re: Great analysis of the Maason Smith situation and NCAA incompetence

quote:

---

The ruling said the athletes always had that right. How can you punish a kid for exercising his rights?

---

No it did not, ruling had nothing to do with this type of compensation for student-athletes.

"unconstitutional" would be a far reach to describe the findings that certain NCAA rules/by-laws violated provision of an anti-trust statute. This was not a Constitutional Law issue.

quote:

---

The ruling said the athletes always had that right. How can you punish a kid for exercising his rights? The rule was unconstitutional and so are the penalties.

---

This is the part in all of this I don’t understand. Once the Supreme Court ruling was handed down it should have invalidated all rules to the contrary. Even beyond that, I don’t understand why the NCAA felt there was a compelling need to make the new rules effective at some future date rather than immediately upon passage. What good were they serving preventing earning money on autographs in June, but not July and forward? And, even at that, what competitive advantage do they believe it gave LSU that this money was earned two weeks early that it would necessitate a punishment now? It’s not deterrence since the act is no longer prohibited.