UNLV QB is leaving the program immediately due to the school not withholding NIL commitments

cykadelic2

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2006
4,008
1,749
113
The Department of Justice and districts attorney from 10 states and the District of Columbia seem to think it isn't quite so "perfectly logical."

Yeah, it was a BS bleeding heart ruling as I suggested before without regard to the time and financial resources invested by schools during the recruiting process and the freedom of choice of those athletes.
 

Mr Janny

Welcome to the Office of Secret Intelligence
Staff member
Bookie
SuperFanatic
Mar 27, 2006
42,737
33,751
113
Yeah, it was a BS bleeding heart ruling as I suggested before without regard to the time and financial resources invested by schools during the recruiting process and the freedom of choice of those athletes.
Lol. It wasn't a ruling. It was a settlement. The NCAA agreed to it in exchange for the suit being dropped. The judge didn't rule against the NCAA. It never got that far. But by all means, don't let the facts disrupt the story you want to tell yourself.
 

Mr Janny

Welcome to the Office of Secret Intelligence
Staff member
Bookie
SuperFanatic
Mar 27, 2006
42,737
33,751
113
Yeah, it was a BS bleeding heart ruling as I suggested before without regard to the time and financial resources invested by schools during the recruiting process and the freedom of choice of those athletes.
Not to mention, where's the protection that other businesses get for the time, money and effort it takes to attract, hire and train talented employees, only to see them leave after a year?

What makes college sports so special that makes their talent acquisition costs so much more valuable than say, the insurance industry, that they need special rules to keep their talent in house?
 

cykadelic2

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2006
4,008
1,749
113
Lol. It wasn't a ruling. It was a settlement. The NCAA agreed to it in exchange for the suit being dropped. The judge didn't rule against the NCAA. It never got that far. But by all means, don't let the facts disrupt the story you want to tell yourself.
And the NCAA, without an anti-trust exemption, knew it would lose in court. So yes, it was a settlement, not a ruling and based on NIL opportunities for athletes wanting to transfer a second time. It wasn’t based on treating athletes the same as normal students which you previously suggested.
 

cykadelic2

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2006
4,008
1,749
113
Not to mention, where's the protection that other businesses get for the time, money and effort it takes to attract, hire and train talented employees, only to see them leave after a year?

What makes college sports so special that makes their talent acquisition costs so much more valuable than say, the insurance industry, that they need special rules to keep their talent in house?
If my employer spent the same amount of time and financial resources recruiting me as a typical P4 athlete with multiple scholarship offers, I sure as hell wouldn’t be as apt to quit on them after 12 months. You are not making a valid comparison.
 

Mr Janny

Welcome to the Office of Secret Intelligence
Staff member
Bookie
SuperFanatic
Mar 27, 2006
42,737
33,751
113
And the NCAA, without an anti-trust exemption, knew it would lose in court. So yes, it was a settlement, not a ruling and based on NIL opportunities for athletes wanting to transfer a second time. It wasn’t based on treating athletes the same as normal students which you previously suggested.
Leagues like the NFL and NBA only have protection from anti trust laws (regarding player rights) because of the existence of the players unions. There's not a special protection for the NFL that allows them to set standards for player movement. It's collectively bargained. Any unionized industry has the power to agree to the same arrangement if they want. to. It doesn't take an act of Congress.

But without the union, college sports has to conform to the same anti trust laws that every other industry does. So yeah, the NFL knew they would lose in court. Not because of a stacked deck or a bleeding heart judge, but because they knew they had no legal leg to stand on.
 

Mr Janny

Welcome to the Office of Secret Intelligence
Staff member
Bookie
SuperFanatic
Mar 27, 2006
42,737
33,751
113
If my employer spent the same amount of time and financial resources recruiting me as a typical P4 athlete with multiple scholarship offers, I sure as hell wouldn’t be as apt to quit on them after 12 months. You are not making a valid comparison.
The amount of money spent doesn't make a lick of difference. The law is the law.
 

cykadelic2

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2006
4,008
1,749
113
Leagues like the NFL and NBA only have protection from anti trust laws (regarding player rights) because of the existence of the players unions. There's not a special protection for the NFL that allows them to set standards for player movement. It's collectively bargained. Any unionized industry has the power to agree to the same arrangement if they want. to. It doesn't take an act of Congress.

But without the union, college sports has to conform to the same anti trust laws that every other industry does. So yeah, the NFL knew they would lose in court. Not because of a stacked deck or a bleeding heart judge, but because they knew they had no legal leg to stand on.
...and the House Settlement will likely lead to a anti-trust exemption that will include an element of restricted athlete movement, potentially without athletes becoming employees but we shall see on that one.
 

nfrine

Well-Known Member
Mar 31, 2006
9,873
12,040
113
Nearby
Looks like UNLV's replacement at QB continues to is do just fine. QB rating of 233 last game. Runs and passes. Oh, by the way, a transfer portal guy too. Got him at the same time as the last guy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Letterkenny