Recruiting Football Talk VII

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here we see the NCAA blatantly repeat Saban's idiotic and deliberately backwards "NIL will destroy parity" argument that Saban has been repeating for a couple of years. Pretty much since the day he got beat out for Nico. Oh, and the corrupt NCAA is repeating Saban's propaganda in an attempt to... go after Nico.

View attachment 617577

View attachment 617583
Saban conducted this propaganda campaign -- shamefully without being called out by the media -- while having the highest percentage of blue-chip players on roster in history. The NCAA is sewer of corruption.


TLDR: NCAA is screwed. With this lawsuit, they are forced into the street at high noon with no bullets, and a huge target painted on their belly.


This is odd, as the NCAA is literally and transparently trying to use the same less stringent test to defend their system that the SCOTUS struck down.

In a 35-page decision, Gorsuch first addressed which legal test should apply to the NCAA’s rules restricting athletes’ compensation. The district court applied the most common test in antitrust law, known as the “rule of reason.” The NCAA contended that a less stringent test should apply because the association and its members act as a “joint venture” and have to work together “to offer consumers the benefit of intercollegiate athletic competition.” But Gorsuch noted that less stringent tests apply only in extreme cases, when it is easy to determine what impact an agreement will have on competition. That is not the case here, Gorsuch stressed, because the NCAA and its members control the market for the services of college athletes. The potential anti-competitive effects of the NCAA’s restrictions, he concluded, demand a searching inquiry.


The NCAA says that, in order for them to provide the product, it must be amateur, and they need the right to collude to artificially suppress NIL and salary markets. The SCOTUS said, "I don't think so."

In this lawsuit, they've repeated the same, if perhaps in different verbiage.

Also, the NCAA seems to be relying on amateurism as a core fabric of culture, which the last SCOTUS ruling seems to have spoken to. Basically, they said that that's an important conversation, but not one the SCOTUS needs to resolve. The SCOTUS' job is to enforce legislature. (This after telling the NCAA to make their argument to Congress if they want immunity from anti-trust laws.)

In his final paragraph, Gorsuch outlined the dilemma facing the court. Some people may think that the district court should have gone further, he suggested, while “others will think the district court went too far by undervaluing the social benefits associated with amateur athletics.” But in the end, Gorsuch emphasized, the Supreme Court agreed with the 9th Circuit that although “[t]he national debate about amateurism in college sports is important,” it is not the Supreme Court’s job to resolve it. Instead, Gorsuch observed, the court’s job is to determine whether the district court properly applied principles of antitrust law to this dispute – which, Gorsuch concluded, it did.

Further, Kavanaugh, in a parallel opinion, basically indicated that the NCAA should see the court's legal attitude on this limited NIL debate as the framework to expect on any future NIL and salary issues.

Kavanaugh joined the court’s opinion in full, but he also wrote a separate concurring opinion in which he questioned the legality of the remaining restrictions on benefits for college athletes. He made clear that although those restrictions were not before the court in this case, Monday’s ruling established a framework for future challenges to the restrictions – and, he wrote, there are “serious questions” about whether those rules “can pass muster” under that framework. Kavanaugh, an avid sports fan who coaches his daughters’ basketball teams and unsuccessfully tried out for the varsity basketball team while an undergraduate at Yale, acknowledged that college athletics includes “important traditions that have become part of the fabric of America.” But, he warned, the “NCAA is not above the law.”
 
Last edited:
And here (sandwiched between the two sentences I just quoted) the NCAA admits in its own name that Tennessee is standing up for the rights of student athletes. While the NCAA is seeking to institute a policy to keep the illegal bag game and Charger racketeering going while oppressing student athletes in direct defiance of the Supreme Court decision. Nice.

View attachment 617588

Btw, by "these rules" the NCAA means the rules that it instituted post hoc and is now attempting to use concerning a prior event. So obviously wrong -- but also, importantly -- blatant evidence of lack of institutional control at the NCAA. It's manifestly corrupt.
That fact may be. But, I need to hear from an attorney that what they're saying is swing and amish.
 
He's a sophomore.............


Career Statistics​

Career Statistics
MINAVGFGFGAPCTFGFGAPCTFTFTAPCTOFFDEFTOTAVG
SeasonGPGSMinutesTotals3-PointFree-ThrowsReboundsPFFOASTAST/GT/OBLKSTLPTSAVG
2022-23342972621.4135250.5403192.3376288.705301061364.0680561.630122336310.7
2023-24212162529.8117215.5443784.4407087.805261311577.5551874.142151534116.2
Total5550135124.6252465.54268176.386132175.754562372935.312311432.672273870412.8
Lol checkout that Free Throw percentage, makes Shaq look like Calvin Murphy ..
 
Even though Rose gambled on MLB he should still be in HOF.
It's not like he was juicing..
I am coming around to this argument, a little. He is one of the best hitters ever. I think he is a real jerkwad of a person. Gambling, though, is the one thing, that is hard to let go. I don't believe he bet on other teams when he gambled, but having money on any game that you are managing, absolutely has strong potential to influence the outcome.
 
What is going on in sec men's basketball?


That explains the look in his eyesScreenshot_20240203_232025_DuckDuckGo.jpg

I don't care what year it is, that Kentucky player shouldn't have been allowed to play anymore last night. You can't "recruit for the other team" like that during the game.

Believe it or not, some people don't want to be gay.

If TENNESSEE would have done that ESPN would have been screaming "sexual harassment" and "unwanted advances".

I would have tried to rip that sissy's face off. No wonder Awaka looked like a psycho
 
Last edited:
I don’t understand how we fell in NET rankings after that win last night and Bama jumped us. We have a better record vs quad 1 and 2 teams
 
  • Like
Reactions: OrangenSC
Hot take... Zach edey actually sucks and the only reason he is what he is is because refs have no clue how to call for/against him because of his size.

He does not run the floor. He is not athletic even for his size.

He's 8' tall and he's literally a one of a kind.

That's it. If he was 7' he's just another big.

I absolutely hate the notion that he gets away with what he gets away with because, he's big. It's easy to say you can't hold his size against him... Does that mean it's then ok to hold his size against who plays against him?

Eh. Rant over.
 
That fact may be. But, I need to hear from an attorney that what they're saying is swing and amish.
I'm not an attorney, but.. If you read my last post, it quoted and linked to the SCOTUS' blog describing the last ruling on NIL benefits. If you read the NCAA's latest response, it sounds eerily similar to the response that the SCOTUS struck down in the last case. Then, you have Kavanaugh saying to expect the same logic on similar NIL and salary suits, if they see one in the future.
 
That explains the look in his eyesView attachment 617595

I don't care what year it is, that Kentucky player shouldn't have been allowed to play anymore last night. You can't "recruit for the other team" like that during the game.

Believe it or not, some people don't want to be gay.

If TENNESSEE would have done that (and we wouldn't) ESPN would have been screaming "sexual harassment" and "unwanted advances".

I would have tried to rip that sissy's face off. No wonder Awaka looked like a psycho
I think you are correct. Dude literally kissed him, and our guy went crazy-eyed. It's what happened.
 
I think you are correct. Dude literally kissed him, and our guy went crazy-eyed. It's what happened.
I'm half joking about the Kentucky player making a play/ flirting with Awaka. I don't know if that guy is gay or not, but kissing another dude on the court should be a flagrant foul, ejection, or just let the 2 go ahead and fight.

One thing's for sure..... I don't understand this world anymore
 
I'm half joking about the Kentucky player making a play/ flirting with Awaka. I don't know if that guy is gay or not, but kissing another dude on the court should be a flagrant foul, ejection, or just let the 2 go ahead and fight.

One thing's for sure..... I don't understand this world anymore
I'm not saying he flirted. It's just clear in that view that he kissed Awaka, and that was point that Awaka went into crazy-eyed, even the ref won't touch him, better get the kissing fool out of here for the sake of keeping him intact, mode.
 
I am at the point, I would take that trade. Let Shoeless Joe in and then let Pete in.
Always been ok with Shoeless...never believed he was culpable.. Would be fine with Pete AFTER he joins Joe in the hereafter. Lied until he wanted to sell a book. He shouldn't be able to enjoy the honor while breathing imo.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement



Back
Top