F the NCAA

[CrimsonNBlue]

Just wait until NCAA retroactively says Silvio was not good despite its appeal loss.

I mean, hell, if they vacate wins from 2017-18, this is not that much different.

[jfish26]

Just wait until NCAA retroactively says Silvio was not good despite its appeal loss.

I mean, hell, if they vacate wins from 2017-18, this is not that much different.

This sort of thing is playing out in other forums - literally the only thing the NCAA could do to jeopardize its power (from a legal standpoint) is to enforce its rules arbitrarily or in bad faith.

LOL

[CrimsonNBlue]

https://twitter.com/marchmadness/status ... 88865?s=20

[pdub]

LOL.

[holidaysmore]

Petty

[NDballer13]

Cali just signed the pay for play into law. Time to sit back and watch the fireworks.

#BITFD

[jfish26]

https://twitter.com/JayBilas/status/1178682321630826496

[NewtonHawk11]

#BITFD

[ousdahl]

Wait, what’s this whole angle with Lebron’s media company?

[noosh]

The fact the bill was signed during a taping for LeBron's TV show shows you just how much confidence CA has in this ever going into effect.

Anyway, this is all pointless. While S.B. 206 does allow college dudes to make money off of the use of their name and likeness while retaining their eligibility, it doesn’t force universities to actually pay them. Under the law, a football player at Kansas may be able to monetize a YouTube channel or hire an agent without fear of losing his scholarship, but that's it.

[jhawks99]

Can someone educate me, what is bitfd?

[noosh]

https://throughthephog.com/2019/09/25/k ... legations/
NCAA is already punishing Kansas on the recruiting trail.

The only flaw in this story is that we aren't UNC. Recruiting has never been as easy for us.

That and the NCAA wasn't in need of an image makeover. Really bad time for Billy Eugene to not have a burner.

[JayhawkInIowa726]

BITFD = Burn It The F**k Down

[jhawks99]

thanks

[Lonestarjayhawk]

Embarrassed to say FUCK?

[zsn]

The fact the bill was signed during a taping for LeBron's TV show shows you just how much confidence CA has in this ever going into effect.

Anyway, this is all pointless. While S.B. 206 does allow college dudes to make money off of the use of their name and likeness while retaining their eligibility, it doesn’t force universities to actually pay them. Under the law, a football player at Kansas may be able to monetize a YouTube channel or hire an agent without fear of losing his scholarship, but that's it.

There is some dispute as to whether the Bill was actually signed during the show.....the paper LeBron held up was not the Bill. Anyway, it is set to go into effect only in 2023, presumably to avoid litigation regarding athletes already in college under the old rules.

The NCAA is having an ouchie about this, but similar laws are being worked-on in other states (NC, Colorado, Maryland, Washington etc.). State universities are goverened by the State govt and thus the NCAA is mostly SOL, except in specific cases (competition rules). This is the reason that the State of CA can prohibit state schools from traveling to states where there are "discriminatory laws".

Yes, the NCAA can say that the schools from these states cannot play in the tournament, but imagine the blowback if KU, UNC and Duke cannot play in the NCAA tournament or Clemson in Bowl games (if the NC law is similar to CA law all schools in the state, public or private will have to pay student-athletes for commercial use of their name-image-and-likeness)

[jfish26]

I think where this is headed is federal legislation that preempts legislation at the state level, but will generally have the effect of opening up N/I/L.

[twocoach]

The fact the bill was signed during a taping for LeBron's TV show shows you just how much confidence CA has in this ever going into effect.

Anyway, this is all pointless. While S.B. 206 does allow college dudes to make money off of the use of their name and likeness while retaining their eligibility, it doesn’t force universities to actually pay them. Under the law, a football player at Kansas may be able to monetize a YouTube channel or hire an agent without fear of losing his scholarship, but that's it.

A basketball player at KU could also sign an endorsement contract with Adidas if the rule was in place.

[CrimsonNBlue]

The fact the bill was signed during a taping for LeBron's TV show shows you just how much confidence CA has in this ever going into effect.

Anyway, this is all pointless. While S.B. 206 does allow college dudes to make money off of the use of their name and likeness while retaining their eligibility, it doesn’t force universities to actually pay them. Under the law, a football player at Kansas may be able to monetize a YouTube channel or hire an agent without fear of losing his scholarship, but that's it.

There is some dispute as to whether the Bill was actually signed during the show.....the paper LeBron held up was not the Bill. Anyway, it is set to go into effect only in 2023, presumably to avoid litigation regarding athletes already in college under the old rules.

The NCAA is having an ouchie about this, but similar laws are being worked-on in other states (NC, Colorado, Maryland, Washington etc.). State universities are goverened by the State govt and thus the NCAA is mostly SOL, except in specific cases (competition rules). This is the reason that the State of CA can prohibit state schools from traveling to states where there are "discriminatory laws".

Yes, the NCAA can say that the schools from these states cannot play in the tournament, but imagine the blowback if KU, UNC and Duke cannot play in the NCAA tournament or Clemson in Bowl games (if the NC law is similar to CA law all schools in the state, public or private will have to pay student-athletes for commercial use of their name-image-and-likeness)

Legislation like this and litigation related to the n/i/l issue help shape public opinion. We have 75% of basketball coaches now saying that N/I/L is the future. The fans are following and increasingly saying N/I/L is the right and just thing.

It's similar to gay marriage. It was something like a 40-50 point jump in the US population stating that it should be legal AFTER the SCOTUS struck down all the state bans.

[Geezer]

I don't understand what the law can do. Surely they don't think they can compel the NCAA to grant eligibility to a player getting paid for his likeness.