Illinois Hoops Recruiting Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
#351      
STLini25
Oracle21 said:
Those listed are all collectively bargained between the employer and the union. So they’d stand up in court.

And the issue with jobs like the military for instance where there is an age restriction is more about the ability to do the job physically and the demand from that entity. For instance to join the Marines, the maximum age with a waiver is 35. But if someone was 36, and challenged it in court, the military could just argue that a 36 year old is more likely to develop physical ailments during enlistment time (36-40) than anyone younger than them and thus the younger serviceman is more likely to be a more effective soldier.

You couldn’t argue this point in the NCAA until guys were well past 35. You can’t argue that 25 year old Drew Timme isn’t good enough to play NCAA basketball because he’s too old. Whereas with other rare labor intensive jobs that try to get people out the govt argues it’s due to their ability to do the job when in reality it’s about not wanting to pay them their salaries/benefits once they hit certain ages. And most of those areas are collectively bargained. If the NCAA collectively bargained with the athletes, there’s no way they’d agree to eligibility limits

Can you imagine MLB, NBA, or NFL players agreeing to a maximum retirement age? It’d never happen. And wouldn’t happen in NCAA either. And without a CBA, I don’t see anything the NCAA tries to enforce standing up in court including eligibility limits.
Click to expand...
Correct. NCAA is a different animal. Only way an NCAA age restriction could be enacted is basically if Congress enacted a law saying you can’t go to college past a certain age (never going to happen)
 
#352      
STLini25
Oracle21 said:
Meyers Leonard doesn’t need the money but I bet he’d come back and play if he felt his body was good to go.

And I bet if you asked Bret Bielema if he was good with giving Luke a 4 year extension on his deal, he’d be fine paying Luke to be Illinois QB for 4 more years if Luke isnt good enough to make an NFL roster.
Click to expand...
The years on eligibility are defensible although I’m sure will eventually be challenged
 
#358      
IlliniHardwood
Oracle21 said:
Not to me either. Say there’s a guy like Drew Timme who isn’t quite good enough for the NBA. He’s currently on a 2 way deal with the Lakers. And he’s used up his eligibility in college. But let’s say Duke is willing to pay him $2 million dollars (or some amount way more than a 2 way) to play for them. Couldn’t he challenge in court that the current collegiate rule is denying his right to the pursuit of happiness?

There aren’t any jobs in the US that have limits on how long you can work at them.
Click to expand...

jamarvelous31 said:
Umm...theres a lot of jobs with age restrictions
Click to expand...

Oracle21 said:
Those listed are all collectively bargained between the employer and the union. So they’d stand up in court.

And the issue with jobs like the military for instance where there is an age restriction is more about the ability to do the job physically and the demand from that entity. For instance to join the Marines, the maximum age with a waiver is 35. But if someone was 36, and challenged it in court, the military could just argue that a 36 year old is more likely to develop physical ailments during enlistment time (36-40) than anyone younger than them and thus the younger serviceman is more likely to be a more effective soldier.

You couldn’t argue this point in the NCAA until guys were well past 35. You can’t argue that 25 year old Drew Timme isn’t good enough to play NCAA basketball because he’s too old. Whereas with other rare labor intensive jobs that try to get people out the govt argues it’s due to their ability to do the job when in reality it’s about not wanting to pay them their salaries/benefits once they hit certain ages. And most of those areas are collectively bargained. If the NCAA collectively bargained with the athletes, there’s no way they’d agree to eligibility limits

Can you imagine MLB, NBA, or NFL players agreeing to a maximum retirement age? It’d never happen. And wouldn’t happen in NCAA either. And without a CBA, I don’t see anything the NCAA tries to enforce standing up in court including eligibility limits.
Click to expand...

A huge non-governmental category has been omitted, which limits age in many cases and there are very rarely any unions or collective bargaining: healthcare. Many hospitals and/or healthcare systems have an age maximum for physicians to practice/work, and at times, for other employees, including high-level administration.

There is no way to predict what the NCAA could or could not get away with enforcing, which is disconcerting due to their ineptitude. I'm sure I am not in the minority when I say that I do not trust the NCAA to be consistent or rational. And, with possible precedent regarding age maximum vs age discrimination (for either side of the argument as previously mentioned) outside of government employment, a court decision would likely depend on a convincing argument since this seems like a new/gray territory. #IANAL
 
Last edited:
#360      
IlliniHardwood
JFGsCoffeeMug said:
This is getting out of control, fast: https://www.maizenbrew.com/michigan...s-chicago-bulls-dusty-may-wolverines#comments
Click to expand...
No Way What GIF by Wind Sun Sky Entertainment


Home Alone Kevin GIF
 
#363      
BashCtIllini
ChiTown said:
So how about this….😂
https://twitter.com/x/status/2005137016313577814
Click to expand...
I think college sports need to have a serious conversation about what they are. Allegiances aren't going to sever overnight, but they are driving right off the cliff, imo.

Why do we watch college sports? It's an inferior product talentwise to professional sports. Many of us are alums and feel a part of the college teams. But there is also that familiarity, watching a local kid go from high school star to college star, and hopefully off to the NBA. Watching that Fr. with promise turn into All Conference by his Sr year. Seeing a group develop, watching recruiting because all we need is a PG and this team is going to be great. Discussing how great next year will be because 4 starters are coming back.

When that changes into every year it's a new group with maybe 2 or 3 guys coming back, Euros, washed out pros, constant transfers, no allegiance to anything other than money, then you are becoming what some have disliked about the pro game on steroids. At least in the pros they have contracts. That 1st round rookie you love can get signed to a 5-year contract, and you know he'll be there next year.

College is quickly turning into a revolving door of players making way more money than they're worth (all paid for by the fans, which is the single most ridiculous thing) No contracts, no salary caps, it's anarchy. And hanging over all of it, it's still an inferior product to the pro game. So if you completely erode much of what people love about the college game, why not just watch the better players?

People love winning, so as long as your team is winning, people will still watch. But if your team doesn't win?
 
#364      
the juiceman cometh
BashCtIllini said:
I think college sports need to have a serious conversation about what they are. Allegiances aren't going to sever overnight, but they are driving right off the cliff, imo.

Why do we watch college sports? It's an inferior product talentwise to professional sports. Many of us are alums and feel a part of the college teams. But there is also that familiarity, watching a local kid go from high school star to college star, and hopefully off to the NBA. Watching that Fr. with promise turn into All Conference by his Sr year. Seeing a group develop, watching recruiting because all we need is a PG and this team is going to be great. Discussing how great next year will be because 4 starters are coming back.

When that changes into every year it's a new group with maybe 2 or 3 guys coming back, Euros, washed out pros, constant transfers, no allegiance to anything other than money, then you are becoming what some have disliked about the pro game on steroids. At least in the pros they have contracts. That 1st round rookie you love can get signed to a 5-year contract, and you know he'll be there next year.

College is quickly turning into a revolving door of players making way more money than they're worth (all paid for by the fans, which is the single most ridiculous thing) No contracts, no salary caps, it's anarchy. And hanging over all of it, it's still an inferior product to the pro game. So if you completely erode much of what people love about the college game, why not just watch the better players?

People love winning, so as long as your team is winning, people will still watch. But if your team doesn't win?
Click to expand...
FYI, there are reasons to be skeptical about the Tipton report. Not saying this kind of thing is not going to happen at some point but it appears a number of the programs named by Tipton are denying they have any interest in Flowers or have had any contact with him or his camp.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2005283885450666453
 
#365      
BashCtIllini
#367      
skyIdub
Oracle21 said:
Those listed are all collectively bargained between the employer and the union. So they’d stand up in court.
Click to expand...
Did I miss something? It’s literally federally mandated that airline pilots cannot work past 65. It has nothing to do with the union or the employers.
Same with ATC except that their employer is literally the federal government.
 
#368      
the juiceman cometh
ChiTown said:
Though some of the schools listed may not be interested,but I didn’t hear none of the schools are interested.
Click to expand...
Lol. "Yes parts of this news report are completely made up, but have we confirmed that all of it is completely made up?"

Look, maybe there's some truth to this, but at this point it's equally and probably more likely that Tipton is just putting out completely unsubstantiated rage bait to boost engagement.

Another possibility here is that the NCAA is indeed going to open the flood gates, or at least threaten to do so, because they want Congress to grant them an exception to anti-trust laws, which is a thing they have been actively campaigning for: https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/score-act-would-grant-ncaa-antitrust-immunity/

Basically keep granting eligibility in a way that escalatingly shocks the conscience of sports fans and claim they're doing it to avoid an anti-trust suit, and tell Congress if they want to stop it to pass this legislation. All for the goal of once again nixing NIL.

FWIW I think I could ne convinced that some level of anti-trust exemption allowing the NCAA to enforce reasonable eligibility could work, but this proposal seems to go too far.
 
#373      
lstewart53x3
Last edited:
#374      
the juiceman cometh
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back