Started By
Message
Co/Wa in process of Passing their version Of Fair Pay for Play.. Forbes NCAA will lose
Posted on 9/10/19 at 11:46 pm
Posted on 9/10/19 at 11:46 pm
No domino effect right MrAUTigers. Right BamaGradinTn?
Right RD Dawg?
And her is what the people in cali just told the NCAA:
And it's being PUSHED in the US Congress
Not only That, Forbes mag is telling you exactly what will happen. If the NCAA tries to throw out member for restricting legal rights, the NCAA will be taken down hard:
LINK
Thoughts now?
Right RD Dawg?
quote:
Similar bills are in their infancy in state legislatures in Washington and Colorado
And her is what the people in cali just told the NCAA:
quote:
"I just want to say, 'NCAA, don't threaten California. Don't threaten us'," Kamlager-Dove said. "Because we have formidable schools. We have formidable alumni. And we have formidable viewership.
And it's being PUSHED in the US Congress
Not only That, Forbes mag is telling you exactly what will happen. If the NCAA tries to throw out member for restricting legal rights, the NCAA will be taken down hard:
quote:
As the Fair Pay to Play Act moves forward to Governor Gavin Newsom’s desk for his anticipated signature, the NCAA now faces what seems to be a Hobson’s choice: either capitulate and allow college athletes to sign at least a limited range of endorsement deals, or attempt to ban California member colleges if they comply with the Fair Pay to Play Act and risk an antitrust lawsuit that could ultimately lead to the association’s annihilation.
quote:
NCAA’s Principle of Amateurism—a principle that at times has been afforded great deference from certain federal courts—almost certainly cannot trump free trade principles or government mandates. By way of analogy, under federal antitrust law, if a national association of retailers with market power were to decide to ban all members that chose to operate in California and thus complied with California's minimum wage laws, such conduct would fairly easily be recognized as an illegal restraint of trade. Any attempt by the NCAA to ban colleges that comply with the Fair Pay to Play Act would likely be viewed the same.
LINK
Thoughts now?
21
Posted on 9/10/19 at 11:47 pm to Jjdoc
It doesn't surprise me that those states are passing them. It would stun me to see any SEC states pass them besides maybe Missouri.
Posted on 9/10/19 at 11:51 pm to Jjdoc
quote:
Because we have formidable schools. We have formidable alumni. And we have formidable viewership.
Seemed believable all the way up until they mentioned viewership.
Posted on 9/10/19 at 11:51 pm to Jjdoc
Northwestern already tried something similar and failed. Intresting to see how this pans out
This post was edited on 9/10/19 at 11:52 pm
Posted on 9/10/19 at 11:53 pm to The Winner
We will pass them. Will be forced to man.
I would hope the NCAA could win this and keep college competitive, but every SEC school needs to start saving up to go shopping!
This will forever change the game
I would hope the NCAA could win this and keep college competitive, but every SEC school needs to start saving up to go shopping!
This will forever change the game
Posted on 9/10/19 at 11:55 pm to LSUNV
We are now talking state laws vs what will be labeled a monopoly.
They don't want Antitrust busted. The NCAA has little choice but to cave.
They don't want Antitrust busted. The NCAA has little choice but to cave.
Posted on 9/10/19 at 11:55 pm to Jjdoc
I haven't read up too much on these laws, so someone will have to educate me: what exactly are they legislating? It is not currently against the law in any jurisdiction, as far as I know, for a player to profit from his likeness or to even accept money from boosters or coaches. Yes, it is against NCAA rules, but no one has ever been led away in handcuffs just for breaking NCAA rules.
Posted on 9/10/19 at 11:56 pm to Jjdoc
It's pretty simple really, NCAA rules state that players are not to be paid. It is the school's choice whether to stay in the NCAA or leave. The NCAA doesn't have to ban anyone. Play by the rules set forth by the NCAA, or face the penalties.
Posted on 9/11/19 at 12:01 am to Jjdoc
I don’t understand the law. There is no law saying they can’t, so what’s the point of a law saying they can?
These schools enter into a voluntary agreement with the NCAA. If they don’t want to abide by the rules then they can always leave.
It’s just grandstanding
These schools enter into a voluntary agreement with the NCAA. If they don’t want to abide by the rules then they can always leave.
It’s just grandstanding
Posted on 9/11/19 at 12:02 am to TeddyWestside
quote:
I haven't read up too much on these laws, so someone will have to educate me: what exactly are they legislating? It is not currently against the law in any jurisdiction, as far as I know, for a player to profit from his likeness or to even accept money from boosters or coaches. Yes, it is against NCAA rules, but no one has ever been led away in handcuffs just for breaking NCAA rules.
Short version. Cali passed a law and the Gov will sign it stating that players can even hire agents and obtain deals.
The NCAA warned they would disqualify the schools in Cali from National Championship games in all sports.
Cali said.. We will see you in court.
So yes, it is legal, but it disqualifies the player with the NCAA... the LAW says.. BS! See in front of a judge.
Forbes Mag is straight up saying the NCAA has no choice or Cali and the other states will bring antitrust lawsuits up
Posted on 9/11/19 at 12:03 am to AirbusDawg
quote:
The NCAA doesn't have to ban anyone. Play by the rules set forth by the NCAA, or face the penalties.
You were right up until that point. the NCAA can not avoid a state law when it comes to this. It will result in Antitrust lawsuits.
Posted on 9/11/19 at 12:04 am to TeddyWestside
quote:
I haven't read up too much on these laws, so someone will have to educate me: what exactly are they legislating? It is not currently against the law in any jurisdiction, as far as I know, for a player to profit from his likeness or to even accept money from boosters or coaches. Yes, it is against NCAA rules, but no one has ever been led away in handcuffs just for breaking NCAA rules.
Your employer can do lots of things to you that aren't going to get them or you carted away in handcuffs either, but it doesn't make what they're doing "legal". Civil lawsuits don't lead to capital punishments.
Posted on 9/11/19 at 12:05 am to JesusQuintana
quote:
so what’s the point of a law saying they can?
To tell the NCAA that any attempt to harm a player's ability for income is illegal and you can't take his or her's source of income away.
quote:
These schools enter into a voluntary agreement with the NCAA.
They do.
quote:
If they don’t want to abide by the rules then they can always leave.
I agree..
But not any more.
Posted on 9/11/19 at 12:10 am to Jjdoc
Ahhhh ok, I understand now... kind of. So when California passes this law, the NCAA may ban all the schools who adhere to the law from postseason play, at which point California will bring an antitrust lawsuit.
But it could take years before it would even go to trial. Wouldn't the affected schools be banned in the interim if they didn't back down to the NCAA, still doing serious damage to those schools? Or could California file some kind of injunction that the judge could grant to keep the NCAA from banning those schools from postseason play until the trial ends?
We need to get Litigator or some of the other real lawyers on this board in this thread. I am only three weeks into my first year Civil Procedure class, so these questions are way over my head.
But it could take years before it would even go to trial. Wouldn't the affected schools be banned in the interim if they didn't back down to the NCAA, still doing serious damage to those schools? Or could California file some kind of injunction that the judge could grant to keep the NCAA from banning those schools from postseason play until the trial ends?
We need to get Litigator or some of the other real lawyers on this board in this thread. I am only three weeks into my first year Civil Procedure class, so these questions are way over my head.
This post was edited on 9/11/19 at 12:22 am
Posted on 9/11/19 at 12:11 am to Jjdoc
Posted on 9/11/19 at 12:11 am to AirbusDawg
quote:
It's pretty simple really, NCAA rules state that players are not to be paid. It is the school's choice whether to stay in the NCAA or leave. The NCAA doesn't have to ban anyone. Play by the rules set forth by the NCAA, or face the penalties.
Sounds like the NCAA literally holds all the power in this relationship. They have a monopoly; if LSU or UGA doesn't like it, you think they're going to jump ship and join the NAIA?
Posted on 9/11/19 at 12:12 am to TeddyWestside
quote:
But it could take years before it would even go to trial. Wouldn't the affected schools be banned in the interim if they didn't back down to the NCAA, still doing serious damage to those schools? Or could California file some kind of injunction that the judge could grant to keep the NCAA from banning those schools from postseason play?
There would almost assuredly be a court order prohibiting the NCAA from taking punitive action while a trial is pending.
Posted on 9/11/19 at 12:16 am to Jjdoc
I don't see this ever happening. Players are compensated by the scholarships they are receiving. This is really just about two sports, football and basketball. Once people realize that football and basketball revenues help pay the way for other athletes to attend college such as equestrian and water women's water polo, they will back off. I don't really understand the argument of using a players name or likeness. So Alabama could sell a jersey with the number 13, but not have Tua on the back of it? Big deal, sell a jersey with just 13. Problem solved.
Posted on 9/11/19 at 12:18 am to AirbusDawg
Title IX gonna frick this up. Watch and see
This post was edited on 9/11/19 at 12:19 am
Posted on 9/11/19 at 12:20 am to LSUNV
quote:
I will just drop this here
Read it, and don't see how that applies to sates passing laws that put the NCAA in it's line of fire.
The NCAA will be forced to act:
-Either call the bluff on Cali
or
- Just ignore it.
or
- Change the rules voluntary.
There are no other choices.
- Call their Bluff... SCOTUS... here we come.
- Ignore it will just be a total removal of their power.
- Be involved in the process to change it and be a shell of what we use to be.
Page 1 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News