Started By
Message
re: Temporary Restraining Order Against NCAA Denied - A crushing blow for the Vols!
Posted on 2/7/24 at 4:51 pm to captdalton
Posted on 2/7/24 at 4:51 pm to captdalton
quote:
By all means, point us to all the case law that deals directly with NCAA NIL agreements as it relates to recruiting guidelines. I bet we would all love to read it.
I think it's pretty evident that you have zero background in the law.
You realize there is anti-trust caselaw that is both relevant and controlling that doesn't have to be "NCAA NIL agreements as it relates to recruiting guidelines" right? Oddly enough, some even involving the NCAA
Maybe start with reading the complaint filed in this case and how the courts have ruled in other anti-trust cases involving the NCAA. This specific, nuanced issue has never been brought before the courts until now; however, the Courts will use precedent from other cases they have heard, as well as their analysis of the law itself, to render a decision in the current case before them. It's like you want to bury your head in the sand out of hopes for carnage of a program you don't like. Which is weird because Tennessee isn't the only program affected by this. The state AG, along with VA, just happen to be who brought the suit.
2
Posted on 2/7/24 at 4:52 pm to lsufball19
Why won’t you post this relevant case law for us?
Posted on 2/7/24 at 4:53 pm to Shaft Williams
quote:
The cheaters are the NCAA and their sham notion of amateur athletics that has enriched them while not financially compensating the athletes.
Vol lover!
Posted on 2/7/24 at 4:56 pm to captdalton
quote:
Why won’t you post this relevant case law for us?
You wouldn't even read it, or be even able to understand it.
Posted on 2/7/24 at 4:59 pm to lsufball19
quote:
The NLRB's ruling for Dartmouth players to unionize is another massive issue the NCAA is going to face.
Ironic that the NLRB still would have to approve even if the team got the vote.
Also it was only a region director not the actual NLRB who would need to approve it in the end. Also it is not a court ruling either and will be fought in court.
The problem is what I am hearing is if they vote for union and Dartmouth cannot prevent it from moving forward, they will drop the men's basketball team and the players will have no home. Unlike other leagues the Ivy League does not give out athletic scholarships so the players were brought to Dartmouth based on academic ability so ending the program would not prevent them from receiving an education.
The NCAA might be powerless in regard to NIL and possible unions looming, but no court can force any university to maintain a sport.
Posted on 2/7/24 at 4:59 pm to Smokeys Howl
Maybe he can include some cartoons for you.
Posted on 2/7/24 at 5:06 pm to captdalton
quote:
Why won’t you post this relevant case law for us?
I've posted two case names for you already. There is also another case set for trial, House v NCAA. It's not my job to brief them for you.
Posted on 2/7/24 at 5:08 pm to TideWarrior
quote:
The NCAA might be powerless in regard to NIL and possible unions looming, but no court can force any university to maintain a sport.
Oh I fully expect to see a ton of athletic departments disband when all the dust settles. Most won't be able to afford to stay in business.
Posted on 2/7/24 at 5:10 pm to lsufball19
Actually the solution is very simple and that's college players becoming employees of the athletic associations, signing binding contracts and getting paid.
Every other sport has figured this shite out, including the Olympics.
Every other sport has figured this shite out, including the Olympics.
Posted on 2/7/24 at 5:14 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Maybe start with reading the complaint filed in this case
Of course Ut is going try and make this a NIL issue. That would be their only defense to win on.
Question for you.
Do you believe the NCAA has the authority to prevent recruiting violations?
Do you believe recruiting violations can be separate from NIL issues?
I am only asking because all your arguments seem to indicate they are now permanently intertwined. If so, I understand why the courts would be an issue for the NCAA moving forward but I believe they can be separate situations. The courts in the past have not gotten involved in the NCAA in regard to recruiting violations unless an actual law may have been broken.
I also doubt the NCAA would have come after Ut if they did not feel they could demonstrate the issue was not a NIL since they knew based on the Alston case they would not win. Which is why I think Donde & Ut are trying to tie it in with NIL.
I will say I only guessing on this because I have not seen any official NOA or anything from the NCAA on what they have. I have seen what Ut is saying and their fans are claiming. It may be out there but if anyone has seen what the NCAA is actually using as evidence from them I would appreciate a link to see it.
Posted on 2/7/24 at 5:22 pm to jonnyanony
quote:
Actually the solution is very simple and that's college players becoming employees of the athletic associations, signing binding contracts and getting paid.
Most ADs cannot afford that and Title IX still comes into play with that
Posted on 2/7/24 at 5:23 pm to lsufball19
So after skimming the three cases, it looks like all three revolve directly around NIL. The House lawsuit is seeking to have universities pay former athletes millions in the name of NIL. Both the VA and TN cases seem to be arguing that NIL money can be spent on recruiting and NIL money can be given to recruits.
Nowhere in any of the suits does it argue that the NCAA can not have member institutions agree to recruiting bylaws. Please, point out where this is as I have clearly missed it.
Again, the Nico case has nothing to do with NIL. It has everything to do with boosters contacting recruits directly, providing them impermissible benefits, and acting as agents of the University of Tennessee.
As a legal scholar, are you saying that if the NCAA loses any of those NIL lawsuits they will completely wipe away all bylaws and rules? Are you saying that these lawsuits that seem to all focus directly on NIL will result in the NCAA being unable to enforce any rules that all member organizations agreed to previously?
I kind of hope so. Now Alabama really will hold on every play since penalties will be unenforceable.
Nowhere in any of the suits does it argue that the NCAA can not have member institutions agree to recruiting bylaws. Please, point out where this is as I have clearly missed it.
Again, the Nico case has nothing to do with NIL. It has everything to do with boosters contacting recruits directly, providing them impermissible benefits, and acting as agents of the University of Tennessee.
As a legal scholar, are you saying that if the NCAA loses any of those NIL lawsuits they will completely wipe away all bylaws and rules? Are you saying that these lawsuits that seem to all focus directly on NIL will result in the NCAA being unable to enforce any rules that all member organizations agreed to previously?
I kind of hope so. Now Alabama really will hold on every play since penalties will be unenforceable.
Posted on 2/7/24 at 5:25 pm to captdalton
quote:
Again, the Nico case has nothing to do with NIL. It has everything to do with boosters contacting recruits directly, providing them impermissible benefits, and acting as agents of the University of Tennessee.
Spyre is not a booster.
Posted on 2/7/24 at 5:34 pm to Smokeyone
quote:
Spyre is not a booster.
By NCAA 2022 guidelines, he is. Which is why they came knocking.
Posted on 2/7/24 at 5:39 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Most ADs cannot afford that and Title IX still comes into play with that
Most ADs won't have to. There are only ~50-60 schools that routinely funnel players to the NFL. The rest won't pay, won't have any restrictions on play or salary and won't participate in a draft.
Title IX will likely be worked around by the employment aspect.
Posted on 2/7/24 at 5:43 pm to Smokeyone
quote:
Spyre is not a booster.
Spyre Sports was founded in 2020 by Tennessee alums Hunter Baddour and James Clawson.
Spyre Sports - Cars, Apartments, and Six-figure Packages
They are season ticket holders, are members of an organization that promotes Tennessee athletics, they have donated to a Tennessee booster organization, and they have assisted athletes in receiving benefits. All of which make them boosters.
Here is the NCAA’s definition of a booster.
quote:
Boosters, referred to by the NCAA as “representatives of the institution’s athletic interests,” include anyone who has:
Provided a donation in order to obtain season tickets for any sport at the university.
Participated in or has been a member of an organization promoting the university’s athletics programs.
Made financial contributions to the athletic department or to a university booster organization.
Arranged for or provided employment for enrolled student-athletes.
Assisted or has been requested by university staff to assist in the recruitment of prospective student-athletes.
Assisted in providing benefits to enrolled student athletes or their families. Been involved otherwise in promoting university athletics.
Once an individual is identified as a “representative of the institution’s athletics interests,” the person retains that identity forever.
You may argue that they aren’t boosters, but their whole mission statement is to assist athletes in receiving benefits. So under the NCAA’s definition they clearly are boosters.
Posted on 2/7/24 at 5:44 pm to jonnyanony
quote:
By NCAA 2022 guidelines, he is.
Sprye is not a he. It’s a business
Posted on 2/7/24 at 5:48 pm to jonnyanony
quote:
By NCAA 2022 guidelines, he is.
What in the hell are you talking about?
lmao, the Turd thinks Spyre is a guy.
Posted on 2/7/24 at 5:50 pm to Smokeys Howl
I knew he was unable to grasp even the most elementary issues around this case...but I didn't realize just how uniformed, at a basic level, he was.
And he's supposed to be the smart one out of these three nimrods.
And he's supposed to be the smart one out of these three nimrods.
Page 9 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News