Jump to content
Jaroslav Hasek

the NCAA is not 'above the law'

Recommended Posts

That is according to the Supreme Court, who issued a narrow ruling that 'upheld an injunction imposed by a federal district court that barred the NCAA from limiting “compensation and benefits related to education."' Though narrow in immediate scope, the Supreme Court obliterated the notion that the NCAA should get some sort of exemption to the Sherman anti-trust act, and that if it wanted one it should lobby Congress, not SCOTUS. More here. Here's the court's opinion

This, plus the number of states allowing students to profit off their name, image and likeness as soon as July 1st in some cases would, to me, portend some fairly radical changes to the NCAA landscape in the near future. I am curious if there are any sharp legal minds in the forum that would like to weigh in on the topic, and how it might affect college wrestling specifically. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Jaroslav Hasek said:

That is according to the Supreme Court, who issued a narrow ruling that 'upheld an injunction imposed by a federal district court that barred the NCAA from limiting “compensation and benefits related to education."' Though narrow in immediate scope, the Supreme Court obliterated the notion that the NCAA should get some sort of exemption to the Sherman anti-trust act, and that if it wanted one it should lobby Congress, not SCOTUS. More here. Here's the court's opinion

This, plus the number of states allowing students to profit off their name, image and likeness as soon as July 1st in some cases would, to me, portend some fairly radical changes to the NCAA landscape in the near future. I am curious if there are any sharp legal minds in the forum that would like to weigh in on the topic, and how it might affect college wrestling specifically. 

Gable and a few others about to make some decent money. Maybe Ferrari. RBY and a few others. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Downtown Brown said:

Gable and a few others about to make some decent money. Maybe Ferrari. RBY and a few others. 

I'd suggest buy stock in Ford

Ford Motor Company
NYSE: F

OverviewNewsCompareFinancials
14.84 USD +0.32 (2.24%)today
Jun 21, 2:38 PM EDT · Disclaimer

gonna be huge demand for the new Ford Focus:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jaroslav Hasek said:

That is according to the Supreme Court, who issued a narrow ruling that 'upheld an injunction imposed by a federal district court that barred the NCAA from limiting “compensation and benefits related to education."' Though narrow in immediate scope, the Supreme Court obliterated the notion that the NCAA should get some sort of exemption to the Sherman anti-trust act, and that if it wanted one it should lobby Congress, not SCOTUS. More here. Here's the court's opinion

This, plus the number of states allowing students to profit off their name, image and likeness as soon as July 1st in some cases would, to me, portend some fairly radical changes to the NCAA landscape in the near future. I am curious if there are any sharp legal minds in the forum that would like to weigh in on the topic, and how it might affect college wrestling specifically. 

FloKaren?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, uncle bernard said:

What part don't you like?

Feel like it opens the door for "bad" recruiting (yes I know they discuss how there are still a bunch of rules around it).  I also am torn about what athlete's already do get for being an athlete (tuition, books, room and board, travel, clothes, special tutoring, etc.) and why isn't that enough?  But on the flip side I also understand how much money universities do make off of athletes.  So again...just torn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, dman115 said:

Feel like it opens the door for "bad" recruiting (yes I know they discuss how there are still a bunch of rules around it).  I also am torn about what athlete's already do get for being an athlete (tuition, books, room and board, travel, clothes, special tutoring, etc.) and why isn't that enough?  But on the flip side I also understand how much money universities do make off of athletes.  So again...just torn.

I hear this.  The NCAA is high profile but rather insular in it’s competitive field.  Taken to the extreme, this will gradually erode the system we see today, and many sports could progress to a baseball style farm system.  Baseball and gymnastics are the only two sports I can think of where the NCAA isn't the defacto farm system.  

Overall, I say hooray, as this will disempower a number of the worst actors in colleges around the country, and the colleges at large.  Education ought be a service for the people, not the mutant pseudo-profiteering industry it has become.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, dman115 said:

Feel like it opens the door for "bad" recruiting (yes I know they discuss how there are still a bunch of rules around it).  I also am torn about what athlete's already do get for being an athlete (tuition, books, room and board, travel, clothes, special tutoring, etc.) and why isn't that enough?  But on the flip side I also understand how much money universities do make off of athletes.  So again...just torn.

If you have ever asked for a raise and your boss says, "why isn't your current salary enough?", do you have a reply?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jaroslav Hasek said:

That is according to the Supreme Court, who issued a narrow ruling that 'upheld an injunction imposed by a federal district court that barred the NCAA from limiting “compensation and benefits related to education."' Though narrow in immediate scope, the Supreme Court obliterated the notion that the NCAA should get some sort of exemption to the Sherman anti-trust act, and that if it wanted one it should lobby Congress, not SCOTUS. More here. Here's the court's opinion

This, plus the number of states allowing students to profit off their name, image and likeness as soon as July 1st in some cases would, to me, portend some fairly radical changes to the NCAA landscape in the near future. I am curious if there are any sharp legal minds in the forum that would like to weigh in on the topic, and how it might affect college wrestling specifically. 

I have not followed this case, and I have not read Gorsuch’s opinion either, but on the surface it looks like a truly narrow holding, as the article you quoted said. 

As I understand it, the Court is simply talking about non-cash compensation *related to education* — although at least one analyst mentioned paid post-graduate internships as well  

In his concurring opinion, Kavanaugh signaled that he thinks athletes should be compensated for their athletic endeavors. 

Edited by Katie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope men and women can make as much as they want off of their likeness and name.  Some of the female athletes could make good money off of their huge social media followings.  I don't have any problem if endorsement money is promised in recruiting.  

But I'm strongly against the NCAA paying directly.  If the NCAA pays football/basketball it will end non-revenue sports for men and women.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jaroslav Hasek said:

That is according to the Supreme Court, who issued a narrow ruling that 'upheld an injunction imposed by a federal district court that barred the NCAA from limiting “compensation and benefits related to education."' Though narrow in immediate scope, the Supreme Court obliterated the notion that the NCAA should get some sort of exemption to the Sherman anti-trust act, and that if it wanted one it should lobby Congress, not SCOTUS. More here. Here's the court's opinion

This, plus the number of states allowing students to profit off their name, image and likeness as soon as July 1st in some cases would, to me, portend some fairly radical changes to the NCAA landscape in the near future. I am curious if there are any sharp legal minds in the forum that would like to weigh in on the topic, and how it might affect college wrestling specifically. 

image.png.413b513948815c337383d2346b3da56f.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, gimpeltf said:

I'm concerned about a further lack of parity between schools. Big money schools with deep pocketed alums just got talent richer.

Just like in academics.  And just like in every other area of life.  If those schools can provide a better compensation for athletes then I hope those athletes can receive the better compensation.  There is no reason an athlete should be denied a better life so that smaller colleges can have more competitive sports teams. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, boconnell said:

Just like in academics.  And just like in every other area of life.  If those schools can provide a better compensation for athletes then I hope those athletes can receive the better compensation.  There is no reason an athlete should be denied a better life so that smaller colleges can have more competitive sports teams. 

In other areas of school, the money goes to facilities and professors  more so than to individual kids outside of need based aid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gimpeltf said:

I'm concerned about a further lack of parity between schools. Big money schools with deep pocketed alums just got talent richer.

Your concern hints at the problem. Parity is a professional sports concept. We pretend that this is amateur sports when it really isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, gimpeltf said:

In other areas of school, the money goes to facilities and professors  more so than to individual kids outside of need based aid.

I probably should add that this specific ruling might not do much more than allow for a little more payment towards academically related issues. It's when we get into the payment for using likenesses and that side of the debate that might affect the balance more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

And in sports the money goes to the coaches. See Saban, Nick.

if the athletes were cut into the action you'd see the money coming out of the coaches' hide - pro athletes mostly more than their coaches. and you'd see less luxe facilities. instead, there is a free labor pool so the schools compete on perks and the admin/coaches get paid like CEOs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...