FfldCntyFan
Texas: Property of UConn Men's Basketball program
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2011
- Messages
- 15,581
- Reaction Score
- 62,300
I'm not sure the guy necessarily needs to be unhappy with where he was drafted, nor planning on hitting the open market for NIL.From what we’ve seen so far, if the question is can a player who declares for the draft and doesn’t like where he is drafted, or by whom, say “screw it, I want to put myself on the NIL market and play another year at college at a school I get to pick” go to court and win, I think the answer based on what we’ve seen so far is “heck yes.” From an antitrust perspective, what reason is there that a potential employee who tests the market at the highest level and then doesn’t love the opportunity should be denied the right to then go back into a lower part of the market. Could the McGladrey’s and CBiz’s have a rule that says if you want to interview with a Big 4 firm, once you’ve interviewed then the next level of national firms have agreed that none of us will hire you? No, I’m not an antitrust specialist but it seems to me that that would be a clear restraint of trade. And given what the courts have said about colleges and the NCAAs to date, I don’t see why this restraint would be treated any differently.
Said another way, if colleges can’t agree (through NCAA rules) that they won’t hire people who’ve played professionally in Europe, or the G League, what is the justification for saying but if you see what your options are in the NBA now it’s o.k. to agree no one can hire them? As I said above, under the current rulings (meaning unless laws change or the Supreme Court gets involved) I don’t see how the NCAA could have stopped Providence from signing Pate even if he had played for the Knicks that year. Could all the second tier national accounting firms have a deal that once an accountant started at PWC, they would all agree not to hire them?
Once we crossed the line where NCAA athletes were treated by courts as employees, where concerted actions to limit their opportunities were subject to antitrust laws, I don’t see how any restraints beyond age, years of eligibility and academic eligibility could possibly stick.
The young man could simply say "I'd rather return to school for another year and receive NIL than spend the bulk of the year in the G league".
I really want to see what the NCAA says about a withdrawal deadline this year as there already is one case (Nnaji) were a drafted player has subsequently played (with NCAA approval) and a second where a player (Pate) who did not withdraw from a draft is planning on returning to school.
Theoretically the entire freshman and sophomore classes this past season could declare for the draft and not withdraw, while only a dozen or so have any plans on turning pro this upcoming season. I personally don't see how the NCAA can stop anyone who still has eligibility from returning if they don't sign an NBA contract.