Started By
Message
re: the issue isn't pro/amateur
Posted on 8/30/26 at 5:05 pm to Hester Carries
Posted on 8/30/26 at 5:05 pm to Hester Carries
quote:
A lot of you are still in denial about what is happening.
You can’t have a league that
1) pays people for a skill
2) is the most lucrative place for them to be paid for that skill
3) has a market that wishes to pay them
4) sets arbitrary limitations on people’s ability to access that potential compensation
That’s the literal crux of all of this. It’s not NFL vs CFB. It’s not lane kiffin. It’s not 5 years to play 5. That’s all just shadows of the same item. NCAA became pro sports in the eyes of the law the minute players got paid. They won’t be able to tell people “you can maximize your earnings but only for 5 years. Even if someone wants to continue to pay you”
As long as players get paid, a court will eventually, and rightfully, rule eligibility rules are not permissible.
Yes, it’s terrible for college athletics. But the courts interest isn’t to do what’s best for college athletics.
This right here
0
Posted on 8/30/26 at 5:07 pm to RockyRococco
quote:
you cant play ball. they didnt get fricking drafted im pretty sure the armed forces don't reject people who were just graduated from college
So, college sports is more important than military service. Okay.
I guess it's more important than a religious mission, too.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 5:10 pm to New Money
i never said any of that. you are implying that it's impossible to join the military or do charity work if you go to college first which is retarded
Posted on 8/30/26 at 5:24 pm to RockyRococco
quote:
i wish i went to law school so i could figure out wtf is going on, but from a layman's view, you can't force other parties into action they don't consent to. i guess this is age discrimination or something???
You don’t need to go to law school. You need to erase what you know about college sports from your brain and ask yourself this question
“What’s the most money Diego Pavia can make for his most valuable skill”
The answer is college quarterback. It didn’t use to be the answer but now it is.
Legally an industry can’t say he can’t make that money.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 5:46 pm to Hester Carries
quote:
Legally an industry can’t say he can’t make that money.
if the mac or funbelt want 30 year olds playing ball they are more than allowed to do such. what i'm saying is you're forcing people (rhe SEC) doing their own thing with all willing partners to do something they don't want to do
Posted on 8/30/26 at 5:55 pm to RockyRococco
quote:
i never said any of that. you are implying that it's impossible to join the military or do charity work if you go to college first which is retarded
Some folks can't afford college without doing the military first.
Some folks join the military right out of high school for reasons other than money.
I didn't start college until I was 23 (not due to military service).
This post was edited on 8/30/26 at 6:07 pm
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:04 pm to RockyRococco
quote:
what i'm saying is you're forcing people (rhe SEC) doing their own thing with all willing partners to do something they don't want to do
The government restricts companies/organization from “doing what they want to do” all the time
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:04 pm to RockyRococco
What about ex military or Mormons? Gonna kick them out also? I know there arent a lot at big schools. But guys do go to college after fighting for our country or going on missions. Both admiral
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:09 pm to RockyRococco
frickin retard thought he had something.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:20 pm to RockyRococco
quote:
you're forcing people (rhe SEC) doing their own thing with all willing partners to do something they don't want to do
If a judge sees the action, rule, or bylaw of the group as discriminatory, then the judge will not allow the group to enforce that action, rule, or bylaw.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:21 pm to New Money
quote:
Some folks can't afford college without doing the military first.
that isn't an issue for someone talented enough to play SEC ball. there's this thing called a scholarship. the broader problem is the NCAA and bloated bureacricies in general, if someone is 35 and goes to college and wants to be on the golf team for 4 years, who the frick cares? d1 football needs to be carved out and set
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:26 pm to EulerRules
this is like the hooters ruling or whatever
our business is hot chicks and our revenue relies on it
our business is people want to see 18-23 year olds play ball not 30 year olds our revenue relies on it
if i apply to be a stripper down Wacko's in san marco and they reject me i can't win a lawsuit
our business is hot chicks and our revenue relies on it
our business is people want to see 18-23 year olds play ball not 30 year olds our revenue relies on it
if i apply to be a stripper down Wacko's in san marco and they reject me i can't win a lawsuit
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:37 pm to Hester Carries
quote:
Legally an industry can’t say he can’t make that money.
Legally many jobs can exclude potential employees because they can’t pass a security clearance or background check. Is that illegal? It is impeding a person’s ability to pursue employment.
They are disqualifying someone because of past behavior. They are coming up with arbitrary rules. If it is legal to deny a person from working because they can’t pass a company’s background check, why would it not be legal for a school or conference to deny a person the right to play because they participated in past behavior they don’t agree with and feel should be disqualifying?
Posted on 8/30/26 at 10:21 pm to RockyRococco
Can't do that because of religious purposes with BYU and players going on a missions.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 10:23 pm to RockyRococco
quote:
do your missionary trip after college
yknow like a lot of them already do
Thats not how that works. It would open up the NCAA for a major lawsuit with major implications. This is like telling a Muslim they can't pray in public.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 10:30 pm to captdalton
quote:
Legally many jobs can exclude potential employees because they can’t pass a security clearance or background check. Is that illegal? It is impeding a person’s ability to pursue employment.
They are disqualifying someone because of past behavior. They are coming up with arbitrary rules. If it is legal to deny a person from working because they can’t pass a company’s background check, why would it not be legal for a school or conference to deny a person the right to play because they participated in past behavior they don’t agree with and feel should be disqualifying?
Wow.
Just wow.
Page 2 of 2
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News