re: Now with NIL shouldn’t athletes pay tuition and housing?

quote:

---

Are we reading polar opposite laws?

LSU cannot pay a recruit or player. TAF cannot pay a recruit or player.

It says so literally right in the law that I posted.

Performance based contracts are not allowed.

---

Please post in the law that says LSU can't pay recruits. The law only restricts certain things, I have pointed out in the law specifically why you are wrong but you keep on saying it doesn't say what it says.

Show me.

I have already shown you why you are wrong with direct definitions and quotes from the bill, see prior posts.

High school players have no restrictions, as they are not part of the law. College players could be covered in the law if they met all the requirements of the definition.

quote:

---

(1) "Athletic booster" means a person or entity that has participated in or has been a member of an organization promoting a post secondary education institution's athletic program.

(2) "Athletic program" means an intercollegiate athletic program at a post secondary education institution.

3) "Intercollegiate athlete" means a student enrolled in a post secondary education institution who participates in an athletic program.

(4) "Post secondary education institution" means a Louisiana public post secondary education institution or nonpublic post secondary institution that receives or disburses any form of state student financial assistance, including scholarships and grants.

---

Other than that the only restrictions are on lawyers and licensed agents, not third parties.

LSU could pay a high school player to sign on signing day because the act doesn't allow it for two reasons:

1. high school players even in Louisiana are not covered under the act, see definition

2. even if they were covered in the act, the way the law is written... you don't pay for the NIL, you pay for the signature.

quote:

---

D. A post secondary education institution shall not use an athletic booster to, nor shall an athletic booster, directly or indirectly, create or facilitate compensation opportunities for the use of an intercollegiate athlete's name,image, or likeness as a recruiting inducement or as a means of paying for athletics participation.

---

Also, you don't pay for the NIL, you pay them for signing the document. The NIL is meaningless.

- third parties that are not booster, schools, lawyers, agent are not covered under the law
- high school players are not covered by the law
- even college players are not covered at all by the law unless they fall into the definition
- there could be a small restrictions but they are very limited

These would all be okay to do under the law:

- I pay high school player to attend La. Tech.
- I pay a Florida player to transfer to LSU.
- LSU pays a Florida player to transfer to LSU.
- LSU pays a Florida player not to play in a game.
- La. Tech pays a high school player to attend.


There are all okay under the law.

And the elephant in the room is there is no regulatory body, no accountability, so no enforcement.

I'm very confused as to what you are reading, and all you are doing is saying something is wrong without actually providing anything of substance.

quote:

---

NCAA rules still apply...

---

Delusional.

quote:

---

The SCOTUS statement referred to academic benefits and payments. It did not change the NCAA bylaws to allow schools to pay recruits or players for the athletic accomplishments or performances.

---

This all ended in January when the Justice Department Anti-Trust Division sent the NCAA a letter warning them about trying to regulate. The USSC was the nail in the coffin.

Its called an Anti-trust violations, which can attach civil and criminal penalties.

Correct, the USSC has to do with educational benefits, but the decision was the nail in the coffin.

quote:

---

The NCAA has allowed schools and states to make their own NIL policies.

---

No, the NCAA has no real alternative choice. The States and the Federal government are telling them.

Now you went from saying its against the Louisiana law, to now telling me its against the unenforceable NCAA rules.

quote:

---

Sure, a company could (under the table) tell a player that if he commits to LSU, they'll give him an NIL deal. But that is still prohibited.

---

No its not.

quote:

---

Can you show me one instance where NCAA rules don't still apply?

There's active investigations right now about impermissible benefits. shite they JUST opened one up on Arizona State. Their rules 100% still apply.

---

Of course, those are in violation of the anti-trust act.

If their rules were enforceable, they wouldn't have tried to change them. Duhhhh.

Many conferences told the NCAA not pass their new stupid rules because of the anti-trust law, see prior DOJ letter. Also, the unenforceable rules are in violation of multiple State's laws.

even with NIL, they will still cry poor.

After spending all their NIL money on sneakers, swag, and other stupid shite, they will again cry poor and broke

quote:

---

f you think the NCAA rules are toothless now, why did you have any confidence in them prior to these NIL laws.

---

Who said I did?

They have no ability to stop compensation to players (generally), see DOJ Anti-trust letter and the USSC decision. Their stupid temporary rules are actually in violation of Louisiana state law in addition to Federal and State anti-trust law.

Anti-trust violations have multiple paths... civilly and criminally.

https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/antitrust-laws

quote:

---

The penalties for violating the Sherman Act can be severe. Although most enforcement actions are civil, the Sherman Act is also a criminal law, and individuals and businesses that violate it may be prosecuted by the Department of Justice. Criminal prosecutions are typically limited to intentional and clear violations such as when competitors fix prices or rig bids. The Sherman Act imposes criminal penalties of up to $100 million for a corporation and $1 million for an individual, along with up to 10 years in prison. Under federal law, the maximum fine may be increased to twice the amount the conspirators gained from the illegal acts or twice the money lost by the victims of the crime, if either of those amounts is over $100 million.

---

quote:

---

After DOJ warning, NCAA to delay vote on compensation rules

---

https://apnews.com/article/athlete-compensation-mark-emmert-legislation-laws-f456f4ffa9869653573c146bf5387a34

Now watch DOJ start to prosecute.

quote:

---

Geaux Fighting Tigers 1,

Didn’t the Supreme Court just recently rule that NCAA was violating anti-trust law in a matter unrelated to NIL?

I think I’m confused on your stance in this particular thread. That’s on me for coming in late.

---

Yup. It had to do with additional "educational benefits", not direct compensation. However, they more or less blew up the NCAA's whole anti-trust scam.

I would expect mountains of anti-trust suits coming down the pike now, the lawyer in the case said he was a going to amend various suits and go after the whole thing based on the Supreme Court.

The Justice Department Anti-trust Division told the NCAA not to put in new rules in January as they are in violation of anti-trust laws. Member conferences told the NCAA not to pass new rules as well, why? Anti-trust violations.

The new NCAA "rules" also appear to be in violation of many new State's NIL laws including Louisiana.

All they did was replace old unenforceable rules with new unenforceable rules.

I think at this point, if the NCAA tried to take action the player should sue for injunction relief.. my guess is they will get it if they do a good job. In the meantime, they should file a criminal complaint with the FBI.