(10-02-2019 12:41 PM)e-parade Wrote:  

(10-02-2019 12:32 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(10-02-2019 11:10 AM)AlwaysSunny Wrote:  

(10-01-2019 07:35 PM)sfink16 Wrote:  

(10-01-2019 07:06 PM)AlwaysSunny Wrote:  It doesn't really matter what anyone thinks at this point, the NCAA will have no win here. Even if they do attempt to take it to court, if you have 10 states that have already passed the bill what are you going to do to enforce it? You really going to tell the FBS teams in these states that they cant compete for championships? They try that, they will just force that inevitable split of the power 5 from the NCAA a lot faster. And even if no one other than California passed the bill, what are the odds that they really ban USC, UCLA, Cal and Stanford from postseason permanently? Won't happen. This time whether they like it or not, they are going to be forced to adapt.

Are you trying to saying courts have no say? Tell that to Microsoft or AT&T. Microsoft stifled competition, as the courts determined, as did AT&T. You think FB and Google aren't concerned. P5 trying to break away CLEARLY would be stifling competition (antitrust) and in for a rude awakening if they tried. Hopefully they know better.

BTW, slavery was the law of the land at one time. Lincoln had something to say about that. I think you have a very narrow understanding of how the constitution works, between the lawmakers and the courts. Laws written by lawmakers don't always stand the time of the courts.

This has literally nothing to do with what I said lol. And there would be no trust as there would still be plenty of other outlets for sports. Not sure you get it. I'm saying the courts are not going to side with the NCAA when the majority of the country has voted to allow these kids to make money off of their names. That's pretty much out of the window at this point.

The courts are going to side with who has the most legitimate argument backed by case law, and in the case of the conservative supreme court, they're going to tend to side with big-business. If this becomes the earth-shattering thing many of us believe it will be for the NCAA then I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up in the Supreme Court. Remember that these items have popped up in California for a reason. They're generally liberal leaning court systems, both in district and in the circuit courts. (Nothing against liberalism, just stating facts) I wouldn't be surprised if the SC overturns previous circuit court rulings given the difference in the makeups of the two courts.

You're saying the court will side with "big business" (the comically "non-profit" NCAA) over free market capitalism for individuals?

California has republicans. Like, legit republicans. They're just outnumbered and outvoiced...but this passed unanimously.

I’m not talking about the makeup of the legislature that passed the bill, I’m talking about the makeup of the courts that will inevitably hear the lawsuit, and non-profit or not, we all know the NCAA is big business for a ton of these schools.

(10-02-2019 01:42 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(10-02-2019 01:35 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-02-2019 12:32 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(10-02-2019 11:10 AM)AlwaysSunny Wrote:  

(10-01-2019 07:35 PM)sfink16 Wrote:  Are you trying to saying courts have no say? Tell that to Microsoft or AT&T. Microsoft stifled competition, as the courts determined, as did AT&T. You think FB and Google aren't concerned. P5 trying to break away CLEARLY would be stifling competition (antitrust) and in for a rude awakening if they tried. Hopefully they know better.

BTW, slavery was the law of the land at one time. Lincoln had something to say about that. I think you have a very narrow understanding of how the constitution works, between the lawmakers and the courts. Laws written by lawmakers don't always stand the time of the courts.

This has literally nothing to do with what I said lol. And there would be no trust as there would still be plenty of other outlets for sports. Not sure you get it. I'm saying the courts are not going to side with the NCAA when the majority of the country has voted to allow these kids to make money off of their names. That's pretty much out of the window at this point.

The courts are going to side with who has the most legitimate argument backed by case law, and in the case of the conservative supreme court, they're going to tend to side with big-business. If this becomes the earth-shattering thing many of us believe it will be for the NCAA then I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up in the Supreme Court. Remember that these items have popped up in California for a reason. They're generally liberal leaning court systems, both in district and in the circuit courts. (Nothing against liberalism, just stating facts) I wouldn't be surprised if the SC overturns previous circuit court rulings given the difference in the makeups of the two courts.

The SC already refused to hear the O'Bannon appeal, and let the 9th Circuit decision stand.

Also, a number of these new state law efforts are being led by Republicans, so it's essentially a bi-partisan effort.

There was a number of reasons they didn’t take the Obannon case as I’ve already told you. Just because they didn’t hear it doesn’t mean they won’t hear the next case which will almost assuredly prove to be more seismic to the education system than Obannon was. Also, judicial conservatism and political conservatism aren’t always aligned. It will be interesting to see what happens, but don’t count your chickens based on O’Bannon.

LOL. I'm not counting anything. I don't care which way it goes. I'm simply saying they let the 9th Circuit ruling stand, and what I think that means.

Either way, the pending legislation in a lot of states is going to make it moot. Courts don't make laws, they just interpret disputes.

(10-02-2019 02:00 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-02-2019 01:42 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(10-02-2019 01:35 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-02-2019 12:32 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(10-02-2019 11:10 AM)AlwaysSunny Wrote:  This has literally nothing to do with what I said lol. And there would be no trust as there would still be plenty of other outlets for sports. Not sure you get it. I'm saying the courts are not going to side with the NCAA when the majority of the country has voted to allow these kids to make money off of their names. That's pretty much out of the window at this point.

The courts are going to side with who has the most legitimate argument backed by case law, and in the case of the conservative supreme court, they're going to tend to side with big-business. If this becomes the earth-shattering thing many of us believe it will be for the NCAA then I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up in the Supreme Court. Remember that these items have popped up in California for a reason. They're generally liberal leaning court systems, both in district and in the circuit courts. (Nothing against liberalism, just stating facts) I wouldn't be surprised if the SC overturns previous circuit court rulings given the difference in the makeups of the two courts.

The SC already refused to hear the O'Bannon appeal, and let the 9th Circuit decision stand.

Also, a number of these new state law efforts are being led by Republicans, so it's essentially a bi-partisan effort.

There was a number of reasons they didn’t take the Obannon case as I’ve already told you. Just because they didn’t hear it doesn’t mean they won’t hear the next case which will almost assuredly prove to be more seismic to the education system than Obannon was. Also, judicial conservatism and political conservatism aren’t always aligned. It will be interesting to see what happens, but don’t count your chickens based on O’Bannon.

LOL. I'm not counting anything. I don't care which way it goes. I'm simply saying they let the 9th Circuit ruling stand, and what I think that means.

Either way, the pending legislation in a lot of states is going to make it moot. Courts don't make laws, they just interpret disputes.

That's why the SC takes up one case and then applies it as precedent to laws that various states make. Like Roe v. Wade. Think for before you speak.

(10-01-2019 11:03 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Pay em. Burn it to the ground. Time for a complete reset. I won't watch pro football wearing college colors. No more ridiculous athletic scholarships, fake online classes, fake 3 year graduates. So yeah, pay them. Kill the golden goose.

Do it. Let them all earn academic scholarships or pay their way. Minor league football is fine. I wont watch it or care. I'll watch college football. Real amateur football with players that do it as extracurricular.

Love the idea. Burn it to the ground. Full Ivy League model

"Ivy League schools provide financial aid to students, including athletes, only on the basis of financial need as determined by each institution's Financial Aid Office. There are no academic or athletic scholarships in the Ivy League."

Talking about a school shooting themselves in the foot. All this means is if a player does well on the field or court then a company can come in and give them an endorsement. The school doesn't pay them. Zion Williamson alone brought Duke in millions of dollars. You don't think it's fair for him to secure an endorsement while the NCAA and Duke gets richer? An endorsement he inevitably will get.

(10-02-2019 11:10 AM)AlwaysSunny Wrote:  

(10-01-2019 07:35 PM)sfink16 Wrote:  

(10-01-2019 07:06 PM)AlwaysSunny Wrote:  It doesn't really matter what anyone thinks at this point, the NCAA will have no win here. Even if they do attempt to take it to court, if you have 10 states that have already passed the bill what are you going to do to enforce it? You really going to tell the FBS teams in these states that they cant compete for championships? They try that, they will just force that inevitable split of the power 5 from the NCAA a lot faster. And even if no one other than California passed the bill, what are the odds that they really ban USC, UCLA, Cal and Stanford from postseason permanently? Won't happen. This time whether they like it or not, they are going to be forced to adapt.

Are you trying to saying courts have no say? Tell that to Microsoft or AT&T. Microsoft stifled competition, as the courts determined, as did AT&T. You think FB and Google aren't concerned. P5 trying to break away CLEARLY would be stifling competition (antitrust) and in for a rude awakening if they tried. Hopefully they know better.

BTW, slavery was the law of the land at one time. Lincoln had something to say about that. I think you have a very narrow understanding of how the constitution works, between the lawmakers and the courts. Laws written by lawmakers don't always stand the time of the courts.

This has literally nothing to do with what I said lol. And there would be no trust as there would still be plenty of other outlets for sports. Not sure you get it. I'm saying the courts are not going to side with the NCAA when the majority of the country has voted to allow these kids to make money off of their names. That's pretty much out of the window at this point.

When was this nationwide vote because I missed it. BTW, the courts use the constitution in making their rulings, at least they are supposed to. For example, I disagree, as do many Americans do, with the SC ruling of free speech for burning the American flag. That ruling went against the majority of Americans desires.

You should read the constitution because you obviously do not understand how it works. Three equal branches and all, yet the SC does always have the final say.

Here is an expert witness who knows more than everyone on this list about this subject. Lots of good stuff here, while bringing up the importance of education first. He also brings up California's issues such as not working with teachers and police, and cleaning up the streets. He also humbly credits his teammates for his success (great o-line and teammates) and worries teams will be split/divided with this decision. The best part is that he keeps coming back to education.

Herschel Walker: ‘There’s a reason you call it amateur sports’