SCOTUS rules against NCAA | Page 3 | The Boneyard

SCOTUS rules against NCAA

HuskyHawk

The triumphant return of the Blues Brothers.
Joined
Sep 12, 2011
Messages
31,858
Reaction Score
81,471
For fun. We know they all do.

E4atAkCXMAAFDRc.jpg
 
Joined
Dec 11, 2014
Messages
1,365
Reaction Score
7,712
The ruling didn't directly take on NIL compensation, only ruled that the NCAA couldn't prevent the schools from providing additional educational benefits as part of their scholarships. For instance laptops.

The road from laptop to lap dance is short and quickly traveled. Anyone here think the latter has no educational value ?
 
Joined
Jun 9, 2017
Messages
6,483
Reaction Score
25,808
The ruling didn't directly take on NIL compensation, only ruled that the NCAA couldn't prevent the schools from providing additional educational benefits as part of their scholarships. For instance laptops.

The road from laptop to lap dance is short and quickly traveled. Anyone here think the latter has no educational value ?

They’re both “lap tops” if ya really think about it
 

Chin Diesel

Power of Love
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
32,402
Reaction Score
97,205
The ruling didn't directly take on NIL compensation, only ruled that the NCAA couldn't prevent the schools from providing additional educational benefits as part of their scholarships. For instance laptops.

The road from laptop to lap dance is short and quickly traveled. Anyone here think the latter has no educational value ?

Economics. Finite amount of cash needs to be spent wisely. Or unwisely.
 

CL82

2023 NCAA Men’s Basketball National Champions
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
56,511
Reaction Score
206,251
The real big thing here is that the NCAA is subject to anti-trust laws and there’s really no reason why it shouldn’t be.
Agree and I posted in another thread I wonder if this decision plus the NIL push is effectively a death knell for NCAA. Without an anti-trust exemption it is all that much easier for a group like the P5 to split off for a single sport.
 
Joined
Jun 9, 2017
Messages
6,483
Reaction Score
25,808
Agree and I posted in another thread I wonder if this decision plus the NIL push is effectively a death knell for NCAA. Without an anti-trust exemption it is all that much easier for a group like the P5 to split off for a single sport.

I think one of the great misconceptions out there is that the schools have an adversarial relationship with the NCAA. In fact, the NCAA exists to shield the schools from bad publicity and public acrimony. So, I don’t think the schools - including the football schools - really want the NCAA to go away entirely (and, just to be clear, the NCAA has very little control over football as things stand now). However, it’ll be greatly diminished and even more obviously a figurehead.

What my hope is, without an anti-trust exemption (which they might get via legislation or something btw), the NCAA’s rules regarding D1 divisions and conferences will go by the wayside. For instance, UHart isn’t dropping from D1 because they don’t want a basketball program. They’re dropping because they can’t support the 14 total programs needed to be D1. Therefore, I hope for the creation of more geographically and culturally rational conferences for basketball and football, specifically - and ones that would allow for the ability of schools like UHart to compete at a D1 level in specific sports, rather than all or nothing
 
Joined
May 7, 2015
Messages
761
Reaction Score
2,782
I don't on w for sure but I do know I get up to about $7k in tuition payments before it goes from being a non-taxable benefit and it turns in to taxable income.
And I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. Carry on.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
12,298
Reaction Score
19,587
If I were a P5 AD I’d be nervous. If I were designing the new football tournament I’d be leaning toward making it as open as possible. The anti trust piece being the most important piece of this.

Though I could see a plan along the lines of 1aa system or baseball or hockey. Most players don’t get full rides. 65 or some number of full equivalent scholarships for football, 6 or 7 far basketball. Nobody gets a full ride.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
14,289
Reaction Score
78,475
NCAA amateurism is dead. Whatever you thought the moving target that was the "collegiate model" is gone. The date for the dearly departed will go down as June 21, 2021, but really, the exit from this world was years in the making.

It's not just that amateurism is dead. The NCAA that strangled it might not be far behind.


 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
4,393
Reaction Score
12,751
I understand the concerns about the impact this will have on women’s and minor sports, but this ruling is so long overdue that it’s hard not to be happy about it. The NCAA has one of the grossest business models I’ve ever seen, so it’s pretty satisfying to see them get raked over the coals by the Supreme Court.

At the same time, it sounds like the NCAA can still add some restrictions on expenses for student-athletes. Maybe for once, they’ll find a reasonable middle-ground solution, such as limiting what schools can pay while allowing players to profit off their own likeness.

But I doubt it. They just extended that clown Emmert, so I’m sure it will be the same ‘ol nonsense from the NCAA in a different form.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
29,143
Reaction Score
45,560
I've always thought that if you can't have an amateur model, then totally sever it from the school. Let the teams license the schools name, but the model should be totally overhauled.

That being said, I think SCOTUS is way out of its depth on this. I don't know if it's the lack of knowledge about sports that causes these situations, but there is a lot of precedent for understanding an amateur model. Indeed, a couple decades ago, the court ruled against student teachers on exactly similar issues, so when we hear that athletes are taken advantage of as they are in no other institution in America, it is so plainly false.

The one tell in all of this is I never, ever, ever, ever see an analysis of athletic budgets in any of this.

The media never mentions it. It's not within SCOTUS's purview so they don't have to look at it. But the Senators passing these laws, like Murphy who is frankly an embarrassment on this issue, never look at the school's budget to determine who is really being taken for a ride. And it's doubly nauseating that Murphy and Senators like him represent states where support for academics has been slashed, but there's no concern for what goes on in the classroom. Instead, sports are front and center.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
29,143
Reaction Score
45,560
They finally going to start taxing scholarships?

If theyre employees that is taxable income.

you cannot separate the two and claim otherwise
Federal law is murky on this and always has been.

When I went to school in PA, the borough inside State College actually taxed our tuition scholarship. $2k every year. That was just the borough. When we looked up the law, it basically said that the Federal Gov't can tax it but chooses not to.
 

CTMike

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
11,420
Reaction Score
40,763
I've always thought that if you can't have an amateur model, then totally sever it from the school. Let the teams license the schools name, but the model should be totally overhauled.

That being said, I think SCOTUS is way out of its depth on this. I don't know if it's the lack of knowledge about sports that causes these situations, but there is a lot of precedent for understanding an amateur model. Indeed, a couple decades ago, the court ruled against student teachers on exactly similar issues, so when we hear that athletes are taken advantage of as they are in no other institution in America, it is so plainly false.

The one tell in all of this is I never, ever, ever, ever see an analysis of athletic budgets in any of this.

The media never mentions it. It's not within SCOTUS's purview so they don't have to look at it. But the Senators passing these laws, like Murphy who is frankly an embarrassment on this issue, never look at the school's budget to determine who is really being taken for a ride. And it's doubly nauseating that Murphy and Senators like him represent states where support for academics has been slashed, but there's no concern for what goes on in the classroom. Instead, sports are front and center.
“well, akshully-ing” a unanimous slam dunk ruling… only on the boneyard!
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
86,931
Reaction Score
323,061
Matt Brown’s Extra Point view:

 

The Funster

What?
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
2,949
Reaction Score
8,655
Thank you P5! Your efforts to monetize any aspect of sport that you could for your own benefit, your desire to squeeze every last dollar in an effort to be "the best" has opened Pandora's box and has put college athletics at risk. Well done you classless, greedy
 
Joined
Aug 12, 2017
Messages
892
Reaction Score
2,699
Schools have largely already been slashing non-revenue sports.
Schools have been slashing non revenue sports but that was the tip of the iceberg . I think this is going to destroy non revenue sports and negative impact many African America players
 

Psolo12

Future Doctor of Law
Joined
Dec 22, 2018
Messages
1,177
Reaction Score
7,990
GREAT flick...very funny, almost as funny as... Gorsuch: "the NCAA is not above the law".... that line is highsterical.
That line is actually from Kavanaugh's concurrence, not Gorsuch's opinion.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
29,143
Reaction Score
45,560
“well, akshully-ing” a unanimous slam dunk ruling… only on the boneyard!
Full of ridiculous misstatements easily disproven like "Nowhere else in American society is labor unpaid."

But go on in ignorance.
 

Online statistics

Members online
76
Guests online
2,144
Total visitors
2,220

Forum statistics

Threads
155,752
Messages
4,030,445
Members
9,864
Latest member
leepaul


Top Bottom