Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

cykadelic2 said:
A RevShare cap has been already legally imposed with the House Settlement. And legal NIL is uncapped.

Also, Cruz-Cantwell includes language that leaves open the possibility of athletes eventually unionizing with a CBA. And of course, most every other pro league with athlete CBAs have athlete salary caps and no caps on coaching salaries so Chris Murphy should perhaps rail on those leagues as well.

And if Chris Murphy is going spout out about this bill, then offer an alternative solution in doing so which he doesn't. And his claim that "all of the money" beyond RevShare goes to college administrators is nonsense given that a significant % goes directly to support non-rev sports.
Click to expand...

No it hasn't, which his why any attempts to limit player payments have been struck down in any court case that has been brought to any district in the country. Just because the NCAA came to an agreement with an attorney and it was approved by a judge does not make it a binding agreement to people outside of that lawsuit.

You cannot unilaterally impose a revshare cap without the current players getting a say in how large that cap is.

As for your second paragraph, have you not noticed that NFL head coaches cannot leave for another job while under contract without their current team's permission?
 
Clark said:
No it hasn't, which his why any attempts to limit player payments have been struck down in any court case that has been brought to any district in the country. Just because the NCAA came to an agreement with an attorney and it was approved by a judge does not make it a binding agreement to people outside of that lawsuit.

You cannot unilaterally impose a revshare cap without the current players getting a say in how large that cap is.

As for your second paragraph, have you not noticed that NFL head coaches cannot leave for another job while under contract without their current team's permission?
Click to expand...
This is why you have to make them employees and allow them to form a union, and start collective bargaining, it's the only way to solve the money problem.
 
Clark said:
No it hasn't, which his why any attempts to limit player payments have been struck down in any court case that has been brought to any district in the country. Just because the NCAA came to an agreement with an attorney and it was approved by a judge does not make it a binding agreement to people outside of that lawsuit.

You cannot unilaterally impose a revshare cap without the current players getting a say in how large that cap is.

As for your second paragraph, have you not noticed that NFL head coaches cannot leave for another job while under contract without their current team's permission?
Click to expand...
Beat me to it.

I'll just add that the other MAJOR issue with the House Settlement is that the kids that are getting to college age now were 10 years old when the whole process started. They weren't able, legally or otherwise, to agree to the provisions and because of that, with them not being union members, they can and should sue and they'll win every single time.
 
Clark said:
No it hasn't, which his why any attempts to limit player payments have been struck down in any court case that has been brought to any district in the country. Just because the NCAA came to an agreement with an attorney and it was approved by a judge does not make it a binding agreement to people outside of that lawsuit.

You cannot unilaterally impose a revshare cap without the current players getting a say in how large that cap is.

As for your second paragraph, have you not noticed that NFL head coaches cannot leave for another job while under contract without their current team's permission?
Click to expand...
Let me know when House is completely nullified and maybe then you'll have a point.

Jeffrey Kessler represented the interests of former, current and future athletes during the House Settlement proceedings so your claim that current and future players didn't get a say in how large that cap is is BS.

And you have no relevant point regarding NFL coaches. The discussion was related to coaching salaries, not whether or not they can contractually leave for another job.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Kinch
Fox is lobbying against the bill. They say it’s because of the local mandate. I doubt that is the number one reason.
 
cykadelic2 said:
Let me know when House is completely nullified and maybe then you'll have a point.

Jeffrey Kessler represented the interests of former, current and future athletes during the House Settlement proceedings so your claim that current and future players didn't get a say in how large that cap is is BS.

And you have no relevant point regarding NFL coaches. The discussion was related to coaching salaries, not whether or not they can contractually leave for another job.
Click to expand...

So much has been nullified from that agreement and the NCAA has gone out of their way to not enforce the remainder that I don't know that anyone sees the point in throwing the rest out.

What part of the agreement is still being enforced?
 
cykadelic2 said:
Let me know when House is completely nullified and maybe then you'll have a point.

Jeffrey Kessler represented the interests of former, current and future athletes during the House Settlement proceedings so your claim that current and future players didn't get a say in how large that cap is is BS.

And you have no relevant point regarding NFL coaches. The discussion was related to coaching salaries, not whether or not they can contractually leave for another job.
Click to expand...

Just because you say/think it happened, doesn't make it so.
 
FriendlySpartan said:
What? Where did I say anything about “you would cheat too?”.

I’ve always said the P2 are looking out for their best interest and I don’t take any of this personally. I legit couldn’t care less if this gets passed or not, I, just like you, know that it has no chance of passing.

I’m not sure where you pulled any of these ideas from
Click to expand...
what Petitti defines as best interests is a lot different what the University President of the big 10 define. Problem with Big 10 right now is the tremendous turnover. There are 12 presidents who have been there a year or less. That gives Petitti a lot of power. Too much.
 
FinalFourCy said:
They should have separated pooling & realignment, the mechanisms that determine revenue and threaten schools, from labor politics

The latter was always going to be contentious in any setup and across all conferences. Disagreements will cross most lines

Click to expand...

As previously posted, labor issues have been essentially separated from the bill by leaving open the possibility of athlete unionization. So rational House Republicans and Dems should be fine with labor language in the bill. The unionization issue will, by itself, take years to sort out and as Cantwell has pointed out, drawing a line in the sand at this point on that single issue would be foolish.

Also, Trump/Cruz support of the bill will likely sway House Republicans to support it.

Per ESPN: Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), alongside Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), introduced the bipartisan Protect College Sports Act, which is officially neutral on the issue of whether college athletes should be classified as employees or unionize. Rather than explicitly prohibiting or mandating unionization, the legislation leaves these determinations for future governance and ongoing federal commissions.
 
  • Haha
  • Informative
Reactions: FinalFourCy and Kinch
1UNI2ISU said:
Chris Murphy is a 'No'.

Click to expand...

And there is it...he doesn't support the bill because it doesn't meet his virtue signalling requirement for paying economically-baseless loads of cash to college athletes. He's not alone though...other media talking heads and posters in this thread have brought up the same thing. IMO, the virtue signalling is what will kill the bill, rather than the actual merits of what the bill proposes to do.

Quite often, college coaches who end up getting "blockbuster" salaries get those in part because they are getting looks by the professional leagues, and those looks (whether just rumored or actual) are putting upward pressure on the salary bidding war. So, the salary has at least some basis in real economic market value.

Is that the same case in college sports now, where "Daddy Warbucks" donors pile money into NIL collectives so their favorite college can buy teams? Maybe in a few cases, but in my opinion, usually not. Milan Momcilovic is a great example of this. Outside of the artificially-created college eco-system, is MM worth $ 6 million a year? Was any other basketball league willing to pay him that money?

I think in the college sports eco-system, the vast majority of the risk is taken by the schools. They have to take the loans to build the facilities, they have to pay salaries to keep coaches out of the pro leagues, they have to provide food, medical, housing, tutoring, transportation etc. to the athletes. Seems fair to me that if you take the majority of the risk, you should get the majority of the compensation. And it is certainly debateable whether the risks taken by the colleges are wise and actually within the scope of the mission of the college...like building 100,000 seat stadiums and paying coaches $10,000,000/yr. I don't think the way to control outlandish spending by college ADs is to pay artificially-inflated salaries to college athletes.

I asked google whether it was riskier to play college sports or to go for drive in a car...the answer could be totally wrong, or maybe it isn't...

Driving a car presents a significantly higher risk of serious injury or fatality than playing college sports. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the National Safety Council, car accidents cause millions of injuries and tens of thousands of deaths every year. In contrast, while NCAA sports carry inherent risks, serious catastrophic injuries are rare
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: Kinch
Clark said:
So much has been nullified from that agreement and the NCAA has gone out of their way to not enforce the remainder that I don't know that anyone sees the point in throwing the rest out.

What part of the agreement is still being enforced?
Click to expand...
Last I checked, the CSC winning an arbitration case vs NU FB players who tried to get phony NIL deals approved has yet to be overturned.

And it is my understanding that each school is required to report their RevShare distributions to the CSC or NCAA.

And the reason why there is a perceived lack of enforcement is twofold: 1) the NCAA/CSC lacks an anti-trust exemption to adequately enforce House and 2) House has yet to be codified at the Fed level in order to enable enforcement and not be preempted by state courts.

Cruz-Cantwell addresses both items.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kinch
FYI: Congresswoman Miller-Meeks is on the House commerce committee. I don’t know if that’s committee that would take action on the senate bill should it pass.
 
cykadelic2 said:
As previously posted, labor issues have been essentially separated from the bill by leaving open the possibility of athlete unionization. So rational House Republicans and Dems should be fine with labor language in the bill. The unionization issue will, by itself, take years to sort out and as Cantwell has pointed out, drawing a line in the sand at this point on that single issue would be foolish.

Also, Trump/Cruz support of the bill will likely sway House Republicans to support it.

Per ESPN: Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), alongside Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), introduced the bipartisan Protect College Sports Act, which is officially neutral on the issue of whether college athletes should be classified as employees or unionize. Rather than explicitly prohibiting or mandating unionization, the legislation leaves these determinations for future governance and ongoing federal commissions.
Click to expand...


Not effectively separated. The topic is definitely in the bill. Which is why it was a big part of the conversation yesterday
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom