NCAA Gonna Lose

#76
#76
Visiting Dawg said:
Is there a law that says a voluntary organization has to accept members that will not voluntarily follow their rules. Imo, it's entire legal for a person to cede their rights under a specific law to join an organization that may restrict some legal activities.
Click to expand...
There is a very important law that states you can not restrict a persons ability to make money. In Nico's case Spyre has the right to fly him where ever they want for business. In my mind if they fly him to knoxville for a meeting, in his own time visits campus there is not a thing they can do about it. Kinda the same as being flown across the country to entertain a job. What you do in your own time is yours during the stay. Obviously you are expected to meet the job requirements. But usually speaking you can find some time to see a city etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: norrislakevol, S.C. OrangeMan and cgrish
#77
#77
BigALWiLson said:
There is a very important law that states you can not restrict a persons ability to make money. In Nico's case Spyre has the right to fly him where ever they want for business. In my mind if they fly him to knoxville for a meeting, in his own time visits campus there is not a thing they can do about it. Kinda the same as being flown across the country to entertain a job. What you do in your own time is yours during the stay. Obviously you are expected to meet the job requirements. But usually speaking you can find some time to see a city etc.
Click to expand...
Yes, due to the fact that there are anti trust laws and anti trust exemptions that have been granted, this is going to be an interesting few months. Additionally, since the current mood of the court is the NCAA is now more of a multi billion dollar business rather than simply schools giving poor kids a shot at an education, the dynamics of the original exemptions may not apply.

Having said that, even though an organization may not have the ability to arbitrarily restrict activities that don't directly affect their product, they still may have the ability to enforce rules agreed upon by the voluntary members.

I actually think Tenn will prevail due to some of the issues mentioned but I've also seen courts surprise everyone with different rulings. Yes, Spyre has a right to collect money and award it to whomever they see fit in any legal manner they see fit. However, that doesn't mean it's a slam dunk private orgs can't regulate legal activities as a condition of membership. The court's remedy might actually be that the player have a right to take money from what are basically booster driven orgs but the NCAA also has a right to rescind their membership.
 
#78
#78
Visiting Dawg said:
Evidently you have no idea what the Alston decision was about. Hint, it wasn't NIL, it did not establish NIL and had nothing at all to do with pay for play.

Now, there were briefs written by some justices that indicated they would be sympathetic to true NIL deals but in no way did the Alston decision codify enticing prospective prospects with contracts that were de facto pay for play deals.

So, based on the legal wave, which I have expressed that I believe Tenn is on the right side, the NCAA hastily allowed NIL without a lot of guidance. Many schools became very aggressive with their approach to the new NIL opportunities and we will be finding out shortly how far the courts are going to allow the NCAA go to regulate these deals.

Additionally, Justice Kavanaugh literally wrote in his brief that he believe college athletics were using an outdated amateurism model that no longer applied to the NCAA business model and specifically mentioned collective bargaining. If you would like to read about Alston and the justices briefs, you can find all the info easily using google. The direction of public opinion and recent decisions does bode well for Tennessee's position but it's not settled law at this point for many reasons.
Click to expand...
The NCAA didn't "allow" NIL. The Sherman Act did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Volfansince1980, JacketVol, VolDave53 and 1 other person
#80
#80
Visiting Dawg said:
Yes, due to the fact that there are anti trust laws and anti trust exemptions that have been granted, this is going to be an interesting few months. Additionally, since the current mood of the court is the NCAA is now more of a multi billion dollar business rather than simply schools giving poor kids a shot at an education, the dynamics of the original exemptions may not apply.

Having said that, even though an organization may not have the ability to arbitrarily restrict activities that don't directly affect their product, they still may have the ability to enforce rules agreed upon by the voluntary members.

I actually think Tenn will prevail due to some of the issues mentioned but I've also seen courts surprise everyone with different rulings. Yes, Spyre has a right to collect money and award it to whomever they see fit in any legal manner they see fit. However, that doesn't mean it's a slam dunk private orgs can't regulate legal activities as a condition of membership. The court's remedy might actually be that the player have a right to take money from what are basically booster driven orgs but the NCAA also has a right to rescind their membership.
Click to expand...
The NCAA doesn't need to worry about rescinding. They will be out of jobs altogether soon enough. The wheels are in motion don't you think ?
 
#82
#82
Visiting Dawg said:
Yes, due to the fact that there are anti trust laws and anti trust exemptions that have been granted, this is going to be an interesting few months. Additionally, since the current mood of the court is the NCAA is now more of a multi billion dollar business rather than simply schools giving poor kids a shot at an education, the dynamics of the original exemptions may not apply.

Having said that, even though an organization may not have the ability to arbitrarily restrict activities that don't directly affect their product, they still may have the ability to enforce rules agreed upon by the voluntary members.

I actually think Tenn will prevail due to some of the issues mentioned but I've also seen courts surprise everyone with different rulings. Yes, Spyre has a right to collect money and award it to whomever they see fit in any legal manner they see fit. However, that doesn't mean it's a slam dunk private orgs can't regulate legal activities as a condition of membership. The court's remedy might actually be that the player have a right to take money from what are basically booster driven orgs but the NCAA also has a right to rescind their membership.
Click to expand...
Does UGA have an NIL?
 
#85
#85
BigALWiLson said:
The NCAA doesn't need to worry about rescinding. They will be out of jobs altogether soon enough. The wheels are in motion don't you think ?
Click to expand...
If not the NCAA, some other similar entity. There will always need to be rules governing competitive orgs and it will be contentious as well.
 
#87
#87
Godfatha said:
Does UGA have an NIL?
Click to expand...
Of course, just like everyone else. That doesn't mean everyone runs their programs exactly like each other. Eventually, NIL, pay for play and recruiting inducements will get worked out and all parties will likely have a seat at the table. The problem for the NCAA right now is the revenue drivers had no input as to the contents of the contracts they would eventually sign.
 
#88
#88
volstudent26 said:
While Tennessee and Virginia aren't granted TRO, the Judge notes: "Considering the evidence currently before the Court, Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their claim under the Sherman Act."
Click to expand...
Round 1 to the NCAA.
 
#89
#89
Behr said:
Totally disagree. I don't think he's involved in any of this but I don't believe for one second he's just turned everything off and is fishing and drinking mimosas.

I've been wrong before, actually already twice this morning, but that's my story and I'm sticking with it.
Click to expand...
How dare you challenge my assertion.
 
#95
#95
CAVPUT said:
Round 1 to the NCAA.
Click to expand...
This is in no way a victory for the NCAA.
The judge said the plaintiffs were likely to succeed. Meaning that the NCAA just dug themselves a deeper hole. They will be sued left and right if it is determined that they violated anti-trust laws. (Which they likely have) it will probably end the NCAA as an organization. Which is probably why the SEC and Big 10 have created an advisory board.
 
  • Like
Reactions: norrislakevol, S.C. OrangeMan, VolDave53 and 3 others
#97
#97
BleedingOrangeInChatt said:
This is in no way a victory for the NCAA.
The judge said the plaintiffs were likely to succeed. Meaning that the NCAA just dug themselves a deeper hole. They will be sued left and right if it is determined that they violated anti-trust laws. (Which they likely have) it will probably end the NCAA as an organization. Which is probably why the SEC and Big 10 have created an advisory board.
Click to expand...
Yep. Certain posters just like being negative. The NCAA is in full blown desperation mode.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BleedingOrangeInChatt
#98
#98
S.C. OrangeMan said:
The NCAA didn't "allow" NIL. The Sherman Act did.
Click to expand...
Partially true. After Alston the NCAA saw the hand writing on the wall and allowed NIL. The SCOTUS did not find the NCAA in violation of the Sherman act in regards to NIL but the briefs by the justices made it clear they would be sympathetic to a claim challenging the restrictions. Alston was about NCAA schools restricting funds for educational purposes.
 
#100
#100
Behr said:
Obviously I was out my mind and didn't realize I had quoted you.

Lord forgive me and bless all the pygmies down in New Guinea.
Click to expand...



Wizard Of Oz GIF
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top