NCAA and the antitrust lawsuits

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bigger case is the Dartmouth basketball case before the NLRB. If the players win, all mens non-revenue sports (including soccer are gone). Women's sports will exist to the extent needed for title IX compliance

Or colleges pay players to play a game and represent/advertise their intuition on television.

There is a loophole. But colleges don't want to do this.

At that point why not just privatize the entire thing and let the pro organizations deal with it.

I think there's still value for colleges to have teams and play sports.

The problem is that the value of what college can provide and what players represent is out of wack. The one thing you can never get back is time. Young players value is very high at 18 and diminishes as they get older. A degree from a college has a set value that doesn't change. If colleges paid players 100k a year and if they players hard to use that money to pay for school it would all work out. But colleges don't want to do this because this gives players all kinds of other benefits because they're now employees not students.

That could also fix the transfer portal show though. If they're contracted employees, they can't just hit the market.

How does that work? If they are employees, state restrictions on non-compete clauses come into effect. UCLA trying to restrict a player from moving to USC is going to lose in court

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bigger case is the Dartmouth basketball case before the NLRB. If the players win, all mens non-revenue sports (including soccer are gone). Women's sports will exist to the extent needed for title IX compliance

Or colleges pay players to play a game and represent/advertise their intuition on television.

There is a loophole. But colleges don't want to do this.

At that point why not just privatize the entire thing and let the pro organizations deal with it.

I think there's still value for colleges to have teams and play sports.

The problem is that the value of what college can provide and what players represent is out of wack. The one thing you can never get back is time. Young players value is very high at 18 and diminishes as they get older. A degree from a college has a set value that doesn't change. If colleges paid players 100k a year and if they players hard to use that money to pay for school it would all work out. But colleges don't want to do this because this gives players all kinds of other benefits because they're now employees not students.

That could also fix the transfer portal show though. If they're contracted employees, they can't just hit the market.

How does that work? If they are employees, state restrictions on non-compete clauses come into effect. UCLA trying to restrict a player from moving to USC is going to lose in court

Maybe that's something that's there because it's a university? I was just thinking on the pro side, teams tend to have rights to players. The model of colleges paying players to market their institutions seems like a step away from this all becoming a model that private companies or organizations need to take over.

Why wouldn't the NFL just want to create a development league filled with prospective players and play on Saturday. Even more money for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bigger case is the Dartmouth basketball case before the NLRB. If the players win, all mens non-revenue sports (including soccer are gone). Women's sports will exist to the extent needed for title IX compliance

Or colleges pay players to play a game and represent/advertise their intuition on television.

There is a loophole. But colleges don't want to do this.

At that point why not just privatize the entire thing and let the pro organizations deal with it.

I think there's still value for colleges to have teams and play sports.

The problem is that the value of what college can provide and what players represent is out of wack. The one thing you can never get back is time. Young players value is very high at 18 and diminishes as they get older. A degree from a college has a set value that doesn't change. If colleges paid players 100k a year and if they players hard to use that money to pay for school it would all work out. But colleges don't want to do this because this gives players all kinds of other benefits because they're now employees not students.

That could also fix the transfer portal show though. If they're contracted employees, they can't just hit the market.

How does that work? If they are employees, state restrictions on non-compete clauses come into effect. UCLA trying to restrict a player from moving to USC is going to lose in court

Maybe that's something that's there because it's a university? I was just thinking on the pro side, teams tend to have rights to players. The model of colleges paying players to market their institutions seems like a step away from this all becoming a model that private companies or organizations need to take over.

Why wouldn't the NFL just want to create a development league filled with prospective players and play on Saturday. Even more money for them.

it works on the pro side because there is a CBA allowing for movement to be restricted. The NFL will never have a developmental league because 1) college doesn't cost them anything and already produces all the talent they need and 2) careers are so short that developmental league don't make sense (the average career is 3.3 years). They can't play on Saturday because their anti-trust exemption bars the NFL from playing on Saturdays during the college seasons.

[Anonymous]

All of this is fascinating. Sports organizations and anti trust law.

But nobody wants or thinks a single soccer system underneath USSF with pro/rel would work. Shouldn't violate any anti trust laws as there wouldn't be any huge barriers of entry, and moving up in leagues is absolutely merit based.