College Bball Thread

[jermhoosierfan]

1 hour ago, Class of '66 Old Fart said:

It's going to take an act of Congress to settle this.

It is almost like the NCAA is throwing up their hands or showing the incompetency to force Congress to do something.   

[RaceToTheTop]

....and now fifth year CJ Gunn signs with Missouri.  

They now have 17 players on their roster -- three incoming freshman, seven returnees, and seven transfers.

https://sports.yahoo.com/articles/fifth-guard-cj-gunn-enrolls-222904268.html

[Brass Cannon]

19 hours ago, TheWatShot said:

I can already see the next wave of lawsuits popping up in the coming years: Members of the Class of '23, '24 and '25 who redshirted a year will start suing for another year so they have 6 to play 5. They'll call it the TKR rule. 

Yep.  Would be interesting. 
 

Then you have guys like Hoover you played very little because they were being saved for an extra year. Same with Nico
 

Its never ending 

[cbp4iu]

The NCaA is going to appeal the TRO… I totally see the NcAA losing. Going to be interesting once a couple states start siding with the players.

[Demo]

27 minutes ago, cbp4iu said:

The NCaA is going to appeal the TRO… I totally see the NcAA losing. Going to be interesting once a couple states start siding with the players.

What a cluster.
Am I the only 1 who feels like at this point it could literally be a game to game thing into the season on whether these guys can play? 

[str8baller]

49 minutes ago, Demo said:

What a cluster.
Am I the only 1 who feels like at this point it could literally be a game to game thing into the season on whether these guys can play? 

If the NCAA is going to actually challenge these (welcome to show 2 years later NCAA…) and get traction with appellate courts, you could certainly see guys be eligible—or not eligible—and then have that decision reversed at some point during the season.   
 

In the case of someone being eligible and then that decision overturned during the season you might have the NCAA confronted with teams who have played games who are ineligible. So do they vacate those games and not allow said teams into the tourney?  

[cbp4iu]

25 minutes ago, str8baller said:

If the NCAA is going to actually challenge these (welcome to show 2 years later NCAA…) and get traction with appellate courts, you could certainly see guys be eligible—or not eligible—and then have that decision reversed at some point during the season.   
 

In the case of someone being eligible and then that decision overturned during the season you might have the NCAA confronted with teams who have played games who are ineligible. So do they vacate those games and not allow said teams into the tourney?  

If let’s say 3/4 states start to side with the players… Do courts just start following that path. You can’t truly have like 4/5 states allow this and the others not right? Like I feel like Indiana is at a disadvantage because the NCAA resides in the state of Indiana. Would the court risk something like a case siding with the players over NCAA in its own territory. Truly if 4/5 states start winning this could get ugly. Those that don’t get a 5th year have every right to sue at that point. 

[Home Jersey]

It's worth remembering that this situation (5 for 5 excluding c/o 2022) was largely avoidable, but it's what the NCAA wanted. They have weaponized their incompetence so that there'd be more appetite for legislative action so they could get their antitrust exemption. The implications if student athletes were to be classified as university employees are far reaching and in most cases financially untenable. Without the antitrust exemption, the fractured governance will continue and fans will be disgruntled by the nonsensical nature of it all.

This year is going to be a complete mess because of eligibility rulings. 

IMO, these basketball and football programs are the developmental leagues for the NBA and NFL and the product would be better off if they were decoupled from the universities. These athletes have been semi professionals for some time now (even before NIL, but especially since). This is already a multi-billion dollar professionalized industry, it's time to stop wearing the mask of higher education and let the schools get back to their core mission.

Given how rapidly the valuations of pro teams have increased, I'd prefer to drop the facade and have some investors lease the stadiums from the schools and get licenses for their trademarks, etc. so they can collectively bargain and there is a coherent set of rules.

[go iu bb]

43 minutes ago, Home Jersey said:

IMO, these basketball and football programs are the developmental leagues for the NBA and NFL and the product would be better off if they were decoupled from the universities. These athletes have been semi professionals for some time now (even before NIL, but especially since). This is already a multi-billion dollar professionalized industry, it's time to stop wearing the mask of higher education and let the schools get back to their core mission.

Given how rapidly the valuations of pro teams have increased, I'd prefer to drop the facade and have some investors lease the stadiums from the schools and get licenses for their trademarks, etc. so they can collectively bargain and there is a coherent set of rules.

I can't believe you would say that about these student-athletes. Just because most spent a ton of time working on their game, do just enough in school to stay eligible, don't mingle much with the other students, and make a ton of money playing their sport. If they were to be be regarded as semi-professional or even fully professional so much of the above would change, like the doing just enough to stay eligible would go away.

[Home Jersey]

25 minutes ago, go iu bb said:

I can't believe you would say that about these student-athletes. Just because most spent a ton of time working on their game, do just enough in school to stay eligible, don't mingle much with the other students, and make a ton of money playing their sport. If they were to be be regarded as semi-professional or even fully professional so much of the above would change, like the doing just enough to stay eligible would go away.

Can't have these highly skilled kids, who have dedicated the time and effort to become elite at what they do (and in football, where they literally risk their physical and cognitive health every week) to make too much money during the very limited window they have to monetize the skills that make them great at the sports we all love, now can we? 

[go iu bb]

5 minutes ago, Home Jersey said:

Can't have these highly skilled kids, who have dedicated the time and effort to become elite at what they do (and in football, where they literally risk their physical and cognitive health every week) to make too much money during the very limited window they have to monetize the skills that make them great at the sports we all love, can we? 

No, that would be a terrible thing. They should be doing it for love of the game and pretend to care about school while the coaches and all the other people associated with the sports rake in the money. That's the NCAA way.

[Pagoda]

1 hour ago, Home Jersey said:

It's worth remembering that this situation (5 for 5 excluding c/o 2022) was largely avoidable, but it's what the NCAA wanted. They have weaponized their incompetence so that there'd be more appetite for legislative action so they could get their antitrust exemption. The implications if student athletes were to be classified as university employees are far reaching and in most cases financially untenable. Without the antitrust exemption, the fractured governance will continue and fans will be disgruntled by the nonsensical nature of it all.

This year is going to be a complete mess because of eligibility rulings. 

IMO, these basketball and football programs are the developmental leagues for the NBA and NFL and the product would be better off if they were decoupled from the universities. These athletes have been semi professionals for some time now (even before NIL, but especially since). This is already a multi-billion dollar professionalized industry, it's time to stop wearing the mask of higher education and let the schools get back to their core mission.

Given how rapidly the valuations of pro teams have increased, I'd prefer to drop the facade and have some investors lease the stadiums from the schools and get licenses for their trademarks, etc. so they can collectively bargain and there is a coherent set of rules.

I'm not sure things are so bad drastic measures are needed.  College sports have always had drama.  Right now the legal cases are annoying, inconsistent, and messy.  But TV ratings and attendance are great.  Once the season starts it's awesome.

While some players don't take classes, most do and almost all players interact with the students and campus.  Also athletic depts have hardly any effect on the rest of the school.  Even the poorly run ADs with deficits aren't any sort of material issue to the broader school financial picture.

I worry about the implications of decoupling the revenue sports.  If the fans feel their players are not college students like they were... they will lose interest quickly.  And "college" teams owned by the usual type of pro sports owners/investors sounds unappealing to me as they will push things to be more NBA/NFL-like, which I really don't want.

I think we're eventually (five or more years out) going to see players become employees of the conferences with some sort of collective bargaining.  But who knows.

[cbp4iu]

18 minutes ago, go iu bb said:

No, that would be a terrible thing. They should be doing it for love of the game and pretend to care about school while the coaches and all the other people associated with the sports rake in the money. That's the NCAA way.

What funny about all this is…. If these 5th year guys got to come back it raises the competitive balance. Creating more $$$$. Look at Grand Canyon. Personally would be more fun with the 5th year. Like I said what happens when some kids get to play and some don’t. It will be lawsuit after lawsuit. 

[ebridges24]

It has to be all or none, or this will be an even worse mess. Can't have some schools getting all these 5th year players and the other schools none

[Home Jersey]

2 hours ago, Pagoda said:

I'm not sure things are so bad drastic measures are needed.  College sports have always had drama.  Right now the legal cases are annoying, inconsistent, and messy.  But TV ratings and attendance are great.  Once the season starts it's awesome.

While some players don't take classes, most do and almost all players interact with the students and campus.  Also athletic depts have hardly any effect on the rest of the school.  Even the poorly run ADs with deficits aren't any sort of material issue to the broader school financial picture.

I worry about the implications of decoupling the revenue sports.  If the fans feel their players are not college students like they were... they will lose interest quickly.  And "college" teams owned by the usual type of pro sports owners/investors sounds unappealing to me as they will push things to be more NBA/NFL-like, which I really don't want.

I think we're eventually (five or more years out) going to see players become employees of the conferences with some sort of collective bargaining.  But who knows.

Yeah, who knows. JMO, to me, the more drastic measure would be Congress approving an antitrust exemption that caps the earning potential of these individuals. Without the players, there is nothing.

I personally would not care if the players are not college students and I don't think that'd be a dealbreaker for many people. Push come to shove, as long as they play in the same place, wear the same jerseys, call themselves the same things, etc. I think there'd be a large fanbase, much larger than other developmental leagues. 

People want to watch football on Saturdays. Lots of people like basketball in any form. Plenty of ways they could still be involved in the community and be visible. Not a concern to me personally.

TV ratings and attendance being strong are why they'd be an attractive asset for investors. And when you see how the valuations of pro sports franchises have risen recently, I'd think some sort of arrangement could be more lucrative for the universities than continuing down this road with the NCAA. 

I dunno, but being beholden to various judges and having inconsistent eligibility for the upcoming season all because they wanted to force Congress's hand leaves me with a bitter taste.

If they collectively bargain with the conferences, I don't know what the role of the NCAA would be anymore. Though I guess that would solve the broader issues of student-athletes being considered employees of public universities and thus opening the door for TAs, RAs, campus service workers etc. to do the same.

[cbp4iu]

50 minutes ago, ebridges24 said:

It has to be all or none, or this will be an even worse mess. Can't have some schools getting all these 5th year players and the other schools none

Ya we have guys leaving certain state suits to go join other state suits where they believe they have better chances of winning. I think though after a couple states eventually back the players you almost have to let them play. It will just turn into lawsuit after lawsuit. 

[Home Jersey]

3 minutes ago, cbp4iu said:

Ya we have guys leaving certain state suits to go join other state suits where they believe they have better chances of winning. I think though after a couple states eventually back the players you almost have to let them play. It will just turn into lawsuit after lawsuit. 

Idk, if the NCAA is really going to continue challenging these TROs, I don't see them reversing course. 

I think they want to make the upcoming year as chaotic as possible with eligibility rulings and the looming threat of having wins vacated / being barred from the NCAA tourney so that the public appetite is there for an antitrust exemption to get pushed through Congress. 

[str8baller]

4 hours ago, cbp4iu said:

If let’s say 3/4 states start to side with the players… Do courts just start following that path. You can’t truly have like 4/5 states allow this and the others not right? Like I feel like Indiana is at a disadvantage because the NCAA resides in the state of Indiana. Would the court risk something like a case siding with the players over NCAA in its own territory. Truly if 4/5 states start winning this could get ugly. Those that don’t get a 5th year have every right to sue at that point. 

I’m not sure the NCAA being in the state of Indiana hurts much. Nobody likes them. My guess is there are specific state laws that lead to these guys forum shopping different states. 
 

Even if they go the federal route you have different districts that could have different rulings for different schools. 
 

I’m not fully convinced federal legislation settles it entirely.  I don’t know if anyone pays attention to the news or not but there’s always a judge somewhere ready to enjoin new legislation.  
 

It’s like anything else, you kind of have to wait until a consensus forms and that takes a while. Seems like the NCAA/schools have a little political momentum at the moment.

[RaceToTheTop]

The group that are going to get royally screwed are this year’s high school seniors.  Technically the ONLY players not eligible to come back the next year are those few that won the injunction this year.  Incoming high school players are going to be competing with four years of players.

[cbp4iu]

This is going to be a mess. I have a feeling we are going to see either LSU exit the SEC or pro athletes this season