- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: NCAA to end transfer rule
Posted on 5/31/24 at 8:57 am to Drizzt
Posted on 5/31/24 at 8:57 am to Drizzt
What? The law doesn’t make sense? When all these changes are a direct result of specific legal rulings?
Look, just read my comments in this thread if you want to understand. The NCAA is going the way of the dinosaur for a reason. The courts have said that there is nothing about being an athlete in an organization that supersedes labor law. And that’s where we are. People have a right to utilize their unique skills for compensation. And they can do it where they are “ hired” ie given a scholarship.
The solution is in a “ super conference “ that agrees to rules and limits and contracts that are equally applied. So if the athlete wants in to the super conference he signs said contract. But as long as it’s just a NIL free for all, the courts will continue to assert the players freedom to work when and where they want as long as they comply with the rules of each school ( dates, GPA’s, credit hours etc).
Look, just read my comments in this thread if you want to understand. The NCAA is going the way of the dinosaur for a reason. The courts have said that there is nothing about being an athlete in an organization that supersedes labor law. And that’s where we are. People have a right to utilize their unique skills for compensation. And they can do it where they are “ hired” ie given a scholarship.
The solution is in a “ super conference “ that agrees to rules and limits and contracts that are equally applied. So if the athlete wants in to the super conference he signs said contract. But as long as it’s just a NIL free for all, the courts will continue to assert the players freedom to work when and where they want as long as they comply with the rules of each school ( dates, GPA’s, credit hours etc).
1
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:29 am to Lsupimp
This revocation of the rule is really just acknowledging what the courts were going to do anyway.
Initially, a player had to sit a year if he transferred. And frankly, no one was really challenging that rule. Then 2020 came along and the NCAA, likely many, many institutions in the western world lost any and all ability for logic and forethought. It was a year of "we have to do something"...just to "do something" without any thought whatsoever of potential future repercussions. So they "temporarily" eliminated the one year penalty. But anyone with a modicum of common sense knew that once they let that genie out of the bottle it wasn't going back in.
The NCAA tried to limit the damage by declaring an athlete only could get "one free transfer". Further transfers were subject to a penalty. But once more, demand for immediate gratification outweighed logical forethought. So you saw multiple AGs challenge the 2x transfer rule earlier this year because they wanted key transfers to their schools available NOW. Most notably, the WR at UNC and basketball players at WVU. One case made it to a Fed. Court in West Virginia which granted a TRO on enforcing the 2x transfer rule. That made every 2x transfer basketball player immediately eligible (ex Jalen Cook) and the NCAA was wise enough to see the writing on the wall the temporary ruling was going to eventually become permanent. So this is just the NCAA actually being proactive and eliminating a rule rather than fighting a court battle to inevitably reach the same conclusion.
Perhaps. But that still brings with it a ton of issues. One, there will be no "contracts" unless or until there is a CBA negotiated between the "super conference" and a players' union. Otherwise, that arrangement will be riddled with anti-trust issues. If you are going to have a players union, the players will likely have to be considered employees...or at least have some sort of quasi employment relationship with the school/conference. Finally, as long as you have COLLEGE football and COLLEGE basketball Title IX implications will be in play. The second Ohio St. tries to pay their all-conf. QB $5.00 more in "salary" than they pay the 3rd string left fielder on the softball team the "discrimination" will be challenged. The marketplace for college football is massive. The marketplace for women's softball is almost non-existent. But those two markets can't exist in a pure capitalism system because of the equality provisions of Title IX. So as long at the football/basketball teams are affiliated with colleges Title IX will apply.
Initially, a player had to sit a year if he transferred. And frankly, no one was really challenging that rule. Then 2020 came along and the NCAA, likely many, many institutions in the western world lost any and all ability for logic and forethought. It was a year of "we have to do something"...just to "do something" without any thought whatsoever of potential future repercussions. So they "temporarily" eliminated the one year penalty. But anyone with a modicum of common sense knew that once they let that genie out of the bottle it wasn't going back in.
The NCAA tried to limit the damage by declaring an athlete only could get "one free transfer". Further transfers were subject to a penalty. But once more, demand for immediate gratification outweighed logical forethought. So you saw multiple AGs challenge the 2x transfer rule earlier this year because they wanted key transfers to their schools available NOW. Most notably, the WR at UNC and basketball players at WVU. One case made it to a Fed. Court in West Virginia which granted a TRO on enforcing the 2x transfer rule. That made every 2x transfer basketball player immediately eligible (ex Jalen Cook) and the NCAA was wise enough to see the writing on the wall the temporary ruling was going to eventually become permanent. So this is just the NCAA actually being proactive and eliminating a rule rather than fighting a court battle to inevitably reach the same conclusion.
quote:
The solution is in a “ super conference “ that agrees to rules and limits and contracts that are equally applied. So if the athlete wants in to the super conference he signs said contract. But as long as it’s just a NIL free for all, the courts will continue to assert the players freedom to work when and where they want as long as they comply with the rules of each school ( dates, GPA’s, credit hours etc).
Perhaps. But that still brings with it a ton of issues. One, there will be no "contracts" unless or until there is a CBA negotiated between the "super conference" and a players' union. Otherwise, that arrangement will be riddled with anti-trust issues. If you are going to have a players union, the players will likely have to be considered employees...or at least have some sort of quasi employment relationship with the school/conference. Finally, as long as you have COLLEGE football and COLLEGE basketball Title IX implications will be in play. The second Ohio St. tries to pay their all-conf. QB $5.00 more in "salary" than they pay the 3rd string left fielder on the softball team the "discrimination" will be challenged. The marketplace for college football is massive. The marketplace for women's softball is almost non-existent. But those two markets can't exist in a pure capitalism system because of the equality provisions of Title IX. So as long at the football/basketball teams are affiliated with colleges Title IX will apply.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:30 am to J2thaROC
Nah, these are going to quickly become 1-4 year contracts.
School A offers 3 years $500k per year contract.
School B offers 2 year $600k per year contract.
School C offers 1 year 650k contract.
Player decides which offer to take.
School A offers 3 years $500k per year contract.
School B offers 2 year $600k per year contract.
School C offers 1 year 650k contract.
Player decides which offer to take.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:56 am to Alt26
quote:
So this is just the NCAA actually being proactive and eliminating a rule rather than fighting a court battle to inevitably reach the same conclusion.
Agree with pretty much everything you said. The above is what the casual guy doesn't quite seem to get. The courts have been clear and the NCAA has no choice but to bend to reality. For all the labor law reasons I have outlined. There is nothing so special and unique about college athletics that it magically supersedes the law.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 10:13 am to Average_Comments
2019 was the last real year of college football.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 10:50 am to CatfishJohn
Yeah it’s going to be so weird when we play USC in September and nobody watches and when Bama rolls into town and the stadium is only half full and when we all stop tailgating.
#Rollwiththechanges
#GeauxTigers
#Rollwiththechanges
#GeauxTigers
Posted on 6/1/24 at 11:06 am to Average_Comments
It's like the NCAA just said screw it, if we have to allow players to make money, we might as well remove all guardrails and wait until they eventually come back to us hoping to fix it. Keep in mind, it's really only the top sports that are going to be negatively affected by this.
This happens, just not during the season. Why would anyone do that during the season?
quote:
the school should be able to pull your scholarship if you are not worth a shite and kick you to the curb.
This happens, just not during the season. Why would anyone do that during the season?
This post was edited on 6/1/24 at 11:12 am
Posted on 6/1/24 at 11:31 am to lsujunky
quote:
I say if you can leave at any time with no repercussions the school should be able to pull your scholarship if you are not worth a shite and kick you to the curb.
The school can do that each year.
Posted on 6/1/24 at 12:48 pm to alumni95
So if the goal/ outcome is a total free market, then the schools with the deepest pockets will win. How is that any different than how things work today?!?
A$M has already proven it takes more than money to have success.
It is just really strange as a fan to see such utter chaos.
My predictions:
The inevitable outcome will be contracts that make the players university employees. The better players will get longer contracts and more money than players who need to prove it. Good payers will have buyout clauses for early termination, etc.
It will be the same deal that coaches get now.
Academica will be the only hitch controlling eligibility and transfers
A$M has already proven it takes more than money to have success.
It is just really strange as a fan to see such utter chaos.
My predictions:
The inevitable outcome will be contracts that make the players university employees. The better players will get longer contracts and more money than players who need to prove it. Good payers will have buyout clauses for early termination, etc.
It will be the same deal that coaches get now.
Academica will be the only hitch controlling eligibility and transfers
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News