Re: House v NCAA
Posted: Fri Sep 06, 2024 11:34 am
1) we'll disagree. the representation has the backing of more than just a couple people that can hire an attorney. the attorneys in this deal is set to make > than $500 million from the settlement dollars, fwiw.steel_hop wrote: ↑Fri Sep 06, 2024 11:17 amTwo thingsa fan wrote: ↑Fri Sep 06, 2024 10:56 amThe mindset folks have surrounding this stuff is SO weird. Reading the comments from Americans where they think it makes sense to cap players ability to earn......but NOT coaches, trainers, admin. Oh they can avail themselves of the free market. Wait...what?wgdsr wrote: ↑Fri Sep 06, 2024 10:42 am https://www.sportico.com/law/analysis/2 ... 234796270/
wilken sending them back to the drawing board, nonplussed on nil restriction language or implementation. as well as other filing shortcomings including future athletes.
love the nc$$ attorney saying basically "we're not sure we have a deal then, this is what we're willing to do and it all needs to be in there". they've literally lost every case for almost 10 years, is facing a judge who has presided over some of them, and face by some estimates a $20 billion liability. they still think they have hand.
Show of hands: who here in America wants a third party to arbitrarily decide how much money you can earn? None of you, right? Well, then why would anyone ever advocate doing that to a fellow American?
I don't understand how folks don't get that's what the NCAA is trying to do.....stifle earnings, and they're doing it without talking with players.
This ain't the Soviet Union, comrade NCAA.
1) Anyone that joins a union is letting a "3rd party to arbitrarily decide how much money you can earn." I also understand that where this is eventually going. The involvement of any union is going to be wild given the vast differences between schools, conferences, sports, etc. If I was on a pro-union athlete, I'd want nothing to do with the legacy unions out there given their level of corruption and bloat and look toward the NFLPA, MLBPA, or the like for support.
2) Is it really earnings? I'd call what is going on more like bribes. Earnings you get compensated based on your performance or work. Most of these NIL deals are inducements to attend a college (note, I don't blame any player from working this angle to get as much as he/she can). The guys driving the bus on this (football and men's basketball players) already get full "compensation" in the form of free education, room, board and other support - obviously other sports aren't all full scholarships (and those are the ones that are going to get whacked in any deal). The rest should certainly be on the table but said "rest" should be for actual work - i.e., going to signings, IG earnings, performance on the field, etc. It shouldn't just be for showing up to school X.
so it's union and cba or no collusion/monopoly/cartel setting rules on comp and everybody fends for themselves. same as the job market.
2) nil is the only thing allowed thus far, only because of collusion/monopoly/cartel of the nc$$. alston could only rule on nil, as that was what the actual suit was for. but the justices weighed in anyway on the rest, and told the nc$$ that what they've been doing regarding it all was illegal, and to get going on collective bargaining.
anyone that has a bug up because the nc$$ went back after all that and did nothing with athletes other than fight more court cases, and narrowly define nil to their own standard is in get off my lawn stage. imo