2 Likes
I just want to make sure I understand this correctly. They’re suing for lost wages due to a rule that wasn’t a rule when they played.
Isn’t that like suing a court for having to pay a fine when you were arrested for weed when weed wasn’t legal?
5 Likes
You just gave me a great idea, man
3 Likes
If they want to sue anyone, they should sue the schools. They’re the ones with all the money. The NCAA is just there as a shield for them these days. They don’t actually have any money or power.
Pretty sure yours is going to go about as well as this one is.
1 Like
4 Likes
It’s like @BigNatty suing a toupet company for his baldness…
1 Like
bruh…I’d be thanking them, if they were responsible.
2 Likes
2 Likes
3 Likes
You are mixing up rules and laws. I think the idea is that the rule wasn’t legal back then.
So what were the rules back then?
The rule was that college players could not profit of their name, image or likeness. That rule has since gone to court and been deemed to not be legal.
Just so you understand correctly…
The NCAA already settled one case for the same thing in the amount of 2.7 billion dollars. The funds for that case is only being distributed to eligble players who played after the 2016 season.
This case would make it so players who played prior to the 2016 season would also receive funds.
1 Like
Yeah but the NCAA set the oppressive rules while making money off of the student athletes. The NCAA has stunk up college athletics for decades.
2 Likes
Agreed but they’ve been nothing more than a paper tiger since they lost the lawsuit against Georgia and Oklahoma. Since then the schools have been in charge.
I think the first The Emperor has No Clothes moment was the UNC-Rashad McCants and crew academic cheating scandal. UNC was caught red handed. They are one of the few schools, or were back then, who only has functioning financials in its AD bc of basketball. So they hired the best attorneys they could, got hyper aggressive and litigated (or threatened to litigate) their way out of what would have been a pretty dire probation. And their strategy worked. And rather easily at that.
Right, it just wasn’t worth it. I wish OSU had done that more often for our basketball team, but we’re just the level of school the NCAA is still allowed to punish. The blue bloods are safe, but some of the non-blue-bloods are thrown to the wolves sometimes to make it seem like the NCAA still has teeth.
News flash: they don’t.
But the schools themselves don’t want to deal with the hassles of scheduling baseball and volleyball and all the other non-money-making sports, so they need the NCAA around to govern that stuff.
And as a reward they get to keep the NCAA tournament to fund their operating expenses for the following year.
But to actually punish a blue-blood program? Especially a football school? Laughable.
I have a source for this as well: a buddy of mine’s wife was in the NCAA’s office of legal affairs for a couple of years. Low level, but high enough that she knew the drill.
Weren’t you the only sneaker-gate school punished. Arizona did self-impose a one year probation.