Motigerhawk
Well-Known Member
I like the NIL rule. I am in favor of the old rule of sitting out a year. BUT if a coach leaves before his contract is up he has to sit out a year.
Barta and his big mouth..
- Thread starter Hawkfnntn
- Start date
Maybe for a yr or so but it'd have never stayed that way. Lawyers woulda pushed and pushed and unless the supreme court woulda ruled differently at a different time (which I don't think would have happened) this would have always been the outcome.
NorthKCHawk
Well-Known Member
I am just blown away by the utter stupidity of the comments from a legal perspective. The NCAA does not have an antitrust exemption. If the NCAA passes a rule whose purpose is to hinder the earnings of the athletes, that could be a Sherman Act violation. Even if the rule does not directly inhibit NIL money, it will indirectly. Indeed, that's the point of why he wants it.
His comments will be Exhibit A of the lawsuit filed to enjoin the rule if the NCAA were to pass it.
I agree with this action, BTW, but you gotta be smarter than that. You just say that the transfer rule is not working out as intended and so we are going back to the rule we had in place for 50 years. NIL? Nope, nothing to do with that. Wink wink.
His comments will be Exhibit A of the lawsuit filed to enjoin the rule if the NCAA were to pass it.
I agree with this action, BTW, but you gotta be smarter than that. You just say that the transfer rule is not working out as intended and so we are going back to the rule we had in place for 50 years. NIL? Nope, nothing to do with that. Wink wink.
kicker22
Well-Known Member
I don't think they're over. I think they've become what they've always been. A business. While the landscape has changed its still the same game. Just time for everyone adapt to the new rules.
I hear some say this but what do you mean by that? The $ for it is through the roof. I think some schools have had attendance issues but I'm not sure there's anything head turningly noticeable over it yet. I think the landscape is shifting but to say it's 'basically dead' is a stretch. I'm just curious how you'd define that.
Yeah I'd known that part about the portal. If Fran had someone in the hopper to replace Josh with (like say Xavier Foster just to throw a name out there) he could have replaced him just like that. By no means are the schools obligated to hold that scholly and take them back. That's the roll of the dice the kids take and Josh got lucky...
kicker22
Well-Known Member
Agreed its a hell of a gamble. I see it similar to telling your girlfriend of a year plus, your not really happy and think you could do better so going to test the waters and see if there's anyone else out there. Sure a player has every right, but like the girlfriend the school has no reason to be ok with it. I'm all about coaches supporting the decisions of their players, but at the same time no coach is going to be thrilled knowing a player is wanting to see what other options are out there.
NorthKCHawk
Well-Known Member
There is a lot of talk out there about schools eventually unbundling football and maybe basketball. Basically, Iowa would lease its name and facilities to a pro organization who would run and staff Iowa football. Its unclear under that model if the players would even be students.
I sure hope it never comes to that, but things are morphing quickly.
I sure hope it never comes to that, but things are morphing quickly.
earlkoppelman
Well-Known Member
Starting to feel like the League, ya know.
So the players making $ just makes it feel more like it's a pro league to you and that's different then how it used to be? I see that. I don't necessarily feel the same when I watch the games but it's still early with all this.
Guys getting paid and going where there is more money. Yeah. The 'amateur' shine is now dull and its all about me, me, me baby
