Started By
Message
re: NIL saga: AGs of Georgia, Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, SC file brief in support of NCAA
Posted on 2/11/21 at 2:16 pm to Old Hellen Yeller
Posted on 2/11/21 at 2:16 pm to Old Hellen Yeller
quote:
create a framework and cap the benefits.
Why do you think they will allow them to be capped at all?
How is that different from now?
They are moving towards ZERO barriers and limits, which is moronic.
0
Posted on 2/11/21 at 2:18 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
You need to think this over very carefully before you support players getting compensated for their likenesses. What you will see are schools in big market cities will start getting the best players. You will see schools based in and around Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, Dallas, Houston etc will be able to give the pitch that their TV and media centers will make it much easier for the athlete to get contracts promoting their likenesses.
Check out Korey Foreman's recruitment by USC and you will see this is already coming to fruition. USC has developed a program aimed at maximizing their player's "brand" and this appealed to Foreman and likely others this year, and certainly going forward.
Posted on 2/11/21 at 2:19 pm to lsufball19
quote:
quote:
How does a group get away with telling a public funded University on who to admit and who not to admit.
They don't. They tell players who is eligible to play and who isn't. The schools are free to admit anyone they choose to their universities
Additionally, all of the schools originally got together and decided this was a good thing. They all decided to be a part of it. No one forced them.
quote:
NCAA is racist!!!!
Riddle me this, then: how come the rules were essentially the same pre-integration?
Sorry a group that was formed when radios were a "new-fangled thing" couldn't anticipate what cable, satellite, streaming, and smart phones would do to the worth of an athletes NIL.
Posted on 2/11/21 at 2:36 pm to lsufball19
You can't tell an adult they can't make a living. That is age discrimination.
Posted on 2/11/21 at 2:56 pm to paperwasp
Once the women and progressives in the Democratic Party in Congress realize that with NIL some men are about to get paid while women don't get a dime, it will be dead.
Posted on 2/11/21 at 3:00 pm to AUCE05
quote:
You can't tell an adult they can't make a living. That is age discrimination.
Posted on 2/11/21 at 3:00 pm to paperwasp
quote:
A California court ruled that athletes have a right to more "educational" based benefits, and that the NCAA can't stop schools from giving it to them.
With NIL, the schools aren't paying the players a dime.
And as far as benefits provided by the school, Title IX is still the law of the land.
Posted on 2/11/21 at 3:01 pm to AUCE05
quote:
There is zero argument for an adult to not make money on his/her likeness.
There are a lot of arguments to be made against it when you factor in how much the government already regulates publicly funded colleges (which is almost every college in the US outside of Hillsdale).
Title IX issues alone are non-trivial for paying players.
Posted on 2/11/21 at 3:02 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:
Once the women and progressives in the Democratic Party in Congress realize that with NIL some men are about to get paid while women don't get a dime, it will be dead
The Democrats appear to be for it.
quote:
The run-off elections in Georgia provided Democrats with two additional seats in the Senate, a majority in that body and now full control of Congress. NIL legislation from the NCAA was already set to take into account proposed NIL bills in Congress. However, the bills proposed by Democrats, in general, provide more benefits to athletes than any proposed NIL legislation by the NCAA.
This post was edited on 2/11/21 at 3:05 pm
Posted on 2/11/21 at 3:04 pm to AUCE05
quote:
There is zero argument for an adult to not make money on his/her likeness. It is actually impressive the NCAA has lasted this long under their current structure. Hopefully the NCAA loses, and we finally get a super conference.
Do you really want Mercedes to be able to give all 85 of our scholarship football players $10,000 and a new Mercedes to drive every year in exchange for a few appearances at the plant?
Posted on 2/11/21 at 3:06 pm to paperwasp
quote:
The Democrats appear to be for it.
I know they are at the moment. Klobuchar's name is even on it. But do you think that many have even read it and thought about the ramifications? Does anyone really think AOC and the Squad will sit quietly and let men get paid but not women?
Posted on 2/11/21 at 3:08 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:
With NIL, the schools aren't paying the players a dime.
Not as proposed by the NCAA, but the California court ruled that they could. That's the crux of the argument.
The court also basically said, "You guys implement this, and then come back and check with us to make sure you're doing it right." Which is part of what the States are filing against today.
Posted on 2/11/21 at 3:13 pm to AUCE05
quote:
There is zero argument for an adult to not make money on his/her likeness.
Also, you do realize that the athlete still is not entitled to use the university's name or the team logo or uniform, right?
The majority of the players at Alabama and Auburn wouldn't even be recognized in a TV ad on a Birmingham TV station if the ad didn't reference the fact that they played at Alabama or Auburn...which it won't be able to do.
Remember the Scott Cochran Regions Bank ad? What's missing?
Posted on 2/11/21 at 3:14 pm to lsufball19
They set what high school players must take and pass in HS and what they must score on sat and act to be admitted. Say a kid going to Fort Walton high school to play at Florida must have 4 years of English. That is not true of every student. It is different rules for players.
Posted on 2/11/21 at 3:17 pm to paperwasp
quote:
Not as proposed by the NCAA, but the California court ruled that they could. That's the crux of the argument.
No, it said this:
"The opinion issued May 18 by a three-judge panel in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld a district court’s decision saying the NCAA can’t place restrictions on the education-related benefits available to athletes playing in Division I Football Bowl Subdivision or Division I men’s or women’s basketball."
Nowhere did it say that the school is paying for NIL. It says they can't place restrictions on education related benefits. It says nothing about the school being involved in an endorsement contract between an athlete and a third party.
This post was edited on 2/11/21 at 3:22 pm
Posted on 2/11/21 at 3:21 pm to paperwasp
We won’t get to enjoy college football much longer.
Posted on 2/11/21 at 3:25 pm to GulfCoastOutlaw
quote:
They set what high school players must take and pass in HS and what they must score on sat and act to be admitted. Say a kid going to Fort Walton high school to play at Florida must have 4 years of English. That is not true of every student. It is different rules for players.
I've always thought the way the NCAA considers ACT scores for athletes is bit weird.
quote:
The ACT has four sections: English, Math, Reading, and Science. Each of these sections is scored on a scale from 1 to 36, and these four section scores are averaged together to give you a composite score, also out of 36.
That said, your composite score doesn't really matter for NCAA. Instead, NCAA adds your section scores together to get a sum score.
If you take the ACT more than once, NCAA will take your best section scores from any dates. In other words, NCAA will mix and match your highest section scores on each test you take to get your highest possible ACT sum score.
So for regular students, your eligibility for college acceptance and scholarships is based on your best ACT composite score.
For athletes, they take the best scores for each section (possibly over multiple tests), and add them together?
This post was edited on 2/11/21 at 3:29 pm
Posted on 2/11/21 at 3:26 pm to Hogfan13
Why has there never been a black president of the NCAA?
Posted on 2/11/21 at 3:33 pm to BamaGradinTn
Yeah, I think we're both saying the same thing, I may have made it confusing with my choice of wording.
I think the NCAA believes this opens the door for schools to call anything 'educational' and use that to provide additional benefits.
The NCAA thus wants to place restrictions on what these benefits from the schools are, and the courts say they can't.
NIL is a separate (but related) issue.
I think the NCAA believes this opens the door for schools to call anything 'educational' and use that to provide additional benefits.
The NCAA thus wants to place restrictions on what these benefits from the schools are, and the courts say they can't.
NIL is a separate (but related) issue.
Posted on 2/11/21 at 3:35 pm to GulfCoastOutlaw
quote:
It is different rules for players.
Right, it's easier for players to be admitted into a University than a normal student. But people who provide value at a University get special treatment all the time. That's why they're on scholarships too.
Players are still required to pass the required credits required of all incoming students at the University. They just may not have great grades. Players with offers fail to qualify all the time bud.
That academic requirements for an athlete to be eligible is honestly a joke. If you can't get there, you probably shouldn't be in college at all. Not sure how this shows the NCAA is racist
This post was edited on 2/11/21 at 3:38 pm
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News