The House case | Page 2 | The Boneyard

The House case

nelsonmuntz said:
One practice the P4 are engaging in which is a clearly anti-competitive practice is the 9 game schedule. The 20 game basketball schedule is also not on particularly firm ground. These scheduling practices would likely cost the majors some money if it was challenged by the G5.

There is a lot of legal precedent for enforcement against this kind of practice of restrictive scheduling. One of the more well known is that in the 80's, and I think into the 90's, Coca Cola used to require grocery stores to have exclusive promotions for all its products, focused on the colas, for 26 weeks of the year. By exclusive, the grocery store could not run another cola promotion the same week it was running one for Coca Cola. But shockingly, Pepsi also required grocery stores to commit to 26 weeks of exclusive promotions every year. Which meant that no other cola company could run a promotion at the grocery stores.

It is weird that these schools, many of whom have excellent law and business programs, never bothered to check with their own professors before they engaged in a bunch of stupid and obviously illegal behavior.
Expand ...

grasping at straws​

idiom

trying to find some way to succeed when nothing you choose is likely to work:
 
John said:

grasping at straws​

idiom

trying to find some way to succeed when nothing you choose is likely to work:
Expand ...

So you are officially not even pretending to add anything of value to a realignment discussion? Good to know.
 
One of the unfortunate byproducts of the House case could be a lot fewer kids on scholarship. A lot of these colleges are hurting for cash before having to pay players to compete. Some are going to bag the whole thing and drop or dramatically reduce scholarships.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
One of the unfortunate byproducts of the House case could be a lot fewer kids on scholarship. A lot of these colleges are hurting for cash before having to pay players to compete. Some are going to bag the whole thing and drop or dramatically reduce scholarships.
Expand ...
Seems like football programs will reduce scholarships. It's interesting that college programs have long been at 80+ man rosters as opposed to NFL rosters of 50+...

I might be wrong, but is there the possibility of full scholarships coming to non-revenue sports? For instance, baseball is capped at 11.7 scholarships. Maybe it was someone hypothesizing on that or maybe it would be a condition of the House case? Again, I might be dreaming that up. But, if true, I guess that would be an offset of FB reductions - if they were to happen.

I guess all of this is still TBD.

But this House case settlement seems to me to be legal quicksand. What's going to stop another suit just different enough to be brought that once again puts NCAA member schools in a position to fork out more dough?
 
CTFAN4LIFE said:
Seems like football programs will reduce scholarships. It's interesting that college programs have long been at 80+ man rosters as opposed to NFL rosters of 50+...

I might be wrong, but is there the possibility of full scholarships coming to non-revenue sports? For instance, baseball is capped at 11.7 scholarships. Maybe it was someone hypothesizing on that or maybe it would be a condition of the House case? Again, I might be dreaming that up. But, if true, I guess that would be an offset of FB reductions - if they were to happen.

I guess all of this is still TBD.

But this House case settlement seems to me to be legal quicksand. What's going to stop another suit just different enough to be brought that once again puts NCAA member schools in a position to fork out more dough?
Expand ...
Not sure what you mean about “full scholarships coming to baseball”? They can give a full scholarship or slice and dice. It’s not a head count sport like fb/bb where everyone gets a full
 
CTFAN4LIFE said:
Seems like football programs will reduce scholarships. It's interesting that college programs have long been at 80+ man rosters as opposed to NFL rosters of 50+...

I might be wrong, but is there the possibility of full scholarships coming to non-revenue sports? For instance, baseball is capped at 11.7 scholarships. Maybe it was someone hypothesizing on that or maybe it would be a condition of the House case? Again, I might be dreaming that up. But, if true, I guess that would be an offset of FB reductions - if they were to happen.

I guess all of this is still TBD.

But this House case settlement seems to me to be legal quicksand. What's going to stop another suit just different enough to be brought that once again puts NCAA member schools in a position to fork out more dough?
Expand ...

There is some action by Congress now to provide a legal safe harbor so college can regulate athletics.
 
.-.
AllHusky said:
Not sure what you mean about “full scholarships coming to baseball”? They can give a full scholarship or slice and dice. It’s not a head count sport like fb/bb where everyone gets a full
Expand ...
I mean that they're capped at the equivalent of 11.7 scholarships for baseball, so most players only get a partial, unless they are a star player....

NCAA Division 1 (D1) baseball programs can offer a maximum of 11.7 athletic scholarships that can be divided among 27 players on a 39-player roster. A minimum of 25% of the total cost of attendance must be received by each D1 player on scholarship, which includes tuition, fees, books, room, and board. However, not every program awards the full allotment, and some conferences do not offer scholarships at all.
 
I wonder if any SEC school is going to argue that the payments its boosters made to its players under-the-table over the last 30 years should be used to offset damages for back payments. It is actually a legitimate legal argument by the SEC schools, albeit one that would be a public admission that they had been cheating all along.
 
.-.
How would this work for Connecticut given that we are not a power conference school?
 
noeynox said:
Excellent point. Settlement should be spread on the same basis as the revenues from the tournament and CFP.
Expand ...

Someone really has to look hard to catastrophize this situation for UConn. The NCAA is cooked on this, and the P4 are cooked by extension. This will be the one good thing to come out of UConn’s brutal performance in conference realignment. Playing in front of friends and family for over a decade means there is not much revenue for ex-UConn players to demand a share of.

Do the two plaintiff lawyers need to get approval from someone for that settlement? If I was a player, I wouldn’t vote for a $2.8 billion settlement if I was in this kind of driver’s seat. I would demand $5 billion for back pay alone.
 
From what I have heard and read on a potential settlement is that schools won't be required to pay the max revenue share to athletes, but not doing so would put you at a competitive disadvantage. I can see how the P2 can share the max as their revenues are taking a big jump with the CFP and new media deals, but I can't see how the ACC schools or Big 12 schools can afford it. Also, unclear if all athletes (including women) will share in revenues or if there will be an equal distribution among athletes and among sports. As for scholarships, there is talk of getting rid of scholarship limits and replacing them with roster limits with the individual schools deciding how many players will be on scholarship for a given sport. Probably have limited impact on football and basketball (what player wants to be the 15th scholarship basketball player and never play?), but it could have a huge impact on sports like baseball, softball, lacrosse,... So, if a school wants to invest in their baseball program, they will be allowed to.

If revenue sharing actually happens, some colleges are going to have to make tough choices. Most ADs are already losing money and now they are going to lose more money? That is why Clemson and FSU are throwing a fit and UNC is now worried as they need more revenues to compete with the P2.
 
Kolumbo said:
I've also wondered how lax the top academic schools are with academic requirements for athletes. I've always assumed Northwestern and Vandy were very strict while Michigan and Texas and certainly UNC probably didn't care too much, but I don't know. It would seem the transfer portal would put NU at a disadvantage because the academics would be a big hurdle for many players.
Expand ...
Here is the deal. D1 academic schools will give some academic leeway to revenue producing sports, but they will give almost no academic leeway to non revenue sports. Even at academic D3 schools, a school may give the football coach a few spots for kids who aren't top academic kids but the golf coach will not be given any.
 
.-.
uchusky32 said:
What about those that were cheating? They did pay some. Lol.
Expand ...
nelsonmuntz said:
I wonder if any SEC school is going to argue that the payments its boosters made to its players under-the-table over the last 30 years should be used to offset damages for back payments. It is actually a legitimate legal argument by the SEC schools, albeit one that would be a public admission that they had been cheating all along.
Expand ...
 


-> The NCAA sent out a four-page memo to all 32 Division I conferences this week detailing how the organization plans to cut back on distribution to leagues in six annual payout categories in order to pay the proposed $2.7 billion in damages.

The memo detailed how the NCAA could split up an expected $1.6 billion that would come from reductions in NCAA distribution, sources told ESPN. The remaining $1.1 billion is expected to come from NCAA reserves, catastrophic insurance, new revenue and budget cuts, sources said.

Of that $1.6 billion, nearly 60 percent is expected to come from leagues outside the Power 5 leagues that are named in the House lawsuit, according to sources. (The NCAA is named, and all of the schools are members.) The other 40 percent will come from the power conferences.

For example, the cost annually for the Big East Conference is projected at between $5.4 million and $6.6 over the next decade, according to a source familiar with the memo. <-
 
huskymedic said:


-> The NCAA sent out a four-page memo to all 32 Division I conferences this week detailing how the organization plans to cut back on distribution to leagues in six annual payout categories in order to pay the proposed $2.7 billion in damages.

The memo detailed how the NCAA could split up an expected $1.6 billion that would come from reductions in NCAA distribution, sources told ESPN. The remaining $1.1 billion is expected to come from NCAA reserves, catastrophic insurance, new revenue and budget cuts, sources said.

Of that $1.6 billion, nearly 60 percent is expected to come from leagues outside the Power 5 leagues that are named in the House lawsuit, according to sources. (The NCAA is named, and all of the schools are members.) The other 40 percent will come from the power conferences.

For example, the cost annually for the Big East Conference is projected at between $5.4 million and $6.6 over the next decade, according to a source familiar with the memo. <-
Expand ...

I wondered how the NCAA was going to pay the $2.7 billion in damages when their only real source of revenues is the NCAA men's basketball tournament. Well, they want to take the basketball money to pay for a mostly football problem. Incredible.
 
UConnJim said:
I wondered how the NCAA was going to pay the $2.7 billion in damages when their only real source of revenues is the NCAA men's basketball tournament. Well, they want to take the basketball money to pay for a mostly football problem. Incredible.
Expand ...

They are two choices:

1) A bunch of schools with small athletic programs pay for the misbehavior of about 65 programs,
2) Those 65 programs have to come out of pocket.
 
The P5 does whatever they want, the P5 says to other schools foot the bill or we are leaving.
 
.-.
How about prorating the obligation by the media distribution rights owed by each conference?
 
CL82 said:
How about prorating the obligation by the media distribution rights owed by each conference?
Expand ...
While this would be a far more fair methodology, I don't see how the NCAA could enforce this.
 
FfldCntyFan said:
While this would be a far more fair methodology, I don't see how the NCAA could enforce this.
Expand ...
The NCAA is merely an association. Make the individual schools signatories to the settlement since they are the ones who received the purported benefit from the uncompensated NIL of past players.
 
Now we have a P4...not P5

28 Conferences would pay 40% of the cost

4 conferences would pay 60%

Each G5 conference would pay a little less than 1.5% of costs

Each P4 would pay 10 times that cost.

Shows you the disparity in athletics and money, And the downside of being Borgs and accumulating...
 
billybud said:
Now we have a P4...not P5

28 Conferences would pay 40% of the cost

4 conferences would pay 60%

Each G5 conference would pay a little less than 1.5% of costs

Each P4 would pay 10 times that cost.

Shows you the disparity in athletics and money, And the downside of being Borgs and accumulating...
Expand ...
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,363
Messages
4,567,855
Members
10,467
Latest member
xxBlueChips


Top Bottom