Started By
Message
re: As the jar cracks - Johnny Manziel's downfall is upon us
Posted on 8/13/13 at 4:07 pm to Klark Kent
Posted on 8/13/13 at 4:07 pm to Klark Kent
So a 5 point win is an arse kicking again?
Get me Tuscaloosa on line 2, please.
Get me Tuscaloosa on line 2, please.
0
Posted on 8/13/13 at 4:07 pm to 3andOut
quote:
Damn you, I was setting this up to prove a point.
My bad!
Posted on 8/13/13 at 4:08 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
An upset is when the worse team wins. 2012 Texas A&M >>> 2012 LSU.
Can't wait for your explanation on this. LSU frickin won that game, but I'm sure you somehow convinced yourself that the Ags won. And don't even try to use the "We beat Bama, Bama beat LSU" bullshite argument. Transitive property doesn't apply in football.
Posted on 8/13/13 at 4:09 pm to TeLeFaWx
NCAA BY- LAW 12.5.2.2
If a student-athlete's name or picture appears on commercial items ( e.g.; T-shirts, sweatshirts, serving trays, playing cards, posters, photographs ) or is used to promote a commercial product sold by an individual or agency without the student-athlete's knowledge or permission, the student-athlete ( or institution acting on behalf of the student-athlete ) IS REQUIRED to take steps to stop such activity in order to retain his or her eligibility for intercollegiate athletics."
Bylaw is pretty obvious here, this is a violation of stated rules unless JFF can get these clowns to take a loss.
ME NO THINKS SO.
If a student-athlete's name or picture appears on commercial items ( e.g.; T-shirts, sweatshirts, serving trays, playing cards, posters, photographs ) or is used to promote a commercial product sold by an individual or agency without the student-athlete's knowledge or permission, the student-athlete ( or institution acting on behalf of the student-athlete ) IS REQUIRED to take steps to stop such activity in order to retain his or her eligibility for intercollegiate athletics."
Bylaw is pretty obvious here, this is a violation of stated rules unless JFF can get these clowns to take a loss.
ME NO THINKS SO.
Posted on 8/13/13 at 4:15 pm to TxAgTiger
quote:
Can't wait for your explanation on this. LSU frickin won that game, but I'm sure you somehow convinced yourself that the Ags won. And don't even try to use the "We beat Bama, Bama beat LSU" bullshite argument. Transitive property doesn't apply in football.
You seem...........perturbed, TxAg.
Nice screen name btw
Posted on 8/13/13 at 4:16 pm to S.E.C. Crazy
quote:
ME NO THINKS SO.
Nice Gump
Posted on 8/13/13 at 4:19 pm to Klark Kent
Good luck with getting them to understand that one game does not make you the best team in the league. Some A&M fans thought because they beat Bama that they should play for the National Championship. You can't get it thru their heads that on any given day any team can beat any team.
When South Carolina beat Bama a few years ago, then the next week they turned around and lost to Kentucky, but on the day that they played Bama, Garcia played a perfect game and couldn't make a mistake.
When South Carolina beat Bama a few years ago, then the next week they turned around and lost to Kentucky, but on the day that they played Bama, Garcia played a perfect game and couldn't make a mistake.
Posted on 8/13/13 at 4:31 pm to RT1941
quote:
Herbie is right, it'd be a damn free for ALL, and it will never be allowed.
I like Herbie but he's just wrong here. I could write rules in 5 minutes that would solve his issue and someone is simply going to have to do so. Amateurism is defined as athletes that are not financially remunerated for the time they spend playing or training.
The NCAA is going to lose the O'Bannon case even if the results were to be catastrophic. But it won't get that far as they will find a compromise like they did with olympic athletes. But the NCAA has no ground to stand on to out and out prevent any athlete from selling their own personal asset (their name, likeness, signature) if it happens off the field/court. It's this reason the IOC opened up rules for endorsements in the 1950s, made further changes in the 70s, and gave up completely by the 90s.
The NCAAs amateurism rules are simply archaic and even if you hate Manziel, Texas A&M or whatever, there really is no defense of them beyond it's the way it's always been.
Posted on 8/13/13 at 4:32 pm to S.E.C. Crazy
quote:
NCAA BY- LAW 12.5.2.2
If a student-athlete's name or picture appears on commercial items ( e.g.; T-shirts, sweatshirts, serving trays, playing cards, posters, photographs ) or is used to promote a commercial product sold by an individual or agency without the student-athlete's knowledge or permission, the student-athlete ( or institution acting on behalf of the student-athlete ) IS REQUIRED to take steps to stop such activity in order to retain his or her eligibility for intercollegiate athletics."
Bylaw is pretty obvious here, this is a violation of stated rules unless JFF can get these clowns to take a loss.
ME NO THINKS SO.
Dude you think Manziel is the only collegiate athlete whose signature is sold on the secondary market? By your loose interpretation of that bylaw every athlete needs to be scouring Ebay and pawn shops making sure any memorabilia isnt being sold.
Per the official from NCAA on Mike and Mike that bylaw is in there for when, say a restaurant in College Station plasters a huge billboard of JFF and says "Come eat where Mr. Football eats!"
Posted on 8/13/13 at 4:34 pm to Klark Kent
quote:
they played each other Saturday, October 20th, 2012 and the outcome clearly shows who was the better team. but i'll let you live in your fantasy world if you want.
So if you win you're always the better team? There is no such thing as an upset? Are y'all claiming A&M was better than Alabama as well?
Posted on 8/13/13 at 4:42 pm to S.E.C. Crazy
quote:Thats a lot of clowns taking a loss. Hell, one autograph broker paid an authenticator $10,000 for one JFF session.
NCAA BY- LAW 12.5.2.2
If a student-athlete's name or picture appears on commercial items ( e.g.; T-shirts, sweatshirts, serving trays, playing cards, posters, photographs ) or is used to promote a commercial product sold by an individual or agency without the student-athlete's knowledge or permission, the student-athlete ( or institution acting on behalf of the student-athlete ) IS REQUIRED to take steps to stop such activity in order to retain his or her eligibility for intercollegiate athletics."
Bylaw is pretty obvious here, this is a violation of stated rules unless JFF can get these clowns to take a loss.
ME NO THINKS SO.
Posted on 8/13/13 at 4:43 pm to TeLeFaWx
If you beat another team then yes you can definitively say you are better than that team because you proved it on the field.
Posted on 8/13/13 at 4:46 pm to HollierThanThou
quote:
If you beat another team then yes you can definitively say you are better than that team because you proved it on the field.
TAMU> Bama on the field.
TAMU>the natiinal champions
this is silly.Posted on 8/13/13 at 4:48 pm to TbirdSpur2010
2011-2 LSU > 2011-2 Bama
2011-2 Bama > 2011-2 LSU
2011-2 Bama > 2011-2 LSU
Posted on 8/13/13 at 4:50 pm to tmc94
quote:You think the NCAA will allow student-athletes to sell their signatures for money to any ole broker in the off-season?
I like Herbie but he's just wrong here. I could write rules in 5 minutes that would solve his issue and someone is simply going to have to do so. Amateurism is defined as athletes that are not financially remunerated for the time they spend playing or training.
Can you imagine if every top flight football player sat down and scratched out +4,000 sig's like Johnny did in a month? And if those players were actually being PAID to sign all that shite, what motivates them to train hard and work on their game for the good of the team in the off-season?
Posted on 8/13/13 at 4:56 pm to RT1941
quote:
You think the NCAA will allow student-athletes to sell their signatures for money to any ole broker in the off-season?
no. They'll undoubtedly put regulations on it. But honestly they legally won't be able to stop it. It's no different than telling AJ McCarron he can't sell the vehicle he owns. It's his asset. If he wants to sell it, he can.
And seriously what motivates them? You understand professional athletes get paid a lot of money, right? What motivates them? More money. You suck, nobody wants your signature or endorsement.
Posted on 8/13/13 at 5:07 pm to RT1941
quote:
You think the NCAA will allow student-athletes to sell their signatures for money to any ole broker in the off-season?
Can you imagine if every top flight football player sat down and scratched out +4,000 sig's like Johnny did in a month? And if those players were actually being PAID to sign all that shite, what motivates them to train hard and work on their game for the good of the team in the off-season?
Which is why any and all proceeds or earnings should got to a general trust fund equally among all athletes only accessible upon graduation.
Posted on 8/13/13 at 5:08 pm to TeLeFaWx
5600
Posted on 8/13/13 at 5:12 pm to tmc94
I think there will be ramifications in the arena of contract law. The letter of intent and the scholly paperwork for now prohibit this practice, whether the NCAA is able to or not, and the school that offers the scholly essentially owns those assets until the student-athlete graduates or drops the scholly. Even then, some of the ownership continues with the school - images are a good example - and never pass to the student-athlete.
Posted on 8/13/13 at 5:14 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
Which is why any and all proceeds or earnings should got to a general trust fund equally among all athletes only accessible upon graduation.
Though I'm sure things like EA's NCAA license could be handled this way, I don't think this would satisfy the likely result from O'Bannon. I think they are going to need individual trusts like they did with the olympics. Again, it's Clowney's or Manziel's or McCarron's or Bridgewater's asset, not an NCAA wide asset. And I think the courts are going to require the NCAA to develop a solution that is individualistic. It's a capitalist society and all.
Page 280 of 340
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News