Ross Dellenger of Yahoo Sports reports:

https://sports.yahoo.com/lawsuit-aims-to...46802.html

There is no good argument against transfer restrictions. If you transfer to the same subdivision or up and have a year to focus on academics that's a perk since these are supposed to be student athletes. In fact, the one-time transfer should go away to minimize the avalanche of kids that take care of business in the classroom and put in the work required and lose their scholarship.

(12-12-2023 09:28 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  There is no good argument against transfer restrictions. If you transfer to the same subdivision or up and have a year to focus on academics that's a perk since these are supposed to be student athletes. ...

The argument would be that the "they are supposed to be student athletes" is a thin excuse for getting them to work for a large entertainment division tacked onto many Universities but to get no regular pay for that work.

(12-12-2023 09:42 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(12-12-2023 09:28 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  There is no good argument against transfer restrictions. If you transfer to the same subdivision or up and have a year to focus on academics that's a perk since these are supposed to be student athletes. ...

The argument would be that the "they are supposed to be student athletes" is a thin excuse for getting them to work for a large entertainment division tacked onto many Universities but to get no regular pay for that work.

Protecting the interests of the average athlete will just have to take priority over blowing up the NCAA's tax-exempt status and having universities running NFL development leagues.

(12-12-2023 09:42 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(12-12-2023 09:28 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  There is no good argument against transfer restrictions. If you transfer to the same subdivision or up and have a year to focus on academics that's a perk since these are supposed to be student athletes. ...

The argument would be that the "they are supposed to be student athletes" is a thin excuse for getting them to work for a large entertainment division tacked onto many Universities but to get no regular pay for that work.

Well if they are "student"-athletes, they should be able to transfer just like any other student. This is just one of those stupid rules to protect the coaches that makes it look more and more like an employee relationship.

My sister went to 4 different schools and got her degree, first UK, second UT, next marriage, third UNO, next kids, fourth UofH.

The student athletes are now finding hard after transferring when they were a starter, they wind up being benched as a third or fourth string like a QB. Getting rid of all the restrictions makes the transfer portal very chaotic. It needs to be control.

The more an athlete transfers the less chance he will have getting a degree. May as well ask them not to bother attending classes to they can focus entirely on what they are there for.

(12-12-2023 10:31 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-12-2023 09:42 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(12-12-2023 09:28 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  There is no good argument against transfer restrictions. If you transfer to the same subdivision or up and have a year to focus on academics that's a perk since these are supposed to be student athletes. ...

The argument would be that the "they are supposed to be student athletes" is a thin excuse for getting them to work for a large entertainment division tacked onto many Universities but to get no regular pay for that work.

Well if they are "student"-athletes, they should be able to transfer just like any other student. This is just one of those stupid rules to protect the coaches that makes it look more and more like an employee relationship.

My sister went to 4 different schools and got her degree, first UK, second UT, next marriage, third UNO, next kids, fourth UofH.

Yes - that’s the core issue. Similar to the prior (and arguably even present) prohibitions against NIL compensation, they’re applying restrictions to athletes that don’t apply to any other students. A star violin player doesn’t have to sit out a year from playing in the university orchestra if they transfer from USC to Michigan to Juilliard. Now, if you want to say that athlete transfers need to have the same academic progress toward their degrees that would be required of other “normal” transfer students, then I think that’s perfectly fair (as that would be applying the same transfer standard to all students as opposed to having a specific rule for athletes).

So, people can’t have it both ways. They can’t mandate employment-like restrictions (such as restrictions on eligibility for playing after transfers) unless they’re willing to deem the athletes to be employees.

I’m at a loss at how so many fans are in denial that all of the controls and rules and restrictions that the NCAA has had are *exactly* what the courts are all finding illegal and that tide isn’t turning back. The courts are saying that unless the schools collectively bargain restrictions with the athletes (inherently making them employees), then you *can’t* have restrictions. You can’t have a one-sided mandate. As of now, the “Wild West” is the only system that’s actually legal without collective bargaining in place.

(12-12-2023 10:31 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-12-2023 09:42 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(12-12-2023 09:28 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  There is no good argument against transfer restrictions. If you transfer to the same subdivision or up and have a year to focus on academics that's a perk since these are supposed to be student athletes. ...

The argument would be that the "they are supposed to be student athletes" is a thin excuse for getting them to work for a large entertainment division tacked onto many Universities but to get no regular pay for that work.

Well if they are "student"-athletes, they should be able to transfer just like any other student. This is just one of those stupid rules to protect the coaches that makes it look more and more like an employee relationship.

My sister went to 4 different schools and got her degree, first UK, second UT, next marriage, third UNO, next kids, fourth UofH.

The problem with this line of thinking is that it ignores the reason that 7 state Attorneys General are so worked up about it. Nobody cares if an actual "student-athlete" wants to transfer, but a whole lot of people care if a guy making $500k a year in NIL money transfers and then is forced to sit out a year. This is just reason # 4000 that the biggest schools, the ones that actually make money on Athletics, need a different governing structure.

Unlimited transfers by semester? What, not monthly? Weekly?

At this point, what is the point of having academic requirements? They are simply getting paid to play football for a school. With that being said, with the way this is going, when the majority do not get drafted, or get waived from the NFL and have no football career, you are gonna see a lot of previous student athletes with no job skills and have to start from scratch.

(12-13-2023 12:36 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Unlimited transfers by semester? What, not monthly? Weekly?

The 'they should have the same transfer rights as any other student" claim eliminates the slippery slope argument, because Universities limit all student transfers to occurring at the start of an academic term.

Add a rule that a student athlete has to be enrolled in a school when the competitive season starts to be eligible to compete, and the "monthly? weekly? where does it end?" issue is a non-issue.

(12-13-2023 08:51 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(12-13-2023 12:36 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Unlimited transfers by semester? What, not monthly? Weekly?

The 'they should have the same transfer rights as any other student" claim eliminates the slippery slope argument, because Universities limit all student transfers to occurring at the start of an academic term.

Add a rule that a student athlete has to be enrolled in a school when the competitive season starts to be eligible to compete, and the "monthly? weekly? where does it end?" issue is a non-issue.

Agreed.

Fans need to take a look at themselves whenever they complain about the athletes’ stances here. Essentially, a lot of fans are willing to have the NCAA and universities violate antitrust laws with one-sided deals that would not be allowed in ANY other industry in the country and these fans themselves wouldn’t tolerate in their own jobs… and these athletes aren’t even considered to be employees yet.

Guess what? The desire to have evenly matched football and basketball games doesn’t allow entities to violate antitrust laws. The general public, courts and even politicians from both sides of the aisle are *overwhelmingly* recognizing this now. To all fans complaining: their athletic departments need to adapt or die. There’s no turning back.

(12-13-2023 09:00 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-13-2023 08:51 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(12-13-2023 12:36 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Unlimited transfers by semester? What, not monthly? Weekly?

The 'they should have the same transfer rights as any other student" claim eliminates the slippery slope argument, because Universities limit all student transfers to occurring at the start of an academic term.

Add a rule that a student athlete has to be enrolled in a school when the competitive season starts to be eligible to compete, and the "monthly? weekly? where does it end?" issue is a non-issue.

Agreed.

Fans need to take a look at themselves whenever they complain about the athletes’ stances here. Essentially, a lot of fans are willing to have the NCAA and universities violate antitrust laws with one-sided deals that would not be allowed in ANY other industry in the country and these fans themselves wouldn’t tolerate in their own jobs… and these athletes aren’t even considered to be employees yet.

Guess what? The desire to have evenly matched football and basketball games doesn’t allow entities to violate antitrust laws. The general public, courts and even politicians from both sides of the aisle are *overwhelmingly* recognizing this now. To all fans complaining: their athletic departments need to adapt or die. There’s no turning back.

And when athletes are paid as the norm at universities, these issues will be contained by contract. And Frank, the other thing we need to move on from is the NCAA.

(12-12-2023 09:28 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  There is no good argument against transfer restrictions. If you transfer to the same subdivision or up and have a year to focus on academics that's a perk since these are supposed to be student athletes. In fact, the one-time transfer should go away to minimize the avalanche of kids that take care of business in the classroom and put in the work required and lose their scholarship.

MID GAME TRANSFERS!!! LET'S DO IT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(12-13-2023 09:21 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-13-2023 09:00 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-13-2023 08:51 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(12-13-2023 12:36 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Unlimited transfers by semester? What, not monthly? Weekly?

The 'they should have the same transfer rights as any other student" claim eliminates the slippery slope argument, because Universities limit all student transfers to occurring at the start of an academic term.

Add a rule that a student athlete has to be enrolled in a school when the competitive season starts to be eligible to compete, and the "monthly? weekly? where does it end?" issue is a non-issue.

Agreed.

Fans need to take a look at themselves whenever they complain about the athletes’ stances here. Essentially, a lot of fans are willing to have the NCAA and universities violate antitrust laws with one-sided deals that would not be allowed in ANY other industry in the country and these fans themselves wouldn’t tolerate in their own jobs… and these athletes aren’t even considered to be employees yet.

Guess what? The desire to have evenly matched football and basketball games doesn’t allow entities to violate antitrust laws. The general public, courts and even politicians from both sides of the aisle are *overwhelmingly* recognizing this now. To all fans complaining: their athletic departments need to adapt or die. There’s no turning back.

And when athletes are paid as the norm at universities, these issues will be contained by contract. And Frank, the other thing we need to move on from is the NCAA.

but all of these things are true merely of "revenue" sports.

I agree that I think it'll probably be better if the revenue sports have a different organization than the rest of college sports.

Because the rest just don't seem to have the issues the courts are looking at.

mostly it's football, but I can see basketball and baseball not far afield...

So if we know that, start with football. split football from the ncaa.

it allows to create a different structure out of whole cloth, just for football. And presumably a structure that can end the issues of the court cases.

(12-13-2023 09:21 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-13-2023 09:00 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-13-2023 08:51 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(12-13-2023 12:36 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Unlimited transfers by semester? What, not monthly? Weekly?

The 'they should have the same transfer rights as any other student" claim eliminates the slippery slope argument, because Universities limit all student transfers to occurring at the start of an academic term.

Add a rule that a student athlete has to be enrolled in a school when the competitive season starts to be eligible to compete, and the "monthly? weekly? where does it end?" issue is a non-issue.

Agreed.

Fans need to take a look at themselves whenever they complain about the athletes’ stances here. Essentially, a lot of fans are willing to have the NCAA and universities violate antitrust laws with one-sided deals that would not be allowed in ANY other industry in the country and these fans themselves wouldn’t tolerate in their own jobs… and these athletes aren’t even considered to be employees yet.

Guess what? The desire to have evenly matched football and basketball games doesn’t allow entities to violate antitrust laws. The general public, courts and even politicians from both sides of the aisle are *overwhelmingly* recognizing this now. To all fans complaining: their athletic departments need to adapt or die. There’s no turning back.

And when athletes are paid as the norm at universities, these issues will be contained by contract. And Frank, the other thing we need to move on from is the NCAA.

And that’s fine if it’s done via collective bargaining or contract. It just can’t be handed down from above as it is now (whether that is by the NCAA or some other organization).

(12-12-2023 10:04 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  Protecting the interests of the average athlete will just have to take priority over blowing up the NCAA's tax-exempt status and having universities running NFL development leagues.

College Football is by far the country's second-most popular sports entity and College Basketball is in the Top 5.

Universities aren't cutting loose that relationship and all its benefits just because the schools will have to pay a larger share of the freight

(12-13-2023 09:28 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(12-13-2023 09:21 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-13-2023 09:00 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-13-2023 08:51 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(12-13-2023 12:36 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Unlimited transfers by semester? What, not monthly? Weekly?

The 'they should have the same transfer rights as any other student" claim eliminates the slippery slope argument, because Universities limit all student transfers to occurring at the start of an academic term.

Add a rule that a student athlete has to be enrolled in a school when the competitive season starts to be eligible to compete, and the "monthly? weekly? where does it end?" issue is a non-issue.

Agreed.

Fans need to take a look at themselves whenever they complain about the athletes’ stances here. Essentially, a lot of fans are willing to have the NCAA and universities violate antitrust laws with one-sided deals that would not be allowed in ANY other industry in the country and these fans themselves wouldn’t tolerate in their own jobs… and these athletes aren’t even considered to be employees yet.

Guess what? The desire to have evenly matched football and basketball games doesn’t allow entities to violate antitrust laws. The general public, courts and even politicians from both sides of the aisle are *overwhelmingly* recognizing this now. To all fans complaining: their athletic departments need to adapt or die. There’s no turning back.

And when athletes are paid as the norm at universities, these issues will be contained by contract. And Frank, the other thing we need to move on from is the NCAA.

but all of these things are true merely of "revenue" sports.

I agree that I think it'll probably be better if the revenue sports have a different organization than the rest of college sports.

Because the rest just don't seem to have the issues the courts are looking at.

mostly it's football, but I can see basketball and baseball not far afield...

So if we know that, start with football. split football from the ncaa.

it allows to create a different structure out of whole cloth, just for football. And presumably a structure that can end the issues of the court cases.

Skyhawk, all athletes will be paid a baseline compensation, revenue sports likely more than others. All of them will be able to transfer normally unless signed to contracts, and all of them will have NIL. Stability says all will be paid, contracts used to protect the athlete and student, and that if someone wants to leave either they or the other party can buy out the remainder of any contract. Once you head down this pathway, the rest implicitly will follow.

(12-13-2023 09:33 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-13-2023 09:28 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(12-13-2023 09:21 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-13-2023 09:00 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-13-2023 08:51 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  The 'they should have the same transfer rights as any other student" claim eliminates the slippery slope argument, because Universities limit all student transfers to occurring at the start of an academic term.

Add a rule that a student athlete has to be enrolled in a school when the competitive season starts to be eligible to compete, and the "monthly? weekly? where does it end?" issue is a non-issue.

Agreed.

Fans need to take a look at themselves whenever they complain about the athletes’ stances here. Essentially, a lot of fans are willing to have the NCAA and universities violate antitrust laws with one-sided deals that would not be allowed in ANY other industry in the country and these fans themselves wouldn’t tolerate in their own jobs… and these athletes aren’t even considered to be employees yet.

Guess what? The desire to have evenly matched football and basketball games doesn’t allow entities to violate antitrust laws. The general public, courts and even politicians from both sides of the aisle are *overwhelmingly* recognizing this now. To all fans complaining: their athletic departments need to adapt or die. There’s no turning back.

And when athletes are paid as the norm at universities, these issues will be contained by contract. And Frank, the other thing we need to move on from is the NCAA.

but all of these things are true merely of "revenue" sports.

I agree that I think it'll probably be better if the revenue sports have a different organization than the rest of college sports.

Because the rest just don't seem to have the issues the courts are looking at.

mostly it's football, but I can see basketball and baseball not far afield...

So if we know that, start with football. split football from the ncaa.

it allows to create a different structure out of whole cloth, just for football. And presumably a structure that can end the issues of the court cases.

Skyhawk, all athletes will be paid a baseline compensation, revenue sports likely more than others. All of them will be able to transfer normally unless signed to contracts, and all of them will have NIL. Stability says all will be paid, contracts used to protect the athlete and student, and that if someone wants to leave either they or the other party can buy out the remainder of any contract. Once you head down this pathway, the rest implicitly will follow.

Which is too bad.

I think there could be a path forward for non-revenue sports, the so-called "olympic" sports, to continue on mostly as they are.

But once again people will continue to sit on their hands, and wait and wait and wait until external forces force them to move.

And then what once was, will be all gone. The baby tossed out with the bathwater.

It's just too bad, and sad to see.