Pavia seeking seventh season of eligibility

#6
#6
This lawsuit is the speartip of the eventual singularity for all this NIL / pay-for-play college football. At some point, all the economic arguments about "preventing people from freely selling their skills" and "I should be able to enter an agreement to play with whoever I want in exchange for payment" collides headlong with the idea of there being any sort of "eligibility" rules. Because if schools can have ANY sort of eligibility rules, then it stands to reason they should be able to have ALL the eligibility rules, including the old transfer and amateur status rules. If schools can determine one's eligibility then that power should be completely in their hands. And if the belief is they should not have that power, then there really should be no restrictions. Full commercial pay for play.

And I have to say, on an ethical level, I find the argument convincing. If it's just a job then why shouldn't Pavia get a seventh year? Or an eighth year? Or more? Awful for the sport itself, to the point of rendering everything about the idea of "college" football laughably idiotic, but still - if they're just people working at a job, why should anything be able to prevent them from working and being compensated? If it's just a job, then it's just a job.

Again, horrible for "college football," but no one running or leading "college football" seems to care about that anyway. So. You've made this bed. Time to lie on it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThemDawgsIsHell, Plecoptera and HeuperDrive
#8
#8
The year is 2044. Diego Pavia has just concluded his 20th season with Vandy, and is now suing for season #21.

All jokes aside, getting really tired of this kid lol. But this ruling could give us another year of Star Thomas and Joey,…. So I mean…..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Megatron88 and volfan102455
#12
#12
HeuperDrive said:
The year is 2044. Diego Pavia has just concluded his 20th season with Vandy, and is now suing for season #21.

All jokes aside, getting really tired of this kid lol. But this ruling could give us another year of Star Thomas and Joey,…. So I mean…..
Click to expand...
That's actually their argument. His attorney has stated that in the age of revenue sharing and NIL, there should be no limit on how long an individual can play college sports


Diego Pavia taking next step toward becoming a permanent college football player
 
#13
#13
Voltopia said:
This lawsuit is the speartip of the eventual singularity for all this NIL / pay-for-play college football. At some point, all the economic arguments about "preventing people from freely selling their skills" and "I should be able to enter an agreement to play with whoever I want in exchange for payment" collides headlong with the idea of there being any sort of "eligibility" rules. Because if schools can have ANY sort of eligibility rules, then it stands to reason they should be able to have ALL the eligibility rules, including the old transfer and amateur status rules. If schools can determine one's eligibility then that power should be completely in their hands. And if the belief is they should not have that power, then there really should be no restrictions. Full commercial pay for play.

And I have to say, on an ethical level, I find the argument convincing. If it's just a job then why shouldn't Pavia get a seventh year? Or an eighth year? Or more? Awful for the sport itself, to the point of rendering everything about the idea of "college" football laughably idiotic, but still - if they're just people working at a job, why should anything be able to prevent them from working and being compensated? If it's just a job, then it's just a job.

Again, horrible for "college football," but no one running or leading "college football" seems to care about that anyway. So. You've made this bed. Time to lie on it.
Click to expand...


His logic is inescapable and a natural result of NIL/portal changes. College football is, as has been said a number of times on this board by myself and many others, done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Voltopia, norrislakevol, Pennheel and 1 other person
#17
#17
lawgator1 said:
His logic is inescapable and a natural result of NIL/portal changes. College football is, as has been said a number of times on this board by myself and many others, done.
Click to expand...
Yup! I've said for a year or two now that this was the next shoe to drop. If the players are basically employees then who's to say they can't go to work and do their job for however long the university basically wants to employ them/allow them to take classes...whatever? Now, congress will definitely get involved....God help us college football fans.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider
#21
#21
KoachKrab127 said:
Honestly and logically, I don’t think I can have a problem with a player being allowed to play if he’s enrolled in school and taking classes.
Click to expand...
This would be the stop if a lawsuit goes through to extend eligibility - any player on a collegiate sports team must be enrolled full-time and passing their classes.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top