Bobcat Attack - Ohio Basketball - The new NCAA is here

Ohio Basketball Topic

Topic: The new NCAA is here

Page: 2 of 2

mail

person

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame

4/7/2025 5:22 PM

rpbobcat wrote:expand_more

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more

BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more

Then why is thecourt overseeing the settlement and the new rules? You two are losing me when you say the courts have no role in this, when in fact it’s up to them to agree to the news rules. $20.5 million revenue share, 10 years back pay revenue share and new scholarship and scholarships allocations are all part of thecourts preview here.

I'm really not sure what to tell you at this point, man. The courts are involved here the same way the judiciary would be involved in any class action challenging the legality of a policy. I'm kind of lost as to your point. Do you think the NCAA policy should be exempt from the US legal system?

I don't think the NCAA should be exempt from the legal system.

At the same time I don't think the NCAA should be allowed to arbitrarily restrict athletes from participating in a D1 sport based on an arbitrary roster restriction.

I didn't say that in response to you.

mail

person

giacomo

4/7/2025 8:16 PM

https://pge.post-gazette.com/.pf/showstory/202504030112/3

College presidents arrogance created this mess. Commentary

mail

person

rpbobcat

4/8/2025 7:48 AM

giacomo wrote:expand_more

https://pge.post-gazette.com/.pf/showstory/202504030112/3

College presidents arrogance created this mess. Commentary

Thing is, now that the cat is out of the bag, will the whole system collapse leaving only revenue generating sports to battle for what's left of the pie ?

mail

person

giacomo

4/8/2025 3:20 PM

That might happen. Every other sport will be club or intramural.

mail

person

BillyTheCat

4/11/2025 8:01 AM

OHIO Athletics just told 10 Swimmers and Divers that they are no longer on the team. This is part of the roster limits going forward.

mail

OhioCatFan

4/11/2025 10:57 AM

BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more

OHIO Athletics just told 10 Swimmers and Divers that they are no longer on the team. This is part of the roster limits going forward.

How can the NCAA enforce roster limits when can't enforce transfer limits, NIL monies, or nearly anything else these days? Another court challenge brewing?

mail

person

BillyTheCat

4/11/2025 11:23 AM

OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more

BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more

OHIO Athletics just told 10 Swimmers and Divers that they are no longer on the team. This is part of the roster limits going forward.

How can the NCAA enforce roster limits when can't enforce transfer limits, NIL monies, or nearly anything else these days? Another court challenge brewing?

Court ordered.

mail

OhioCatFan

4/11/2025 12:20 PM

BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more

OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more

BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more

OHIO Athletics just told 10 Swimmers and Divers that they are no longer on the team. This is part of the roster limits going forward.

How can the NCAA enforce roster limits when can't enforce transfer limits, NIL monies, or nearly anything else these days? Another court challenge brewing?

Court ordered.

What one court orders, another court can overturn. I don't see the rationale for allowing the NCAA to have selective enforcement powers on roster limits when they can't enforce much of anything else. If you don't think the pending settlement won't be challenged and ultimately end up in front of SCOTUS, I think you are living in an alternate universe. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken's word will not be the final one, at least without agreement by SCOTUS.

mail

person

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame

4/11/2025 1:28 PM

BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more

OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more

BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more

OHIO Athletics just told 10 Swimmers and Divers that they are no longer on the team. This is part of the roster limits going forward.

How can the NCAA enforce roster limits when can't enforce transfer limits, NIL monies, or nearly anything else these days? Another court challenge brewing?

Court ordered.

It would be court approved, actually. Not court ordered. The roster limits were proposed by the NCAA and member organizations. You really do not have a strong grasp of how the court system works and their role here, my dude.

In fact, one of the current hangups in the court is about the roster limits and specifically what to do with existing athletes left out in the cold. The judge recommended 'grandfathering' them in.

I assure you that the courts are absolutely not writing and proposing policy on behalf of the NCAA (or anybody else for that matter). They provide a ruling on how prior policy runs afoul of legislation, and then during the course of the settlement engaged parties propose amended policies and the court interprets said policy within the lens of their prior ruling.

Last Edited: 4/11/2025 3:27:18 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame

mail

person

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame

4/11/2025 1:32 PM

OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more

I'm pretty confused why people think the roster limit here is such a sticking point. There were roster limits prior, too.

All parties involved have an interest in roster limits now. With revenue share, fewer athletes means more money per athlete, and for the schools it provides a way to cap payments.

More critically, it's a means of creating a limited bargaining class while still clinging (tenuously) to the idea that athletes aren't employees. What do you call a non-scholarship athlete who gets no educational benefits, but a revenue share?

It's just not super clear to me who is going to challenge these caps and on what grounds.

Last Edited: 4/11/2025 2:03:54 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame

mail

OhioCatFan

4/11/2025 4:07 PM

BLSS, I'm no expert in this area of the law, but I did find this interesting story about on 360law.com when I did a search on Fontenot v. NCAA, a counter law suit that already been filed.

Here's a link to the story on 360law.com, but you'll have create a free account to read it:
https://www.law360.com/articles/2307259/ncaa-name-image-likeness-settlement-is-a-2-8b-mistake

Here are the first few paragraphs:

Law360 (March 11, 2025, 4:47 PM EDT) --

In House v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, objectors filed more than 20 objections and submitted more than 60 letters opposing the NCAA's $2.8 billion antitrust settlement on the court's Jan. 31 objection deadline.

Over the following weeks, around 250 former collegiate athletes who opted out of the settlement also launched a new round of lawsuits or joined existing suits.

These moves aren't trivial formalities. They're a full-throated rejection of the idea that this settlement is a win for fairness.

[toward the end of the article, is this interesting paragraph:]

Perhaps it's time to rethink an antitrust exemption for the NCAA. Rather than going from lawsuit to lawsuit — as more seem to be filed almost on a weekly basis at this point — it's time for Congress to step in and create a clear, cohesive framework.

mail

person

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame

4/11/2025 5:49 PM

OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more

BLSS, I'm no expert in this area of the law, but I did find this interesting story about on 360law.com when I did a search on Fontenot v. NCAA, a counter law suit that already been filed.
Here's a link to the story on 360law.com, but you'll have create a free account to read it:
https://www.law360.com/articles/2307259/ncaa-name-image-l...
Here are the first few paragraphs:
Law360 (March 11, 2025, 4:47 PM EDT) --
In House v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, objectors filed more than 20 objections and submitted more than 60 letters opposing the NCAA's $2.8 billion antitrust settlement on the court's Jan. 31 objection deadline.
Over the following weeks, around 250 former collegiate athletes who opted out of the settlement also launched a new round of lawsuits or joined existing suits.
These moves aren't trivial formalities. They're a full-throated rejection of the idea that this settlement is a win for fairness.
[toward the end of the article, is this interesting paragraph:]
Perhaps it's time to rethink an antitrust exemption for the NCAA. Rather than going from lawsuit to lawsuit — as more seem to be filed almost on a weekly basis at this point — it's time for Congress to step in and create a clear, cohesive framework.

None of the objections referenced in that article have anything to do with roster limits. What am I missing?

mail

OhioCatFan

4/12/2025 8:58 AM

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more

OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more

None of the objections referenced in that article have anything to do with roster limits. What am I missing?

Well, that was one of the issues in Fontenot v. NCAA, and I think is a subtext in the 360law.com article, if not specifically mentioned. Another article on Fontenot v. NCAA says this about the issues it raises: "It seems unlikely that the objections, which take issue with a range of settlement terms, from limits on roster spots to the formula for calculating back pay, will be enough to crater approval of the settlement. But Judge Wilken previously has required the parties to make changes to the settlement, such as to clarify language regarding restrictions on NIL deals, and could do so again." And, as I said, these suits will continue after Judge Wilken approves the settlement in whatever final form it takes. This will end up in front of SCOTUS, unless Congress does go the antitrust exemption route.

mail

person

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame

4/12/2025 11:03 AM

OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more

Well, that was one of the issues in Fontenot v. NCAA, and I think is a subtext in the 360law.com article, if not specifically mentioned. [/QUOTE]Is it? I'm having a little trouble keeping all the cases clear, but I thought Fontenot v. NCAA pre-dates the settlement terms in House v. NCAA.

I've seen that some folks opted out of the House settlement and that 43 athletes of the 250 that opted out referenced roster limits, but I didn't know that roster limits were central to Fontenot. Can you share a link?

[QUOTE=OhioCatFan]

Another article on Fontenot v. NCAA says this about the issues it raises: "It seems unlikely that the objections, which take issue with a range of settlement terms, from limits on roster spots to the formula for calculating back pay, will be enough to crater approval of the settlement. But Judge Wilken previously has required the parties to make changes to the settlement, such as to clarify language regarding restrictions on NIL deals, and could do so again." And, as I said, these suits will continue after Judge Wilken approves the settlement in whatever final form it takes. This will end up in front of SCOTUS, unless Congress does go the antitrust exemption route.

Yes, I have no doubt there will continue to be challenges. I'm just saying that in the scheme of this, I don't expect roster limits to be the thing that causes the house of cards to tumble.

mail

OhioCatFan

4/12/2025 5:29 PM

Roster limits are, perhaps, not central to Fontenot v. NCAA, but they were mentioned by some of the plaintiffs, as I recall. But, as you say, it's hard to keep them all straight. Bottom line, I expect roster limits to be an emphasis in suits going forward as folks, like our swim team, see how it's impacting their lives. These cuts are just beginning, and they will be ugly.

mail

person

giacomo

4/13/2025 10:09 AM

https://pge.post-gazette.com/.pf/showstory/202504070080/3

Article about foreign players and NIL.

mail

person

BillyTheCat

4/13/2025 8:48 PM

giacomo wrote:expand_more

https://pge.post-gazette.com/.pf/showstory/202504070080/3

Article about foreign players and NIL.

This paragraph covers our players and guys like Rouke: you simply cut their payment when they are home on break or outside the country.

Or they could return to their home country during a break or tournament on foreign soil, like ones played in the Bahamas during basketball season, to perform more traditional NIL work. Former West Virginia and Kentucky center Oscar Tshiebwe did it during his lengthy collegiate career. The Diaz Graham twins, Jorge and Guillermo, who played three seasons at Pitt, could have done NIL work while the team visited their home in the Canary Islands during the summer of 2023.

mail

person

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame

5/8/2025 9:20 AM

Re-upping here with updates.

The roster limits that Billy was so sure were "court ordered" led to the Judge refusing to approve the settlement temporarily. Specifically, she wanted a provision that grandfathered in existing athletes so they don't lose roster spots, and with caps going into effect after current athletes graduate.

The new proposal exempts current athletes from the roster counts. The proposal doesn't guarantee roster spots, but allows for exemptions and leaves it to coaches to decide.

Will be interesting to see how Wilkins responds.

mail

person

BillyTheCat

5/8/2025 7:03 PM

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more

So do we call back those swimmers we just cut?

mail

person

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame

5/8/2025 7:47 PM

BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more

So do we call back those swimmers we just cut?