Author
Topic: Game Changer / NIL
(Read 28640 times)

JerseyTerrapin · « **Reply #56 on:** June 11, 2021, 10:02:46 AM »

Here is a post by an Arkansas fan on an NC State board (I have lots of friends there from ACC days and go by there sometimes. Ark and NCST are playing in baseball super-regions, hence the message boardery between the two fanbases).

"Walmart, JB Hunt, Tyson, Dillards, Stephens inc, Jerry Jones, Murphy Oil, Scott Ford founder of Alltel. I could keep going,but I’ll stop there.

I can’t for nil to start up, all the above have already agreed to provide contacts for endorsements to Razorback athlete$.

Razorback athletes about to be paid better than anyone in the country.

Hope y’all enjoy NWA!"

utee94 · « **Reply #57 on:** June 11, 2021, 01:15:14 PM »

Quote from: FearlessF on June 11, 2021, 09:59:35 AM

Utee has pointed out........ donors of substance don't care if they get ROI

Auburn's booster didn't make a dime from Cam Newton

Yup. For the most part, the players won't be paid the market value of the worth of their likeness as an endorsement. That bit is pretty much irrelevant.

They'll be paid the market value of a player of their perceived quality/star-rating, at their position.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #58 on:** June 11, 2021, 05:25:22 PM »

I sense unintended consequences, many we can't anticipate now.

At one time, Alabama's starting QB as NOT on scholarship. His parents were wealthy donors and forwent the 'ship to save a slot for another player. We might see some variation of that with this likeness thing.

ELA · « **Reply #59 on:** June 21, 2021, 10:36:45 AM »

NCAA loses at SCOTUS unanimously

https://southpark.cc.com/video-clips/444m6e/south-park-stu-dent-ath-o-leets

ELA · « **Reply #60 on:** June 21, 2021, 10:58:33 AM »

Even more concerning for the NCAA is that in Kavanaugh's concurrence he suggests they aren't reviewing it today, but he doesn't see how the NCAA's model survives an anti-trust challenge

utee94 · « **Reply #61 on:** June 21, 2021, 01:46:40 PM »

Given the wide range of experience, opinion, and ideology among the members of SCOTUS, for that decision to be unanimous, the NCAA's case just had to be complete shite.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #62 on:** June 21, 2021, 02:02:57 PM »

Interestingly, over the years, the most common decisions are either 9-0 or 5-4. The 9-0 is more common than you might think in part because a lot of issues have no "LEFT-Right" axis to them, patent cases for example.

Those 5-4 decisions on the Supreme Court? 9-0 is far more common. | R Street

The ratio is staggering. According to the Supreme Court Database, since 2000 a unanimous decision has been more likely than any other result — averaging 36 percent of all decisions. Even when the court did not reach a unanimous judgment, the justices often secured overwhelming majorities, with 7-2 or 8-1 judgments making up roughly 15 percent of decisions. The 5-4 decisions, by comparison, occurred in only 19 percent of cases.

ELA · « **Reply #63 on:** June 21, 2021, 02:41:15 PM »

That's true, but I would argue this case did have some mainstream interest, and a political nexus, things that typically prevent 9-0 type decisions.

MaximumSam · « **Reply #64 on:** June 21, 2021, 03:45:50 PM »

https://twitter.com/SportsLawGuy/status/1406986290009157634?s=19

utee94 · « **Reply #65 on:** June 21, 2021, 03:50:47 PM »

Quote from: ELA on June 21, 2021, 02:41:15 PM

That's true, but I would argue this case did have some mainstream interest, and a political nexus, things that typically prevent 9-0 type decisions.

Agreed. Look no further than the party-line split that is occurring in the Senate regarding the details surrounding a national NIL bill.

ELA · « **Reply #66 on:** June 21, 2021, 04:03:55 PM »

Quote from: MaximumSam on June 21, 2021, 03:45:50 PM

https://twitter.com/SportsLawGuy/status/1406986290009157634?s=19

And that's what I noted above. His concurrence was a bigger problem for the NCAA than the case before the court today

betarhoalphadelta · « **Reply #67 on:** June 21, 2021, 04:47:56 PM »

Recommend everyone who is interested read the full decision: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/20969583/20-512_gfbh.pdf

In truth, the majority opinion seems not particularly remarkable, nor particularly wide-ranging. They basically rubber-stamped the Ninth Circuit decision and said that the NCAA had no compelling arguments to reverse it.

Beyond that, the final portions of the majority opinion were actually quite deferential to the NCAA. Essentially they didn't say "you can't regulate this", they said "you can't prohibit this, but you can enact regulations and limits to ensure that academic/educational benefits are legitimate and pro-competitive".

Kavanaugh's concurring opinion raises eyebrows, but that's about all it can do legally. While the majority opinion has the force of law, his concurrence does not. And it's telling that no other justices signed on to his concurrence. It's a nothing-burger.

MaximumSam · « **Reply #68 on:** June 21, 2021, 04:50:40 PM »

Quote from: betarhoalphadelta on June 21, 2021, 04:47:56 PM

Recommend everyone who is interested read the full decision: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/20969583/20-512_gfbh.pdf

In truth, the majority opinion seems not particularly remarkable, nor particularly wide-ranging. They basically rubber-stamped the Ninth Circuit decision and said that the NCAA had no compelling arguments to reverse it.

Beyond that, the final portions of the majority opinion were actually quite deferential to the NCAA. Essentially they didn't say "you can't regulate this", they said "you can't prohibit this, but you can enact regulations and limits to ensure that academic/educational benefits are legitimate and pro-competitive".

Kavanaugh's concurring opinion raises eyebrows, but that's about all it can do legally. While the majority opinion has the force of law, his concurrence does not. And it's telling that no other justices signed on to his concurrence. It's a nothing-burger.

No, it doesn't have the force of law. But it sure as hell ain't going to slow down lawsuits aimed at the NCAA and his quote will be in every single brief before lower courts.

GopherRock · « **Reply #69 on:** June 21, 2021, 04:57:20 PM »

The fact that Brent Kavanaugh is lecturing the NCAA about price fixing should tell you how bad the NCAA's case is.

https://twitter.com/gabrielmalor/status/1406979815463395333?s=20

I've been saying it for years: if the NCAA didn't change it's business model, someone else was going to do it for them, and they ain't gonna like how it's changed. The Supreme Court just cracked the door open for someone to blow the whole thing to pieces.

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.

Topic: Game Changer / NIL

JerseyTerrapin

Re: Game Changer / NIL

utee94

Re: Game Changer / NIL

Cincydawg

Re: Game Changer / NIL

ELA

Re: Game Changer / NIL

ELA

Re: Game Changer / NIL

utee94

Re: Game Changer / NIL

Cincydawg

Re: Game Changer / NIL

ELA

Re: Game Changer / NIL

MaximumSam

Re: Game Changer / NIL

utee94

Re: Game Changer / NIL

ELA

Re: Game Changer / NIL

betarhoalphadelta

Re: Game Changer / NIL

MaximumSam

Re: Game Changer / NIL

GopherRock

Re: Game Changer / NIL