The Lawsuit That Could Bring Down the NCAA (2 Viewers)

[roadkill1292]

So ... how long is it supposed to take for the NCAA to be brought down?

And what will this bringing-down look like? No NCAA at all? No NCAA, but something similar steps into the breach? NCAA stays around, but in a radically different form?

Is the NCAA still useful for non-revenue sports, but the revenue sports need to go their own way?

Where you going with this?

 

[Premier]

So ... how long is it supposed to take for the NCAA to be brought down?

And what will this bringing-down look like? No NCAA at all? No NCAA, but something similar steps into the breach? NCAA stays around, but in a radically different form?

Is the NCAA still useful for non-revenue sports, but the revenue sports need to go their own way?

I wouldn't hold your breath.

 

[Doug B]

Where you going with this?

Succinctly:

Are all these lawsuits going to lead to eye-poppingly obvious change to collegiate revenue sports? And is this going to happen anytime soon (within 5 years)?

Tangent: can the NCAA morph in such a way that they can withstand the fallout of these lawsuits and remain relevant in some fashion.

...

I'm asking the question in good faith out of curiosity, not out of an attempt to drive a agenda.

 

[Doug B]

I wouldn't hold your breath.

Kinda what I was thinking. But it could be that the realistic timeframe of change has always been measured in decades. I may have taken the title of this thread too literally, thinking that the NCAA would be forced to insta-dissolve or something as the result of some imminent ruling or another.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Where you going with this?

Succinctly:

Are all these lawsuits going to lead to eye-poppingly obvious change to collegiate revenue sports? And is this going to happen anytime soon (within 5 years)?

Tangent: can the NCAA morph in such a way that they can withstand the fallout of these lawsuits and remain relevant in some fashion.

...

I'm asking the question in good faith out of curiosity, not out of an attempt to drive a agenda.

To your first question, I hope so. To your second, hard to tell at this point. To your third, absolutely yes and they should. There is a place for an organizational agency for college athletics, mainly the also ran sports that no one cares about, while allowing the reality of football and basketball to be dealt with like adults with some common sense.

 

[roadkill1292]

Where you going with this?

Succinctly:

Are all these lawsuits going to lead to eye-poppingly obvious change to collegiate revenue sports? And is this going to happen anytime soon (within 5 years)?

Tangent: can the NCAA morph in such a way that they can withstand the fallout of these lawsuits and remain relevant in some fashion.

...

I'm asking the question in good faith out of curiosity, not out of an attempt to drive a agenda.

I'll mostly echo what Yankee said above but add that, yes, we'll see athletes in revenue sports having very different relationships with the schools in the future, which is not necessarily the same thing as blowing the NCAA up. In fact, the predictions are a little parallel to what happened when Colorado legalized recreational weed -- nothing really noticeable will change. TV money will continue to pour in, coaches will still be paid gobs, Alabama will still be great in football every year and Wake Forest will still suck. A bunch of football and basketball players will be able to take inducements openly, and a few of them will be the objects of crazy bidding wars by school supporters. That doesn't really affect us watching the games on Saturday.

The march to the new open environment will be uneven. But, without intervention by Congress, it is also as inevitable as marijuana legalization. Jeffrey Kessler is coming to blow up, not the NCAA, but how its current rulebook defines eligibility and player compensation.

 

[gump]

Tangent: can the NCAA morph in such a way that they can withstand the fallout of these lawsuits and remain relevant in some fashion.

To your third, absolutely yes and they should. There is a place for an organizational agency for college athletics, mainly the also ran sports that no one cares about, while allowing the reality of football and basketball to be dealt with like adults with some common sense.

The Oliver Luck moves shows they think they can.

 

[roadkill1292]

Slight detour -- Michigan legislature just passed a bill prohibiting athletes at the state universities from unionizing. Board lawyers, is that likely to withstand a potential legal challenge?

 

[Christo]

Slight detour -- Michigan legislature just passed a bill prohibiting athletes at the state universities from unionizing. Board lawyers, is that likely to withstand a potential legal challenge?

Unionization of state and local government employees is covered by state rather than federal law. So it'd take someone familiar with Michigan state labor law to answer that.

 

[Good Posting Judge]

Seems like something's trying to justify its existence:

http://chronicle.com/article/NCAA-Says-It-s-Investigating/151315/

 

[roadkill1292]

I am highly amused that Jim Boeheim, one of the most dismissive opponents of college athletes receiving outside income, just had his program busted in part because of a booster giving cash to football and basketball players.

 

[roadkill1292]

Appeals procedures began today, with the NCAA introducing another amazing argument, per Jon Solomon of CBS (which has filed a brief in support of the NCAA):

In disagreeing with Wilken's ruling that would allow some payments for players, the NCAA wrote, “The court's alternative would blur the line between amateur college sports and their professional counterparts and thereby deprive athletes of a genuine choice between the two endeavors.”

Yes, that's right. If the athletes can get paid while in college, they will no longer have the option not to get paid.

I know I shouldn't take this personally but I am boo coo pissed off at the broadcasters all backing up the schools as this battle continues.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

The lawyers at the NCAA must be laughing their arses off having write and argue this stuff.

 

[The Commish]

The lawyers at the NCAA must be laughing their arses off having write and argue this stuff.

I picture them all sitting around a table bouncing ideas off each other like writers for a sitcom. And I am not surprised at all that the networks are on their side. Follow the money. If they weren't, this would have changed years ago.

 

[GregR]

Makes sense. Any athlete who wants to be able to climb in his time machine and go back in time to compete in past Olympics should be able to make sure he'll still be considered an amateur.

 

[Christo]

The lawyers at the NCAA must be laughing their arses off having write and argue this stuff.

Been there a few times. Nothing like walking to the courthouse repeating to myself, "just don't laugh, just don't laugh, just don't laugh."

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Everyone here saw last weekend's John Oliver show, right?

 

[Insomniac]

The lawyers at the NCAA must be laughing their arses off having write and argue this stuff.

How many hours do you think they billed for "developing" that idea?

How do they sleep? On a pile of money.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Appeals procedures began today, with the NCAA introducing another amazing argument, per Jon Solomon of CBS (which has filed a brief in support of the NCAA):

In disagreeing with Wilken's ruling that would allow some payments for players, the NCAA wrote, “The court's alternative would blur the line between amateur college sports and their professional counterparts and thereby deprive athletes of a genuine choice between the two endeavors.”

Yes, that's right. If the athletes can get paid while in college, they will no longer have the option not to get paid.

You might think that's a fantastic argument because minimum wage laws would indeed deprive college players of the choice not to get paid. But not so fast -- college players might still be able to not get paid if they want, because I think free internships are allowed if it's for college credit.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Appeals procedures began today, with the NCAA introducing another amazing argument, per Jon Solomon of CBS (which has filed a brief in support of the NCAA):

In disagreeing with Wilken's ruling that would allow some payments for players, the NCAA wrote, “The court's alternative would blur the line between amateur college sports and their professional counterparts and thereby deprive athletes of a genuine choice between the two endeavors.”

Yes, that's right. If the athletes can get paid while in college, they will no longer have the option not to get paid.

You might think that's a fantastic argument because minimum wage laws would indeed deprive college players of the choice not to get paid. But not so fast -- college players might still be able to not get paid if they want, because I think free internships are allowed if it's for college credit.

I got college credits for being on the soccer team - 2 credits each year

 

[BassNBrew]

Appeals procedures began today, with the NCAA introducing another amazing argument, per Jon Solomon of CBS (which has filed a brief in support of the NCAA):

In disagreeing with Wilken's ruling that would allow some payments for players, the NCAA wrote, “The court's alternative would blur the line between amateur college sports and their professional counterparts and thereby deprive athletes of a genuine choice between the two endeavors.”

Yes, that's right. If the athletes can get paid while in college, they will no longer have the option not to get paid.

You might think that's a fantastic argument because minimum wage laws would indeed deprive college players of the choice not to get paid. But not so fast -- college players might still be able to not get paid if they want, because I think free internships are allowed if it's for college credit.

I got college credits for being on the soccer team - 2 credits each year

Duke grad right?

 

[BassNBrew]

Appeals procedures began today, with the NCAA introducing another amazing argument, per Jon Solomon of CBS (which has filed a brief in support of the NCAA):

In disagreeing with Wilken's ruling that would allow some payments for players, the NCAA wrote, “The court's alternative would blur the line between amateur college sports and their professional counterparts and thereby deprive athletes of a genuine choice between the two endeavors.”

Yes, that's right. If the athletes can get paid while in college, they will no longer have the option not to get paid.

You might think that's a fantastic argument because minimum wage laws would indeed deprive college players of the choice not to get paid. But not so fast -- college players might still be able to not get paid if they want, because I think free internships are allowed if it's for college credit.

That will help out the vast majority.

What I find interesting is that we are heading down the road where 1-2% will see a huge benefit at the expense of the other 98-99%.

 

[Capella]

Everyone here saw last weekend's John Oliver show, right?

The ending with the video game was amazing.

 

[Fennis]

The lawyers at the NCAA must be laughing their arses off having write and argue this stuff.

How many hours do you think they billed for "developing" that idea?

How do they sleep? On a pile of money.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2VxpTMAbas

 

[Capella]

Yea I feel like this is the beginning of the end for the NCAA.

(Tv execs take turns throwing money at each other)

 

[roadkill1292]

Appeals procedures began today, with the NCAA introducing another amazing argument, per Jon Solomon of CBS (which has filed a brief in support of the NCAA):

In disagreeing with Wilken's ruling that would allow some payments for players, the NCAA wrote, “The court's alternative would blur the line between amateur college sports and their professional counterparts and thereby deprive athletes of a genuine choice between the two endeavors.”

Yes, that's right. If the athletes can get paid while in college, they will no longer have the option not to get paid.

You might think that's a fantastic argument because minimum wage laws would indeed deprive college players of the choice not to get paid. But not so fast -- college players might still be able to not get paid if they want, because I think free internships are allowed if it's for college credit.

That will help out the vast majority.

What I find interesting is that we are heading down the road where 1-2% will see a huge benefit at the expense of the other 98-99%.

Whoops, that's pretty much the NCAA's initial argument in the upcoming Kessler suit, according to Jon Solomon of CBSsports. NCAA lawyers argue that, in the free and open market proposed by Kessler, a handful of athletes will suck up the bulk of schools' available funds, forcing them to cut scholarships.

They'll be forced to pay the big talent, you see. By that nasty open market. So the open market shouldn't be allowed. I think this is the argument that got us the NFL's rookie cap.

The NCAA also argued that payments for athletes couldn't come out of coaches' salaries because the schools were competing against the NBA and NFL for competent coaches and needed every dollar they were spending.

 

[roadkill1292]

Tomorrow is the first day that schools can begin paying athletes per the O'Bannon trial. Instead of developing a cap of some kind -- permissable under Judge Wilkin's ruling -- they are fighting for a last-minute injunction. I wonder what wheels are turning at some of the powerhouses right now?

 

[Capella]

NCAA still here

 

[roadkill1292]

Schools got their 11th hour injunction yesterday. This might blow.

 

[Politician Spock]

Chris Spielman's lawsuit against Ohio State could set monumental precedent

In the first player name, image and likeness lawsuit since Ed O’Bannon’s historic victory against the NCAA became final in 2016, former NFL All-Pro and Ohio State linebacker Chris Spielman filed a federal lawsuit on Friday against his alma mater and IMG College, the popular sports marketing company that negotiates on behalf of Ohio State and many other colleges. Spielman contends that Ohio State and IMG College, along with co-conspirators Honda and Nike, have unlawfully conspired under federal antitrust law to deny payment to current and former Ohio Sate football players.

Spielman’s 35-page complaint details how Honda-sponsored banners hung at Ohio Stadium—where the Buckeyes play their home games and which seats approximately 102,000 fans—depict Spielman and 63 other notable Buckeyes, such as Archie Griffin, Jim Stillwagon, Bill Willis and Andy Katzenmoyer. According to Spielman, these players never agreed to appear on the banners and weren’t paid by OSU, Honda or anyone else for their appearances. Essentially, Spielman is asking, shouldn’t both Ohio State and the players be paid when those players appear on banners?

Spielman’s complaint also takes aim at OSU’s license agreement with Nike. OSU and Nike have a contractual relationship to produce “Legends of the Scarlet and gray” vintage OSU jerseys, which depict, without accompanying compensation, Spielman and other former Buckeyes stars. Spielman contends that these businesses worked with OSU in an unlawful plot whereby they refused to negotiate with OSU football players, thus setting the value of those players’ identity rights—which are clearly marketable since Honda and Nike paid for them—at $0.

The 51-year-old Spielman, who is now a Fox NFL analyst, demands the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio enjoin Ohio State and IMG College from continuing to use current and former Buckeyes players’ identities for profit without first negotiating those rights with the players. He also requests that the court compel the defendants to pay monetary damages to former players for past usage. Spielman has told the Associated Pressthat he would donate any money he receives from a victory or settlement to the Ohio State athletic department. Just like Ed O’Bannon in his lawsuit, Spielman would not personally profit in any way should he succeed. O’Bannon and Spielman brought their cases to change rules and raise awareness.

Read the rest in the link.