NCAA Transfer & NIL Policies

Congress should get involved. They can settle that quick unlike war, and immigrants and drugs.
 
BaNgMyPrOgRaM said:
Congress should get involved. They can settle that quick unlike war, and immigrants and drugs.
Click to expand...
Congress is getting involved...sort of. Some representatives introduced a bill that would basically immunize the NCAA from lawsuits that seek to stop it from enforcing its rules, basically forcing things to go back to how they were. It's probably dead on arrival.
 
News reports say that the NCAA is on the cusp of a settlement in the 2 antitrust class actions currently being litigated against it. I don't understand why they would settle before congressional action.

A class settlement agreement will resolve questions about the NCAA's past behavior (likely w/o an admission of antitrust violations) and would liquidate the NCAA's liability to the class members. Current estimates are north of $2B in damages.

A settlement cannot, however, insulate the NCAA for any future behavior. So unless the NCAA plans on closing up shop the day the settlement is signed, they are right back in the soup. There is one other pending class case and others would immediately be filed. Oh, and w/r/t to *all* these cases, individual class members would have an absolute right to opt out and pursue their own cases. So settling these cases will give the NCAA nothing in terms of resolving their liability going forward.

As badly as the NCAA wants to put this in the rear view and move forward, it cannot do that unless congress gives them an antitrust exemption. So why are they settling?
 
N Mollen said:
News reports say that the NCAA is on the cusp of a settlement in the 2 antitrust class actions currently being litigated against it. I don't understand why they would settle before congressional action.

A class settlement agreement will resolve questions about the NCAA's past behavior (likely w/o an admission of antitrust violations) and would liquidate the NCAA's liability to the class members. Current estimates are north of $2B in damages.

A settlement cannot, however, insulate the NCAA for any future behavior. So unless the NCAA plans on closing up shop the day the settlement is signed, they are right back in the soup. There is one other pending class case and others would immediately be filed. Oh, and w/r/t to *all* these cases, individual class members would have an absolute right to opt out and pursue their own cases. So settling these cases will give the NCAA nothing in terms of resolving their liability going forward.

As badly as the NCAA wants to put this in the rear view and move forward, it cannot do that unless congress gives them an antitrust exemption. So why are they settling?
Click to expand...
Can they try to add a hold harmless clause? Assume that's a no go given future harm would be to players who've yet to enter college and thus aren't party to any settlement, but perhaps that's their plan?
 
VCU77 said:
What does this mean for VCU?
Click to expand...
that the P5 conferences have made an agreement that attempts to offload 60% of the sport's antitrust liability on programs in the rest of the conferences, even though the latter conferences are not parties in the litigation.

It means that the other conferences will object to the settlement. It means that nothing is resolved. It means we are still waiting for Congress to do something
 
Assuming the court approves this settlement, which is not a done deal, this might work to the advantage of basketball-only schools. The power conferences will spend the majority of the 20 million cap on football leaving less than half to bssketball, while basketball-only schools have that money to spend solely on basketball. The article from the WSJ points out that this kind of disbursement could run afoul of Title IX. And I wonder if state government might step in to stop state supported universities from directly paying student atheletes with state money.
 
Ramaste said:
Assuming the court approves this settlement, which is not a done deal, this might work to the advantage of basketball-only schools. The power conferences will spend the majority of the 20 million cap on football leaving less than half to bssketball, while basketball-only schools have that money to spend solely on basketball. The article from the WSJ points out that this kind of disbursement could run afoul of Title IX. And I wonder if state government might step in to stop state supported universities from directly paying student atheletes with state money.
Click to expand...
A cap won't mean much because the collective folks and fans will also give players money so there will be many instances of players circumventing any "cap".
 
AlienAiden said:
A cap won't mean much because the collective folks and fans will also give players money so there will be many instances of players circumventing any "cap".
Click to expand...
True, there is no cap on outside NIL as of yet. But the agreement to allow schools to directly pay student atheletes and setting a high cap puts the university at the head of the line of "NIL contributors," and gives them leverage they did not have before in the NIL world. The universities want to restore some semblance of order and will do this by putting up guardrails, such as regulations on agents, transfer rules, tampering, and from where and from whom a player can receive other money. With regulations in place, the collective folks will see less opportunity to influence the action. I am aware that the NCAA has a lousy track record of enforcing is own regulations equitably, but the universities want to pay players to wrest back control from outside influences.
 
WillWeaverRVA said:
Click to expand...

It is just so outrageous. College basketball becomes a AAA pro league (bye bye G league), with all proceeds subsidizing football.

I think there are very steep hurdles before this could ever be approved (how are the non-P5 leagues bound by the results of litigation to which they were not party?) but this just nauseates me.
 
N Mollen said:
It is just so outrageous. College basketball becomes a AAA pro league (bye bye G league), with all proceeds subsidizing football.

I think there are very steep hurdles before this could ever be approved (how are the non-P5 leagues bound by the results of litigation to which they were not party?) but this just nauseates me.
Click to expand...
Exactly. It blows my mind that 27 other NCAA Division I conferences can be bound by these rulings and settlements, which were made to favor just five (well, soon to be four as the Pac-12 will cease to exist on July 1st) FBS football conferences.

And it's not even just football, it's specifically FBS football. The FCS football conferences and schools are getting just as screwed as the non-football conferences are.
 
WillWeaverRVA said:
Exactly. It blows my mind that 27 other NCAA Division I conferences can be bound by these rulings and settlements, which were made to favor just five (well, soon to be four as the Pac-12 will cease to exist on July 1st) FBS football conferences.

And it's not even just football, it's specifically FBS football. The FCS football conferences and schools are getting just as screwed as the non-football conferences are.
Click to expand...
I read someplace (I think) that the NCAA is not even a defendant (although clearly was negotiating the agreement). How this agreement purports to bind all of the absent conferences and programs is beyond me. I suppose it is possible (a) the NCAA is a defendant and (b) as a condition of membership, every institution authorizes the NCAA to represent it in any litigation of this sort. I suppose we will find out, because if this isn't the case you can bet the BE/A10 etc will come in guns blazing when the motion for approval of the agreement is filed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top