Recruiting Forum Football Talk IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
#160,758
#160,758
volbeast33 said:
That is not accurate at all….. the whole point was that schools were making millions off of student athletes while not allowing student athletes to make money off of their own likeness…. The courts ruled in the favor of the players….. the only thing the ncaa can do is try to go after schools claiming that they are buying players…They will not be able to stop the NIL in its entirety though.
Click to expand...
When the Supreme Court opened up the door to athletes profiting from their likeness it closed the one that allowed the NCAA to have any say in it. Stating otherwise with fluffed up legalese is saber rattling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolsDoc81TX, BullsGap, SweetasSoda and 3 others
#160,760
#160,760
SoilVol said:
So my boss and his wife bought my newborn daughter a bunch of gifts. One whole gift bag was nothing but Virginia Tech Hokies stuff because, well I work for them and he's a troll lol.

One of the gifts was a Hokies children's book about the Hokie bird going to all the other ACC mascots trying to find out what animal he is then learning he's a turkey.

So anyway I'm flipping through and get to the author's page and it's written by none other than J Baron and Woody Baron. The father and brother of Tyler Baron. I met Woody a few times in high school when he was at Brentwood Academy where he also was a very successful wrestler. They both played at Virginia Tech. Woody graduated in 2016.
Click to expand...
Glad I didn’t stop reading after the first 10 words. That’s a good story. Did they move to Knoxville or split parents?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SoilVol
#160,762
#160,762
TheRain said:
This is the best 30 for 30 college Baseball team of all time.

Click to expand...


The comments on the twitter machine....


ice-age-sid.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolsDoc81TX, Brillovol, VOLSONLY and 6 others
#160,765
#160,765
InVOLuntary said:
The delivery and setup was $35K for the recent delivery. Taking a previously loved boat to Oklahoma end of this month from Tennessee. Delivery and setup for that boat will be $55K. It's bigger and has more equipment.
Click to expand...

Strange question...do you deal with lower end boats as well? Like the sub 20k style...ya know pleasure boats that'll seat 6-8 adults but are towable for each lake trip?
 
#160,766
#160,766
Orange_Crush said:
I'll say this, IMHO flipping off opponents is a bad look.


But I agree, the ESPN announcer was a MUCH poorer look, and ESPN should consider that when considering what stories to hyperventilate clicks with.
Click to expand...

Maybe JB was flipping off ESPN, and the GT centerfielder was just in the line of fire?
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolsDoc81TX, Brillovol, OptimusPrimerib and 5 others
#160,768
#160,768
volbeast33 said:
That is not accurate at all….. the whole point was that schools were making millions off of student athletes while not allowing student athletes to make money off of their own likeness…. The courts ruled in the favor of the players….. the only thing the ncaa can do is try to go after schools claiming that they are buying players…They will not be able to stop the NIL in its entirety though.
Click to expand...

butchna said:
When the Supreme Court opened up the door to athletes profiting from their likeness it closed the one that allowed the NCAA to have any say in it. Stating otherwise with fluffed up legalese is saber rattling.
Click to expand...

I hate that this thread keeps going off topic, but this continues to be a problem. Somehow I feel you both are going to be shocked when the NCAA tries to regain a grasp on NIL by placing new restrictions - I'm trying to forewarn you.

Volbeast, I gave you an accurate reading of the holding in Alston. That is where the law stands today. "Schools making millions while not allowing S-As to profit from their rights of publicity" is an argument/legal case you have invented in your head that has never been adjudicated.

There have been two cases that have addressed "payments" to NCAA athletes in recent years, 1) O'Bannon v NCAA; and 2) NCAA v Alston. Both had the chance to offer a broad legal precedence and did not. O'Bannon held that the NCAA could not cap scholarships below the "true cost of attendance, PLUS $5k/year in a trust for those S-As;" while Alston held that the NCAA could not cap "non cash benefits related to educational opportunities." In fact, in Alston, SCOTUS chose not to address the 9th Cir.'s holding that the NCAA has a legitimate interest in "preserving amateurism and thus improving consumer choice by maintaining a distinction between college and professional sports."

All of this is to say, for the TLDR crowd:
There is the law you two want, and the law the way it is. Currently, there is still not one single thing that is stopping the NCAA from trying to regain control of NIL by placing restrictions on the athletes who participate. Sorry Butchna, but no door has been closed to the NCAA - certainly not as it pertains to non-educational benefits. When the time comes, the rules the NCAA place will likely be challenged in court, as they should be. It will be up to the court to then decide whether those rules constitute an unfair restraint on trade. But do not mistake the NCAA's current hands-off approach as the end-all be-all for NIL. We are long way from finding where it lands, and the court system/Congress/NCAA are going to be the ones who ultimately shape it.
 
Last edited:
#160,771
#160,771
MKEvol said:
I hate that this thread keeps going off topic, but this continues to be a problem. Somehow I feel you both are going to be shocked when the NCAA tries to regain a grasp on NIL by placing new restrictions - I'm trying to forewarn you.

Volbeast, I gave you an accurate reading of the holding in Alston. That is where the law stands today. "Schools making millions while not allowing S-As to profit from their rights of publicity" is an argument/legal case you have invented in your head that has never been adjudicated.

There have been two cases that have addressed "payments" to NCAA athletes in recent years, 1) O'Bannon v NCAA; and 2) Alston v NCAA. Both had the chance to offer a broad legal precedence and did not. O'Bannon held that the NCAA could not cap scholarships below the "true cost of attendance, PLUS $5k/year in a trust for those S-As;" while Alston held that the NCAA could not cap "non cash benefits related to educational opportunities." In fact, in Alston, SCOTUS chose not to address the 9th Cir.'s holding that the NCAA has a legitimate interest in "preserving amateurism and thus improving consumer choice by maintaining a distinction between college and professional sports."

All of this is to say, for the TLDR crowd:
There is the law you two want, and the law the way it is. Currently, there is still not one single thing that is stopping the NCAA from trying to regain control of NIL by placing restrictions on the athletes who participate. Sorry Butchna, but no door has been closed to the NCAA - certainly not as it pertains to non-educational benefits. When the time comes, the rules the NCAA place will likely be challenged in court, as they should be. It will be up to the court to then decide whether those rules constitute an unfair restraint on trade. But do not mistake the NCAA's current hands-off approach as the end-all be-all for NIL. We are long way from finding where it lands, and the court system/Congress/NCAA are going to be the ones who ultimately shape it.
Click to expand...
LOL... Yeah. There is. The ruling was that the NCAA could not prevent a player from profiting from his/her NIL. Period. Those are private relationships that only indirectly pertain to the NCAA or member institutions. The NCAA can "try" anything it likes. But short of Congress getting involved... which they show no interest in doing... the NCAA has no power over these PRIVATE CONTRACTS in which they have NO legitimate interest.

They can waste their money trying to win in court. But there are two basic realities to deal with. One, they don't have a good case. Two, they are disadvantaged in terms of money to fight it out in court. They won't face one suit. They'll face hundreds.... probably multiple suits from multiple angles in multiple states.

If they did not know they were holding a losing hand... they would have already tried to reign it in.
 
#160,772
#160,772
InVOLuntary said:
The delivery and setup was $35K for the recent delivery. Taking a previously loved boat to Oklahoma end of this month from Tennessee. Delivery and setup for that boat will be $55K. It's bigger and has more equipment.
Click to expand...

If you find yourself near SW Missouri, give a shout. My work has a designated spot for rigs with oversized loads (like that boat will be, figured I would mention that before I catch a TWSS). What lake is she going in??
 
  • Like
Reactions: gainesvol82 and TennacJed
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement



Back
Top