I have no idea where this is going to go....but it will be a very wild ride. I really wonder what this looks like in 3-5 years, not to mention, the next 3-5 months.This is a landmark that will forever change the landscape of college athletics. It could also be the end of the NCAA as we know it. Every rule they make could be challenged. If you can pay an athlete when he plays, why could you not pay an athlete to come as a bonus to his/her salary? I’d expect transfers to be possible at any time just like in the rest of the world, UNLESS they are signing binding contracts with specific terms.
It’s a while new world!!
No idea really...maybe, teams like UNC, Duke, Kentucky, and Kansas find themselves losing in bidding wars with schools in cities with good cash flow, like USC, UCLA, and UNLV. Maybe the decision kills off some of the really competitive mid-majors.I have no idea where this is going to go....but it will be a very wild ride. I really wonder what this looks like in 3-5 years, not to mention, the next 3-5 months.
I suspect the rich will get richer, the poor get poorer and non-revenue sports might be in trouble.I have no idea where this is going to go....but it will be a very wild ride. I really wonder what this looks like in 3-5 years, not to mention, the next 3-5 months.
I have no idea where this is going to go....but it will be a very wild ride. I really wonder what this looks like in 3-5 years, not to mention, the next 3-5 months.
My biggest take is that it has to be tied to their education, not Athletics. At least that is the way I read it.
I read this the same way. It is not carte blanche anything goes. It doesn't even have to be totally in cash form.. Schools could even offer all their athletes educational trips to Europe separate from athletics.My biggest take is that it has to be tied to their education, not Athletics. At least that is the way I read it.
Will they find loopholes, you better believe it, so may the wealthiest schools win. That is what the new Championship trophy might as well read.
Exactly. I understand the Supreme Court reasoning, but unfortunately the consequences will be far more negative than positive. If this is interpreted such that student athletes must be paid for their time, 90% of student athletes will no longer be playing varsity sports while in college.I suspect the rich will get richer, the poor get poorer and non-revenue sports might be in trouble.
IOW, not a whole lot of change (pun intended)
But what we think is a good idea doesn’t matter if it can’t be defended in court and clearly it cannot.Get rid of the 1 and done rule, expand NBA developmental leagues, but I think paying a salary to college athletes is a bad idea. Allow them all the opportunity to go elsewhere and make money, or earn money off their likeness. I don't really care that the level of competition would drop, I'd watch the NBA/NFL more if that's what I wanted.
LOL - Go get your money Trent!
Did see he was 59th in recent Sporting News mock draft. NIL pay was probably not far enough along in certainty of amount, to be a factor.Kofi could have made good money staying at Illinois another season.
I have been on the other side of Berman multiple times and have retained Waxman before. While Waxman certainly doesn’t come cheap, I promise you that Berman made multiples more from this case. Good to know he cares so mich about his clients in this case, as he typically doesn’t even have real ones.The ruling says nothing about cash payments to students. The existing rules of a $0.00 salary are still in place and the NCAA still has enforcement powers over non-academic payments:
Justice Gorsuch wrote, “the N.C.A.A. is free to forbid in-kind benefits unrelated to a student’s actual education; nothing stops it from enforcing a ‘no Lamborghini’ rule.”
Think I read the lawyers involved extracted $33,000,000 for themselves from the NCAA with just this ruling. There will be many more lawsuits.