Scoggins (ST): University of Minnesota regent Michael Hsu takes the NCAA to task

Donate To GopherHole
Pompous Elitist said:
So, knowing that the courts smile upon restraint of trade/free marketplaces when it please them, and it pleases them to have a competitive NFL league, how does this affect the arguments regarding the NCAA and it’s desire to produce a competitive league?
Click to expand...

It won't affect it, because this is a wild tangent that you invented out of whole cloth. No one is suing the NCAA because restraint on "free trade".

Alston v NCAA is about the NCAA violating antitrust laws.

Pompous Elitist said:
The NFL is different in that the players are classified as employees, and are able to unionize. What would it take for NCAA players to be reclassified as employees? How could the schools counter that? There are legal tests for determining employment status. You do the research and see what turns up.
Click to expand...

Players at Northwestern already tried to form a player's union, a couple(?) years ago, as you may recall. I don't remember all the particulars, but it was a national issue, and it ultimately failed. I do also seem to recall that at least one state (Ohio?) put forth a bill to make a state law making it illegal for college athletes to be employees, or something alone those lines, in response to the the NW union news.

Would be interesting to look that stuff up again.
 
Last edited:

Gophers_4life said:
I've never seen any post of yours where you make a reasonabe argument that allowing player compensation in other forms than, and of greater monetary value than, an FCOA scholarship, will harm the Gophers chances of competing (against whom??). Please link to it. I don't think it exists.
Click to expand...

Your act grows thin. Even with overwhelming evidence of the many hurdles you refuse to even postulate a workable plan as I asked you to do weeks ago.

Give us details of your plan.
 

Gophers_4life said:
It won't affect it, because this is a wild tangent that you invented out of whole cloth. No one is suing the NCAA because restraint on "free trade".

Alston v NCAA is about the NCAA violating antitrust laws.



Players at Northwestern already tried to form a player's union, a couple(?) years ago, as you may recall. I don't remember all the particulars, but it was a national issue, and it ultimately failed. I do also seem to recall that at least one state (Ohio?) put forth a bill to make a state law making it illegal for college athletes to be employees, or something alone those lines, in response to the the NW union news.

Would be interesting to look that stuff up again.
Click to expand...

Wow
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Even with overwhelming evidence of the many hurdles
Click to expand...

There isn’t evidence of one hurdle, let alone many.

Pompous Elitist said:
you refuse to even postulate a workable plan
Click to expand...

I answered every question you asked, as best I could. I said then, you wouldn’t be satisfied. But that was back when I thought you were interested honest discussion. Definitely won’t be putting that level of effort into post again, unless you start being more honest.
 



Can you entertain us with your argument? The Alston trial alleges that schools really want to pay players, but the NCAA is restricting that, correct?

The NCAA has rules to promote a level playing field. The schools agree by those rules. None of them, not one, is arguing in court they want to play players. Why in the world would they want to do that?

Similarly, the NFL restricts its member teams under a salary cap, free agency, the draft and other eligibility rules. All these things are perfectly legal.

Years ago every Supreme Court justice recognized amateurism is important for a competitive field and for the flavor of the product.

Only you, and a few others, haven’t thought this through very well.

Now give us a workable plan or go away and stop wasting our time with your inane posts.
 

Reading through stories on the recent decision it’s clear Wilken does not and did not support a free market or “paying players” or unrestrained free agency in college athletics. This is a nothingburger. Any increase in scholarship funds must be linked to educational purposes:

Judge Wilken’s injunction lists a series of “education-related” items that the NCAA is now permanently restrained from capping. They include education benefits related to “computers, science equipment, musical instruments and other tangible items not included in the cost of attendance calculation but nonetheless related to the pursuit of academic studies.” This list can also be amended by a court-approved motion of the NCAA or the players.

I guess we got all bent out of shape over nothing. Even this ruling will likely be ignored by many/most conferences as it has Title IX implications and will invite yet more lawsuits. When the players and lawyers find they aren’t going to become filthy rich via the courts they will apply for the upcoming XFL and PPFL leagues instead which intend to take players out of high school.
 

Gophers_4life said:
Hsu's point was that the value of Clayton Thorson's benefits were in the mid 70's thousand, while in-state Zach Annaxstad's benefits (including scholarship now) are less than 30 thousand.
Click to expand...

Yet Northwestern doesn't have it's pick of the litter when it comes to recruiting? Strange.
 

WoodburyTim said:
Yet Northwestern doesn't have it's pick of the litter when it comes to recruiting? Strange.
Click to expand...

Rumor has it that the academic standards at Northwestern are pretty high. That might be a bit of a barrier for some players.

Remember the guy who said he didn't choose a certain university just to "play school"? That type of player isn't going to go to Northwestern.
 




You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom