Search results

This is correct.

An interesting question. In theory, if NCAA restrictions on getting paid NIL are now out the window, I don't see how they could enforce eligibility restrictions if a player went pro, then decided to return. Not that it would every likely, but I could see being possible.

yes, similar to the NBA and one-and-dones.

As you said, some schools have historically flaunted the "student" rules. However, I maintain that these rules at least attempt to provide a means of keeping the "college" in "college football" and leveling the playing field to a degree. I believe our point of disagreement stems from your view...

Disagree. Your assumption would require existing rules to be changed. And I don't think the enrolled student/progress toward degree requirements run afoul of antitrust.

Did I read this right? Our d-line coach makes more than our defensive coordinator?

In case anyone hasn't seen this from Cabrera and Batt: https://ramblinwreck.com/cabrera-batt-240524/ I am encouraged that Cabrera's is the first signature.

You're correct that any group, whether it's the NCAA or the conferences, setting either a fixed price or a cap on athlete compensation does sound like price-fixing. I'd still be astonished if any attorney involved in this process wouldn't try to avoid that, given the circumstances.

That game was absurd. Not only an incredible number of Pitt fumbles in such a short period (perhaps a record, but maybe surpassed by 222-0), but the incredible effort play by DJ White.

I take this listing with a grain of salt. Probably directionally correct, but the methodology of counting only Nielsen-rated games and giving non-rated games a "0" skews the data. The fact that Duke is #33 is telling. If you only sum the rated games but use total games as the denominator...

As a former co-op student and an employee of GTRI, I would have been ineligible to play had I wanted to. In principle, this is a ridiculous notion. I think the core issue with most fans isn’t that athletes shouldn’t be able to have some income, but the concern over the best athletes going to the...

Does the proposed agreement set a cap on compensation? That's not clear to me. I also don't believe that the NCAA at this stage would deliberately set up an agreement that still runs afoul of antitrust.

Not sure of the details, but I think the settlement applies to current and former players back to 2016, as well as new players going forward. To collect on the settlement, S-As will probably need to sign an agreement not to sue for additional benefits. A player could conceivably opt out if they...

To expand on this, collusion to restrict income (NCAA rules) has been the issue that ran afoul of the law. While it's conceivable that new lawsuits could claim that forcing players to spend time in class unduly restricts their income opportunities, I think the enrolled student/progress toward a...

Perhaps. But I wouldn’t put too much stock in a smallish reported deficit, especially for a non-profit. As I recall, when I would ask my accounting folks what our quarterly numbers were looking like, they would respond with “what number do you want?” There are ways of juggling things to...

I didn’t read the paywalled linked article, but it seems to me that you are saying the following: If a) NCAA players agree to a collective bargaining agreement with the NCAA that includes a salary cap, then b) the NCAA could conceivably place restrictions on outside income, such as NIL, that...

Back to the point that @leatherneckjacket and I were making earlier, any attempt to control player compensation, whether from the schools or outside organizations, legally or under the table, is bound to fail. They need to find other means of leveling the field. One way is roster control...

I second this concept. When remedies that touch upon player compensation and freedom to transfer have become very restricted due to the Sherman Act issues and related lawsuits, I think that eligibility requirements may be one of the few things left for the NCAA's competition committee to...

This ranking means nothing to recruits. On field performance is what matters. Am I doing it right?

Agree. Some of the legal restrictions being discussed include reducing maximum football roster sizes down from 120 to 85. This would kill walk-ons, but with NIL, scholarship limits don't mean much.