he has done with comparable startup companies with the goal of receiving a significant financial return on his investment. The institution is therefore seeking confirmation that the Regent can invest in the company without comprising the SA’s athletics eligibility. Rationale: The institution believes it is permissible for the Regent to invest in a company that is partially-owned by a SA given the following circumstances: 1. The company is established and registered as an LLC in Texas and has an existing operating agreement in place for all investors 2. The SA’s involvement in the company is independent of his athletics abilities 3. The SA is not currently receiving any income from the company and would not receive any direct benefit from the Regent’s investment. The SA would only realize long-term benefits if the company distributed profits to investors or the SA sold his share of the company to another investor. 4. The Regent has confirmed that his potential investment in the company is completely independent of the SA’s affiliation with the company and is solely based on the potential return on his investment 5. The Regent’s investment and corresponding equity in the company would be consistent with general industry practices given the company’s current valuation and potential for future profitability
NCAA ruling:
Based on the facts presented, the booster appears to be entering into a legitimate business arrangement with an LLC owned by a student-athlete's friend that the student-athlete has also invested in. Provided this arrangement is not based in any way on the student-athlete's athletic reputation, it would meet the intent of the attached interpretation.
(Radio mogul Steve Hicks is the regent)
So they naturally I Google RevGum since whoever decides what to redact in these things is an idiot...and lo and behold:
(former teammate and Denver Bronco Andrew Beck promoting them from the Broncos facility)
The RevGum instagram has a video of former Ehlinger teammate and current Seattle Seahawk Michael Dickson holding up Rev Gum before kicking a punt on the field at DKR this past March. But I'm sure the RevGum folks just have normal field access to DKR at any time, nothing to do with their connection to Ehlinger.
From the McCombs school of business magazine:
"Like other ambitious business students, he has already started a company, with two other McCombs students. 'Through McCombs I’ve made incredible connections with successful business people,' Ehlinger says. 'I can apply every single class that I’m taking to my own company and just run scenarios through my head and apply it in a real-world sense instead of just seeing it in the book and trying to remember it.'”
(sounds like a passive investor though)
Apparently his Snapchat and IG story (the stuff that deletes automatically) are filled with shoutouts to RevGum...
So someone explain to me how it's not a violation to be promoting a product that you have a financial stake in, on your social media that identifies you as a student-athlete and your profile photo is you on the field playing in a game, and 99.9% of your followers follow you because you're a student-athlete...?
Is there any way in hell these guys are getting a meeting with a regent and investor if the UT QB isn't setting it up? Is the governor coming to their launch party if the UT QB isn't involved?
I guess my point is that we really don't need to worry about the NCAA rule changes because the blue bloods are already doing it, and apparently with the knowledge and consent of the NCAA.
