7 states file lawsuit against the NCAA over transfer restrictions

[jbhtexas]

But in the business world you also have non-competes. IMO having a player sit 1 year is similar deal.

I feel all the recent legal opinions and recent NCAA proposal is pushing toward athletes being employees. IMO that goes hand-in-hand with athletes unionizing and CBA between schools and athletes. Revenue sharing, work rules and transfer rules will all be negotiated.

Could be...at that point "college" sports basically becomes just another professional sports league for less-developed/less talented athletes. What would be the tie to the college? Would the CBA have enrollment/academic requirements? At that point, there seems to be no need for the NCAA.

Even at this point, the seems to be little use for the NCAA. The Penn State saga showed that courts are more than willing to reverse any kind of meaningful discipline that the NCAA might carry out against a badly misbehaving member, so that any penalties now are minor with little impact to discourage bad behavior.
The courts/states seem eager to regulate the financial aspects of "student" athletes. At this point, the NCAA still does have the ability to impose academic standards in order to be eligible to play, but don't those standards also hamper the economic opportunity of student athletes? It's probably just a matter of time before those are challenged in court.

But I'm sure we'll keep the NCAA around...someone has to keep up the 501(c)(3) facade for college athletics.

 

[isucy86]

Schools could try it but other schools would use it against them in the recruiting process.

It won't be at an individual school level. Athlete compensation and eligibility rules would be at a conference level or consortium of conferences.

That would be consistent to the recent NCAA working group proposal that creates 2 tiers of college sports and if schools want to be in the top tier they would have to meet specific athletic scholarship and extra payment investment levels.

 

[Mr Janny]

It won't be at an individual school level. Athlete compensation and eligibility rules would be at a conference level or consortium of conferences.

That would be consistent to the recent NCAA working group proposal that creates 2 tiers of college sports and if schools want to be in the top tier they would have to meet specific athletic scholarship and extra payment investment levels.

And that's where it gets dicey. Unless those stipulations are agreed upon via collective bargaining, rules like that are going to be vulnerable to legal action under the Sherman Antitrust act, similar to how we've seen in recent years.

Totally agree that at least part the NCAA's recent striation proposal is an attempt to make these kinds of rules more palatable from a legal perspective. We'll have to see if it works.

 

[isucy86]

And that's where it gets dicey. Unless those stipulations are agreed upon via collective bargaining, rules like that are going to be vulnerable to legal action under the Sherman Antitrust act, similar to how we've seen in recent years.

Totally agree that at least part the NCAA's recent striation proposal is an attempt to make these kinds of rules more palatable from a legal perspective. We'll have to see if it works.

I think a CBA is the only way to clean up this mess for the NCAA and schools.

The big question is how many university presidents are committed to college sports becoming the equivalent of minor leagues for the NFL and NBA. Sure P5 college athletic departments make hundreds of millions in revenue annually, but to what degree does that revenue benefit each universities bottom line? I am not aware of any P5 athletic department that pays back "profit" to its university's general fund.

I see a 2 tier system:

• Tier 1: Football and Men's Basketball athletes are employees. These sports would exist as for-profit entities, separate from the university. Athletes create a union and their leadership negotiates a collective bargaining agreement with a Tier 1 School governing body. All NIL deals must go through a clearinghouse with oversight by schools and union.
• Tier 2: Athletes receive scholarships that cover full cost of education plus stipend to cover typical college student living expenses. Athletes would also be allowed to earn NIL money with clearinghouse governance. There would be spending caps (coach salaries, travel, athlete training costs, etc.) for each sport. Any net income would be transferred back to each universities general fund.

If tier 1 or 2 schools are found breaking the tier 1 or tier 2 rules, they face a 5 year death penalty.

 

[jctisu]

I heard on a podcast to just wait for this lawsuit to come up. And that is this: Why is there a years of eligibility to play limit in college sports? As long as you are a student, you should be able to play as much and as long as you want.

And the reason this is going to come up is because of NIL and players now being able to make money. Why should anyone be capped on their earnings as a player as long as they are enrolled in a school? You could have the Caitlyn Clarks of the world just keep getting degrees and make way more money in college than they ever would in the pros.

I obviously hope this never happens because if I wanted to watch a bunch of 30 year olds I would watch the NFL. Or BYU.

But you just know this is coming from some player somewhere. The amount some of these players are making? You would try anything to keep that gravy train rolling.

 

[alexssdean12]

I heard on a podcast to just wait for this lawsuit to come up. And that is this: Why is there a years of eligibility to play limit in college sports? As long as you are a student, you should be able to play as much and as long as you want.

And the reason this is going to come up is because of NIL and players now being able to make money. Why should anyone be capped on their earnings as a player as long as they are enrolled in a school? You could have the Caitlyn Clarks of the world just keep getting degrees and make way more money in college than they ever would in the pros.

I obviously hope this never happens because if I wanted to watch a bunch of 30 year olds I would watch the NFL. Or BYU.

But you just know this is coming from some player somewhere. The amount some of these players are making? You would try anything to keep that gravy train rolling.

There are so many questions like this to answer and there is not a solid governing body to establish these rules

 

[Kinch]

Do these colleges think the NCAA has the right to establish eligibility?

 

[jbhtexas]

Do these colleges think the NCAA has the right to establish eligibility?

The NCAA is a membership-governed organization, where the member colleges make the rules. The colleges voluntarily joined the NCAA, and by doing so agreed to abide by the NCAA rules. If a lawsuit is brought and the courts decide that the NCAA doesn't have the right to establish eligibility requirements, the NCAA basically becomes an organization that does nothing more than run a few tournaments every year and distribute the tourney profits to the members.

 

[SolterraCyclone]

Shoot why make them go to school at all then. Might as well end the facade

 

[packattack425]

Crushing for those who bet the O/U at 27.5

 

[MeowingCows]

The NCAA is a membership-governed organization, where the member colleges make the rules. The colleges voluntarily joined the NCAA, and by doing so agreed to abide by the NCAA rules. If a lawsuit is brought and the courts decide that the NCAA doesn't have the right to establish eligibility requirements, the NCAA basically becomes an organization that does nothing more than run a few tournaments every year and distribute the tourney profits to the members.

And then college sports largely dies due to having no actual governing body. Even the pro leagues have laws and standards they choose to abide by and enforce. College rules will be ran by the biggest ~20 or so football programs, while everyone else and every other sport suffers in quality and consistency.

 

[cycloneG]

Judge's ruling grants all NCAA transfers temporary eligibility, paving way for potential permanent change

Transfer athletes like West Virginia basketball player RaeQuan Battle are now eligible to play, at least for the next two weeks.

sports.yahoo.com

 

[Cyclonepride]

 

[mkadl]

Other than the investments already made by donors, why does an institution of higher learning need or want to be involved with this scene? Maybe I am clueless asking this question.

 

[Nolaeer]

The NCAA did this to themselves when they denied Battle, a WVU transfer, eligibility. At the time battle transferred, he was eligible to play this year for WVU without a waiver (coach left).

NCAA changed the rule and applied it retroactively. It also resulted in another WVU transfer losing his last year of eligibility. That's right, a player transferred to WVU under the existing rules and should've been eligible, but the NCAA changed the rule AFTER he transferred, causing him to never be able to play college basketball again.

NCAA ruthlessly denied all the waiver for WVU players, motivating the WV ag, and private lawyers, to sue the NCAA.

In louisiana the legislature cannot pass a law and apply it retroactively if it causes a person to lose a vested right. As a matter of fairness, you cant screw players by retroactively making them ineligible.

the good news is WVU now has its starting backcourt back, neither who've played a game, plus a starting 4, and a backup 5. WVU's roster went from 7 to 11.

 

[Mr Janny]

The fact that the NCAA capitulated so quickly, should tell you exactly how confident they are in their legal standing, and ability to restrict transfers, which is not confident at all.

 

[CydeofFries]

The fact that the NCAA capitulated so quickly, should tell you exactly how confident they are in their legal standing, and ability to restrict transfers, which is not confident at all.

I'm shocked they did actually. They weren't restricting their ability to transfer or their ability to earn money after the transfer, only their ability to participate in a sport that is under their purview. Which, explicitly, you cannot get paid for. But that wasn't the question of this particular lawsuit.

My thought, is that by capitulating on this, they're trying to prevent further scrutiny and opening themselves to other lawsuits about items like suspensions or number of eligibility years, which while make sense from a sport perspective, do not from a business standpoint.

 

[Mr Janny]

I'm shocked they did actually. They weren't restricting their ability to transfer or their ability to earn money after the transfer, only their ability to participate in a sport that is under their purview. Which, explicitly, you cannot get paid for. But that wasn't the question of this particular lawsuit.

My thought, is that by capitulating on this, they're trying to prevent further scrutiny and opening themselves to other lawsuits about items like suspensions or number of eligibility years, which while make sense from a sport perspective, do not from a business standpoint.

It's not that shocking at all. The NCAA knows that a judgement against them on this issue could eliminate their ability to enforce their transfer eligibility rules at all. They absolutely do not want a legal precedent to be set establishing that restricting eligibility equals legal harm, and that was very much on the table, here. They might have prevailed, had they continued to fight, but the fact that they didn't is pretty telling. Settling allows them to preserve their illusion of power a bit longer.

 

[Cy Guy69]

So why is all of this stuff happening right now? I know California spearheaded the bill for NIL (pushed by ******* Ed O’Bannon), is this all basically a response from that? Did Ed not only take away NCAA videos games, but also take down college athletics as we know it?

 

[CydeofFries]

It's not that shocking at all. The NCAA knows that a judgement against them on this issue could eliminate their ability to enforce their transfer eligibility rules at all. They absolutely do not want a legal precedent to be set establishing that restricting eligibility equals legal harm, and that was very much on the table, here. They might have prevailed, had they continued to fight, but the fact that they didn't is pretty telling. Settling allows them to preserve their illusion of power a bit longer.

I think we're thinking close to the same thing but different conclusions. I figured the NCAA, at some point, would stand up and try and fight to have some power remaining. And this was a platform they actually could have won.

Agreed that the fact the didn't fight it is extremely telling about how they view their position.