PHS

Do players yet have the upper hand?

Facts: The NCAA still does have restrictive NIL rules that were not agreed to by players.

The NCAA caps non-education related benefits without the agreement of players.

Also facts: Two unfair labor practice complaints have been filed with the NLRB against the NCAA.

A pending lawsuit could lead to all DI athletes (if not indirectly others) being recognized as employees under the FLSA, who are due at least a minimum wage. (Johnson v NCAA.)

A pending lawsuit by DI athletes (House v NCAA) could (and almost certainly will) lead to an injunction against the the NCAA's NIL rules.

But ultimately, until such time as athletes exert their true power, their schools will look to shite on them any way they can. That's their history.

I like Bama's AD's take on NIL at the Spring meetings, which was that the NCAA's NIL restrictions are illegal under under Federal antitrust law. (Yes, of course they are.) He later implied Bama folks need not pay heed to the the NCAA's illegal rules, in part because no one can tell fact from fiction, anyway lol

quote:

---

It's not retroactive, these rules are just clarification.

But beyond that, why do people think the federal court system is somehow the place where these things are decided? This will never see a court room of any level.

The NCAA is voluntary. If A&M or anyone else doesn't like it, they can just leave.

---

The federal court system is the place to settle it because the NCAA's remaining NIL restrictions might be illegal restraints on trade under federal antitrust law. I say "might" because the NCAA's antitrust violations are historically analyzed by the courts under the Rule of Reason, meaning they may or may not be legal. In this case, we'll see...

In House vs NCAA, DI athletes are suing for NIL damages and for an injunction against the NCAA's remaining NIL restrictions. From the consolidated amended complaint: (House is a combination of three lawsuits)

quote:

---

5. ...Moreover, even under its interim policy, the NCAA has not suspended enforcement of critical aspects of its NIL restraints, including those restraints prohibiting NCAA institutions from compensating student-athletes for use of their NILs, as well as restraints prohibiting NIL compensation from being contingent upon athletic participation or performance, or
enrollment at a particular school. All of Defendants’ NCAA NIL restraints are unreasonable restraints of trade, are unjustified, and should be enjoined...

32. No procompetitive purposes are served by the NCAA’ NIL rules. They all should thus be permanently enjoined, including those aspects of the NIL rules that the NCAA states it will continue to enforce under its interim policy: the rules barring NIL compensation “contingent upon enrollment at a particular school,” based on an athlete’s “athletic participation or performance,” and the rules barring NIL compensation provided by NCAA institutions in exchange for the use of a student-athlete’s name, image or likeness. These are all unjustified and unreasonable restraints on competition in the relevant labor markets...

---

That case survived dismissal last year and is in discovery. Class certification will come this year or next and trial is set for 2024. I've no doubt that other people will sue if the NCAA enforces those rules.

Volunteerism has nothing to do with the application of antitrust law. NCAA athletes are voluntarily so yet they successfully sued the NCAA in White, in O'Bannon and in Alston and likely will again in House. NCAA assistant coaches are voluntarily so but they once successfully sued the NCAA for capping their compensation. (Law vs NCAA.) Oklahoma and Georgia are voluntary members of the NCAA but they successfully sued the association for their TV rights. (Oklahoma Board of Regents vs NCAA.) Those were all federal antitrust cases.

NIL aside, all DI schools may provide athletes vehicles as long as they're at least ostensibly for getting to class.

From DI bylaw 16.3.4

quote:

---

A conference or institution may provide...tangible items not included in the cost of attendance calculation but nonetheless related to the pursuit of academic studies

---

That's part of the end result of Alston vs NCAA. In their appeals, the NCAA complained this means schools can provide athletes with vehicles, even luxury ones, to get to class. The SCOTUS reminded them that, as per paragraph 3 of the injunction, they are free to ask the district court to amend the injunction to allow them to enforce a "no Lamborghini rule" or whatever, but they have not done that. Not yet, anyway.

BTW, the presiding judge in that case is now presiding over a NIL-related antitrust class action that could lead to an injunction against NCAA-wide and division-wide NIL restrictions, so there's that, too.

You know, of course, that I'm just kidding about the dick sucking, right?

My main point (which, if I'm not mistaken, is beside the OP's main point, but I don't give a shite) is that Dabo Swinney is an avowed proponent of the systematic robbing of the college athletes who generate revenue so that he may better enrich himself.

The study I linked earlier shows that the avg 'cost' of the scholarships earned by FBS football players amounts to only about 17% of the collective worth of their services, and it found that D1 men's basketball players were paid only about 9% of of their market value. Think about that...

The good news is that college athletes have twice won antitrust lawsuits against the NCAA over the past few years (price-fixing the cost of labor is illegal under section 1 of the Sherman Act) and the "good ole days" of the economic exploitation of college athletes is drawing to a close.

Peace.

:lol:

quote:

---

my screenname choice is a twofer I like the architecture of Tillman Hall. it's shape is a symbol of the university seen on t-shirts and elsewhere. and it gets liberal racebaiters and bitter fans of rival teams riled up. you are case in point. lol

---

My friend, nice try, but you won't be able to convince me that you're not a "racebaiter" yourself with a name like that. May Swinney and his thieving God save you. :cheers:

quote:

---

on Top of all of this he wore the football matters shirt. Dabo is really fricking up. Whether you agree with what’s going on or not, you can’t do this when the majority of the kids that play for you are black. Clemson pleads ignorance every single time something comes up. Back to when his players failed that drug test before the playoff two years ago. It’s always “oh shucks” with Dabo, I hope his name continues to get drug through the dirt

---

The problem with Clemson is that they ignore their racist roots, pretending it's not there. The problem with Swinney is that he's a moron. The problem with Swinney's supporters is that they, too, are morons. Either that or blind...

quote:

---

Hopefully Clemsom cleans house, I hate Dabo hes an idiot

---

Word. Wake me when Dabo is gone or when the weird-arse Clemson faithful insist that he not rob folk in the name of God. :thup:

quote:

---

When you have our Coot rivals posting this crap what do you expect to see? Love poems?? SMH

---

Don't be so cynical. Now ask yourself:

a) how many of your friends were drunk this weekend?
b) how many Muslims in Arabia or Afghanistan were drunk this weekend?
c) considering the prospect of a true American free market like you and I enjoy, exactly how much money has Dabo robbed from Clemson athletes this year?