Flash Point: New state social studies standards and NIL legislation
OKLAHOMA CITY (KFOR) — State Sen. Julia Kirt (D-Oklahoma City) joins the Flash Point team to discuss new state social studies standards.
Also on the show, State Sen. Todd Gollihare (R-Kellyville) discusses NIL legislation awaiting the Governor's signature.
Watch the episode above.
Now Flash Point can be seen on the new SmartTV app KFOR+! Download the app on ROKU, AppleTV, or FireTV. It can be seen at 9:30 a.m. on Sundays on KFOR or KFOR+.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Elon Musk Deletes Epstein Accusation From X Amid Trump Feud
Although Elon Musk has been known to lean on 'free speech' when convenient, the ex-DOGE boss appears to be backpedaling after dropping a major bombshell. Following a heated exchange in which he claimed his former bestie Donald Trump is included in the Jeffrey Epstein files, the X mogul appears to have deleted the loaded post from his own platform. More from Deadline Elon Musk Blows Up Internet & Maybe D.C. With Claim That Trump Is In Epstein Files: 'Holy Sh*t' All-Out Feud Erupts Between Trump And Musk: POTUS Threatens To End Government Contracts, Tesla Titan Invokes Epstein Files – Update Trump Can Resume Restricting AP's Access To Oval Office And Other Spaces, Appeals Court Rules The feud comes after Musk denounced Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which would add an estimated $2.4 trillion deficit over the next decade. The Tesla CEO previously concluded his stint with DOGE last month. After Trump threw down a gauntlet, Musk responded to his threat to terminate Tesla's government subsidies with the Epstein allegation. 'Time to drop the really big bomb: @realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!' he wrote in the since-deleted tweet. 'Mark this post for the future. The truth will come out,' added Musk in another post that has also disappeared from his profile. While it has never been a secret that the late, disgraced billionaire Epstein and Trump were party pals back in the 1990s, Trump always has denied he had anything to do with his convicted friend's penchant for underaged girls. CNN's Dana Bash has since said she's spoken to Trump, who is more 'resigned' than angry at Musk, relaying that he told her, ''I'm not even thinking about Elon. He's got a problem. The poor guy has got a problem.'' 'He says he won't be speaking to him for a while, but he wishes Elon Musk well,' added Bash. Best of Deadline 2025 TV Series Renewals: Photo Gallery 2025 TV Cancellations: Photo Gallery 'Stick' Soundtrack: All The Songs You'll Hear In The Apple TV+ Golf Series
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Even after House v. NCAA settlement, college sports remain broken. But what else is new?
College sports are at an inflection point. Approval of the long-awaited House v. NCAA settlement was finally granted on Friday, a decision set to reshape the future of college sports. And yet, so much of the industry's future is still pinned to Congress and the hopes of federal legislation, all while private equity and 'super league' models circle overhead. President Donald Trump recently considered a commission that would explore the issues facing the NCAA and college athletics, with Nick Saban expected to be involved. Advertisement An enterprise that has long had too many cooks in the kitchen now has all three branches of government and outside financing getting involved. (Wherefore art thou 'stick to sports' crowd?) That's on top of the current power struggle over the future of the College Football Playoff, and the expanding competitive gap between the power conferences and everyone else. All of it underscores just how fractured and dysfunctional college athletics have become, with no quick fixes in sight. But for as dire as all of this might seem, it's not a death rattle, either. College sports are broken and in desperate need of reform. And college sports will be just fine. For too long the NCAA was trapped in amber, still trying to operate as a singular, all-encompassing, amateur production, while its most prominent sports and conferences leaned further into a big-money, professionalized business model. Prior court rulings and allowing athletes to earn name, image and likeness (NIL) compensation have chipped away at the old notion, but only after the NCAA got dragged along, kicking and screaming. The organization consistently opted for incremental half measures over effective reform, which is how we swung from full-ride athletic scholarships feeling grossly insufficient to the guardrails getting ripped off via lawless, pay-for-play NIL deals. Yet college sports keep hanging tough, resilient through change and mismanagement. Advertisement The House settlement is the latest example, a $2.8 billion agreement that peels away at the last remaining vestiges of amateurism in collegiate athletics by allowing schools to directly pay athletes, yet fails to solve the industry's biggest underlying issue: The NCAA is still ripe for litigation. To be fair, the House settlement an attempt to find that Goldilocks solution to athlete compensation, as well as revamp the broader governance of college athletics. It improves the status quo, most notably because more athletes will receive a bigger cut of the billions in revenue dollars that college sports generate. It also reflects a shift in posture by the NCAA since Charlie Baker took the reins from Mark Emmert as NCAA president in 2023, and the growing influence of the power conferences. Rather than risking more legal defeats (and financial ruin), the NCAA opted for compromise, bundling a trio of high-profile antitrust lawsuits into one agreement and footing a multi-billion-dollar bill. Except it doesn't change the fact that the NCAA and power conferences are still trying to live in two worlds at once — the old and the new — a luxury that even this pricey settlement can't buy. There are still questions about years of eligibility, collective bargaining, athlete employment status, conflicting state laws, Title IX, third-party NIL deals, and the likelihood of Congressional intervening on any of it. Unless Congress or this presidential commission — which is currently on pause — can drum up some legislative action in relatively short order, the House settlement does little to stop the onslaught of legal challenges that have kneecapped the NCAA's authority, again and again. 'The House settlement started with the goal of the NCAA putting an end to the losses it has taken in these litigations all over the country,' Cal Stein, a sports law lawyer, said in an interview with earlier this year. 'But the great irony is that it's really just going to lead to more lawsuits.' Advertisement This lack of harmony plagues college sports beyond the courtrooms, too. Yes, revenues keep climbing, and that money is a direct result of the continued popularity. But don't mistake it to mean every development has been fan friendly. Dollar signs also funded the Great Consolidation of conference realignment and power conference autonomy, dismantling so much of the regionality and tradition that makes college sports special. As fans continue to suffer lost rivalries and increasingly transient rosters (and whatever happens with the Playoff), it's reasonable to argue that enthusiasm has dipped as a result, at least in some corners. But what is unassailable, by any modern cultural standard, is that college sports remain extremely popular, warts and all. College football is the second most-watched sport in America behind the NFL. Men's basketball recently had its best TV audience since 2017 for a Final Four, featuring four No. 1 seeds from power conferences. Women's basketball has experienced exponential growth in the past few years. Nebraska women's volleyball filled a football stadium with 92,000 fans in 2023, breaking the world record for attendance of a women's sports event. Stanford softball set the sport's all-time attendance record this season. Times change. College sports plow on. There's more change ahead. What a much-needed reset actually looks like for the industry is up for debate, and competing voices can haggle over how to best restructure college sports and what role the NCAA should serve. But the House settlement required years of mountain-moving negotiations and billions of dollars in restitution that will totally upend the industry — only to reiterate more is needed. Advertisement '(The settlement is) not the end of the story,' SEC commissioner Greg Sankey said during a recent panel discussion. 'It is a chapter. It's a necessary chapter.' That's a nice way of saying the current Frankenstein approach isn't gonna cut it, and is merely delaying the inevitable. Until then, history tells us to expect more of the same resiliency from college sports in this post-settlement era … or if the College Football Playoff expands (again) to 16 teams … or if the NCAA Tournament expands to 76 teams … or if the President invokes an executive order … or if some version of the power conferences break away in football to form a super league. One of the few constants in college sports is the ability to prosper in spite of themselves. Though it would be nice if that didn't always have to be the case. This article originally appeared in The Athletic. College Football, Men's College Basketball, Sports Business, Women's College Basketball 2025 The Athletic Media Company
Associated Press
14 hours ago
- Associated Press
A $2.8 billion settlement will change college sports forever. Here's how
A federal judge has approved terms of a sprawling $2.8 billion antitrust settlement that will upend the way college sports have been run for more than a century. In short, schools can now directly pay players through licensing deals — a concept that goes against the foundation of amateurism that college sports was built upon. Some questions and answers about this monumental change for college athletics: Q: What is the House settlement and why does it matter? A: Grant House is a former Arizona State swimmer who sued the defendants (the NCAA and the five biggest athletic conferences in the nation). His lawsuit and two others were combined and over several years the dispute wound up with the settlement that ends a decades-old prohibition on schools cutting checks directly to athletes. Now, each school will be able to make payments to athletes for use of their name, image and likeness (NIL). For reference, there are nearly 200,000 athletes and 350 schools in Division I alone and 500,000 and 1,100 schools across the entire NCAA. Q: How much will the schools pay the athletes and where will the money come from? A: In Year 1, each school can share up to about $20.5 million with their athletes, a number that represents 22% of their revenue from things like media rights, ticket sales and sponsorships. Alabama athletic director Greg Byrne famously told Congress 'those are resources and revenues that don't exist.' Some of the money will come via ever-growing TV rights packages, especially for the College Football Playoff. But some schools are increasing costs to fans through 'talent fees,' concession price hikes and 'athletic fees' added to tuition costs. Q: What about scholarships? Wasn't that like paying the athletes? A: Scholarships and 'cost of attendance' have always been part of the deal for many Division I athletes and there is certainly value to that, especially if athletes get their degree. The NCAA says its member schools hand out nearly $4 billion in athletic scholarships every year. But athletes have long argued that it was hardly enough to compensate them for the millions in revenue they helped produce for the schools, which went to a lot of places, including multimillion-dollar coaches' salaries. They took those arguments to court and won. Q: Haven't players been getting paid for a while now? A: Yes, since 2021. Facing losses in court and a growing number of state laws targeting its amateurism policies, the NCAA cleared the way for athletes to receive NIL money from third parties, including so-called donor-backed collectives that support various schools. Under House, the school can pay that money directly to athletes and the collectives are still in the game. Q: But will $20.5 million cover all the costs for the athletes? A: Probably not. But under terms of the settlement, third parties are still allowed to cut deals with the players. Some call it a workaround, but most simply view this as the new reality in college sports as schools battle to land top talent and then keep them on campus. Top quarterbacks are reportedly getting paid around $2 million a year, which would eat up about 10% of a typical school's NIL budget for all its athletes. Q: Are there any rules or is it a free-for-all? A: The defendant conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC and Pac-12) are creating an enforcement arm that is essentially taking over for the NCAA, which used to police recruiting violations and the like. Among this new entity's biggest functions is to analyze third-party deals worth $600 or more to make sure they are paying players an appropriate 'market value' for the services being provided. The so-called College Sports Commission promises to be quicker and more efficient than the NCAA. Schools are being asked to sign a contract saying they will abide by the rules of this new structure, even if it means going against laws passed in their individual states. Q: What about players who played before NIL was allowed? A: A key component of the settlement is the $2.7 billion in back pay going to athletes who competed between 2016-24 and were either fully or partially shut out from those payments under previous NCAA rules. That money will come from the NCAA and its conferences (but really from the schools, who will receive lower-than-normal payouts from things like March Madness). Q: Who will get most of the money? A: Since football and men's basketball are the primary revenue drivers at most schools, and that money helps fund all the other sports, it stands to reason that the football and basketball players will get most of the money. But that is one of the most difficult calculations for the schools to make. There could be Title IX equity concerns as well. Q: What about all the swimmers, gymnasts and other Olympic sports athletes? A: The settlement calls for roster limits that will reduce the number of players on all teams while making all of those players – not just a portion – eligible for full scholarships. This figures to have an outsize impact on Olympic-sport athletes, whose scholarships cost as much as that of a football player but whose sports don't produce revenue. There are concerns that the pipeline of college talent for Team USA will take a hit. Q: So, once this is finished, all of college sports' problems are solved, right? A: The new enforcement arm seems ripe for litigation. There are also the issues of collective bargaining and whether athletes should flat-out be considered employees, a notion the NCAA and schools are generally not interested in, despite Tennessee athletic director Danny White's suggestion that collective bargaining is a potential solution to a lot of headaches. NCAA President Charlie Baker has been pushing Congress for a limited antitrust exemption that would protect college sports from another series of lawsuits but so far nothing has emerged from Capitol Hill. ___ AP college sports:
