Page 7 of 21 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 210
  1. #61
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    10,147
    Look, at the end of the day I'm just not all that confident in the NCAA's position, and even less confident in their ability to defend their position. I'm actually kind of shocked at how many people seem so unconcerned about this. I mean seriously! What has the NCAA EVER done to make everyone think that there is nothing to be worried about?? People on here blast the NCAA for being stupid and inept all the time. What makes those people suddenly think that the NCAA is going to get this right?
    Last edited by xubrew; 09-16-2019 at 10:36 AM.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

  2. #62
    Sophomore
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    2,111
    Seeing as there's virtually nothing i can do to effect the outcome one way or the other, I don't get too worked up about it.

  3. #63
    Sophomore
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    2,111
    Quote Originally Posted by xubrew View Post
    Travis Steele does not work for the NCAA or the Big East. If he were to sue the NCAA demanding payment (not that he ever would), he'd lose spectacularly. The work he is performing, the organization that has control over him and the work he is performing, and the organization benefiting from the work being performed is not the NCAA or the Big East, so you cannot say that he is an employee of either organization. Same with the kid from USC.
    Not exactly, first Travis is undoubtedly an employee of Xavier, but beyond that it can certainly be argued that his work benefits the ncaa and the big east. xavier plays in the big east tournament annually and the ncaa tournament almost annually. xavier brings in money for both of those organizations.

    the same argument could be made for the players. they play on national television wearing the big east and ncaa logos and those media deals make both orgs money. the branding alone is probably pretty significant. there are plenty of good arguments there.
    Last edited by scoscox; 09-16-2019 at 10:48 AM.

  4. #64
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    10,147
    Quote Originally Posted by scoscox View Post
    Not exactly, first Travis is undoubtedly an employee of Xavier, but beyond that it can certainly be argued that his work benefits the ncaa and the big east. xavier plays in the big east tournament annually and the ncaa tournament almost annually. xavier brings in money for both of those organizations.

    the same argument could be made for the players
    Well, he tried to make that argument, and he lost. So, I guess that's something to feel a little better about.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

  5. #65
    Freshman
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    338
    Quote Originally Posted by xubrew View Post
    The end result is that the courts will rule that college athletes are employees, and that they have the right to be paid their fair market value, and that schools are not allowed to collectively fix how much they are allowed to be paid. That is ultimately what they are gunning for. Schools won't be required to pay athletes, but they will be permitted to if they choose to.

    That is what the other side is gunning for, and they have people that are both smart and aggressive that are leading that charge. It would be VERY stupid to just ignore them and assume that they don't have a case, because they absolutely do. Even if the NCAA thinks they can win (which I guess is possible, but probably not easy), to just passively dismiss something this threatening as an impossibility is both stupid and irresponsible.
    Well put me in the group with the stupid and irresponsible. I don't think this ever happens. I think there are adults in the room who are alot smarter than me who recognize that permitting schools to pay players (with each school determining to what extent they participate) erodes competitive balance and ultimately destroys college athletics. And as I asked earlier, at that point who is the winner?

  6. #66
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    10,147
    Quote Originally Posted by Final4 View Post
    Well put me in the group with the stupid and irresponsible. I don't think this ever happens. I think there are adults in the room who are alot smarter than me who recognize that permitting schools to pay players (with each school determining to what extent they participate) erodes competitive balance and ultimately destroys college athletics. And as I asked earlier, at that point who is the winner?
    And a very plausible response from the courts to that is "Well, the NCAA is in violation of anti-trust laws, so tough shit!"

    They won't word it quite like that, but it's very possible that will be their ruling. It's not the job of the courts to make sure the NCAA maintains a competitive balance.
    Last edited by xubrew; 09-16-2019 at 11:38 AM.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

  7. #67
    Sophomore
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    2,111
    Quote Originally Posted by xubrew View Post
    Well, he tried to make that argument, and he lost. So, I guess that's something to feel a little better about.
    Agreed. Maybe it's more compelling to say they're direct employees of the school rather than the conference and NCAA, which is likely, but it's atleast encouraging that he lost that case.

  8. #68
    Freshman
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    338
    Quote Originally Posted by xubrew View Post
    And a very plausible response from the courts to that is "Well, the NCAA is in violation of anti-trust laws, so tough shit!"

    They won't word it quite like that, but it's very possible that will be their ruling.
    And that very well may be the response. But I guess my point is, then what? What emerges from the ashes? A new association of member schools with a charter that has language more iron clad, with rules and regulations, that sponsors national championships? Sorta like, say, the NCAA?

  9. #69
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    10,147
    Quote Originally Posted by Final4 View Post
    And that very well may be the response. But I guess my point is, then what? What emerges from the ashes? A new association of member schools with a charter that has language more iron clad, with rules and regulations, that sponsors national championships? Sorta like, say, the NCAA?
    Who knows??

    To the general fan, it may not look all that different. The big programs will continue to get the big players, and will now be able to entice them with endorsement deals from apparel companies, and if what South Carolina has proposed goes through they'd be able to pay them directly on top of that. But, the big time programs already get all the big players right now anyway. So when taking a macro look at competitive balance, the P5 and major programs would still be the major programs, and the one bid leagues would still be the one bid leagues.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

  10. #70
    Junior sirthought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NKY
    Posts
    2,774
    I think if this were to sway the requirements of universities paying scholarship students for basketball, then you'd have to be looking at every scholarship journalist that writes for the newspaper or student run TV station, every musician that's playing university concerts, or every scientist that's doing work on behalf of a research project.

    All of that collective training and controlled life experience would become too expensive and we'll have to end the notion of public education.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •