Anything the NCAA does which inhibits a player from getting paid runs afoul of the Sherman Act.

Any rule, policy or bylaw that the NCAA has which inhibits a player from getting paid runs afoul of the Sherman Act.

Get that through your thick skull.

quote:
I have a question for you Smokey: why is this something you are so excited about?

For decades we gave seen the 'favorites' of any given year get all the calls, get all the breaks, get all their violations ignored, all so that the powers that be get their 'dream matchup' at the end of the season and rake in 50 million instead of 45.

Most years it's the same few teams, sometimes a program here or there will reach that plateau for a couple of seasons.

But I'm tired of it. I want football to be allowed to play out without some fey from Hunstville putting his finger on the scale, all so they can have the matchup they want in the playoffs, NC game, whatever. I say if Slippery Rock or Northeastern Arizona Poly is pulling off an upset against the #1 team, let them pull it off.

If I have to choose between some Super League (that is a fair and straight up game, mind you) and what we have now with the NCAA (where it's basically the WWF and the big fish never get violations), I choose the Super League.

quote:
Is it just so Nico can play?

I've been excited for NIL to come, and for the NCAA to fkoff, long before we ever signed Nico.

But I am VERY EXCITED to see where Nico can lead us.

quote:
That means there will be a regulator, ncaa or otherwise, that will have a bunch of rules in place, just like the nfl.

True. So yeah, we might eventually have the WWF on the field (like we have with the NFL already) but at least the asshatery with targeted violations to protect the 'protected few' will be a thing of the past, along with the blatant defamation of specific players in order to keep the status quo going strong.

Two out of three ain't bad.

And one last thing:

I realize the new Super League might also play the same silly games that the NCAA plays (on field favoritism, etc.) but at least there's a chance that it won't.

With the NCAA, we already know it will.

Hope springs eternal.

This post was edited on 2/9/24 at 10:44 am

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by Lucado

Member since Nov 2023

2842 posts

Posted on 2/9/24 at 11:39 am to Smokeys Howl

quote:
quote:
None of that changes the fact that...

Anything the NCAA does which inhibits a player from getting paid runs afoul of the Sherman Act.

Any rule, policy or bylaw that the NCAA has which inhibits a player from getting paid runs afoul of the Sherman Act.

Get that through your thick skull.

The NCAA isn't trying to inhibit Nico from receiving NIL. The NCAA is trying to prohibit UT boosters from providing improper inducements via flying him in for an unofficial visit. That is an improper recruiting inducement which has nothing to do with NIL. You can either get that through your thick skull or keep burying your head in the sand. They are entirely separate issues.

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by MondayNightPavs

Jax, FL

Member since Aug 2022

207 posts

Posted on 2/9/24 at 11:42 am to Smokeys Howl

Fair enough, I don’t like uneven enforcement either and I don’t like playing favorites. But I don’t think what you are cheering on here will be any sort of panacea.

I think the gist of what you are excited about is that by saying the ncaa can’t regulate nil, it will effectively end the ncaa. From there schools would be able to compete on a level playing field because there would be no one to stop them from attracting the best players effectively via bid and there would be no uneven enforcement, as you see it, because there would be nothing to enforce.

If I am interpreting this wrong let me know. I don’t see this working out that way and really see all this as potentially creating a worse situation.

0 ...

Report Post

SEC Rant - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board