Started By
Message
Final approval of NCAA Lawsuit delayed.
Posted on 4/24/25 at 8:29 am
Posted on 4/24/25 at 8:29 am
Seen on ON3, there's a concern about immediate roster limit implementation per the judge.
House vs. NCAA
Take away quote.
House vs. NCAA
Take away quote.
quote:
“The Court finds that the decision by Defendants and NCAA member schools to begin implementing the roster limits before the Court granted final approval of the settlement agreement is not a valid reason for approval of the agreement in its current form despite the harm discussed above,” Wilken wrote. “Any disruption that may occur is a problem of Defendants’ and NCAA members schools’ own making. The fact that the Court granted preliminary approval of the settlement agreement should not have been interpreted as an indication that it was certain that the Court would grant final approval.”
6
Posted on 4/24/25 at 8:39 am to ukraine_rebel
That lady is an idiot.
Posted on 4/24/25 at 8:57 am to ukraine_rebel
quote:
the judge
Posted on 4/24/25 at 9:01 am to TideSaint
quote:
That lady is an idiot.
Yet in her hands is the future of college sport.
Posted on 4/24/25 at 11:22 am to ukraine_rebel
She is actually the voice of reason in all this.
This settlement will get blown up within the next 12 months and it will all start again.
You can’t hold future NCAA athletes to a settlement they never agreed too. This gets blown up soon.
This settlement will get blown up within the next 12 months and it will all start again.
You can’t hold future NCAA athletes to a settlement they never agreed too. This gets blown up soon.
Posted on 4/24/25 at 11:45 am to 03 West CoChamps
Again, for the people in the back, nobody is forced into college athletics…
Posted on 4/24/25 at 11:51 am to ukraine_rebel
I honestly have no idea what is going on here, or why a court is ruling on roster limits.
WTF is going on anymore?
WTF is going on anymore?
Posted on 4/24/25 at 11:52 am to 03 West CoChamps
Wait, is this really bc of our walk on’s lawsuit?
quote:
Texas A&M walk-on objects to roster limits, which could stonewall House settlement
Roster limits are the lone hurdle left in the years-long journey to approving the settlement in the House v. NCAA antitrust case. However, it remains a high hurdle to clear.
Wednesday, Judge Claudia Wilken issued a five-page order that held the settlement’s approval contingent on both parties agreeing to gradually implementing roster limits. If plaintiffs, former and current NCAA athletes, and the defendants, the NCAA and power conferences, can’t come to agreeable terms on the issue, the case might very well go to trial.
Attorneys from both parties, as well as lawyers representing objecting parties, have 14 days to come to new terms on the issue, according to the court document.
Posted on 4/24/25 at 11:56 am to JayAg
Man, just frick every last person and organization involved in all this. frick the NCAA, the players, the athletic departments, the networks, the lawyers, the coaches and staff, the universities, the judges, the fans, the collectives …
frick all of them and all of this.
frick all of them and all of this.
Posted on 4/24/25 at 11:56 am to ukraine_rebel
The real question is will the big dogs agree to roster limits and a salary cap?
Roster limits maybe, but then you create a stable of practice squads to supplement the active roster.
In addition, there are 15-20 schools realistically that could pay for a 30M roster.
If the salary cap comes down to 10-15-20M, where will the money shift? Nil, endorsement?
And what does the financial structure look like for players?
School base salary - dictated by salary cap
NIL - somewhat regulated
Endorsement- the wild west
Roster limits maybe, but then you create a stable of practice squads to supplement the active roster.
In addition, there are 15-20 schools realistically that could pay for a 30M roster.
If the salary cap comes down to 10-15-20M, where will the money shift? Nil, endorsement?
And what does the financial structure look like for players?
School base salary - dictated by salary cap
NIL - somewhat regulated
Endorsement- the wild west
Posted on 4/24/25 at 11:59 am to 3down10
quote:
I honestly have no idea what is going on here, or why a court is ruling on roster limits.
WTF is going on anymore?
I still have no idea why the federal government got involved with rule enforcement of amateur student athletics in the first place. It's a major part of why we're here.
People clamor for restrictions to help cut down the insanity, but over the last ~5 years whenever the NCAA tried to enforce its own rules the courts kept telling them they couldn't.
Posted on 4/24/25 at 12:35 pm to paperwasp
What ever that is he, she or it, is 100% wacko liberal.
Is there a good looking democratic woman that is not crazy in the entire country?
Is there a good looking democratic woman that is not crazy in the entire country?
Posted on 4/24/25 at 12:46 pm to ukraine_rebel
Same judge from the O'Bannon v. NCAA case.
Posted on 4/24/25 at 1:03 pm to WG_Dawg
bc those rules the NCAA was trying to enforce stemmed, in a post-Board of Regents world, from the fantasy that throwing around the world "amateurism" was a de facto antitrust exception
which the supreme court ruled 9-0 (!) was absolutely ridiculous
which the supreme court ruled 9-0 (!) was absolutely ridiculous
Posted on 4/24/25 at 1:16 pm to TheSandman
quote:
bc those rules the NCAA was trying to enforce stemmed, in a post-Board of Regents world, from the fantasy that throwing around the world "amateurism" was a de facto antitrust exception
which the supreme court ruled 9-0 (!) was absolutely ridiculous
The NCAA is private organization and has every right to decide the standards it wants. Nobody has ever prevented a player from receiving NIL money, they have never had the authority. They did have the authority to prevent them from competing in college sports after, that's it.
The system is completely voluntary, nobody forces them to join. Millions of kids every year go into debt for a fraction of the benefits given to them.
As usual those who have a problem with freedom do so out of fear of what others may do with theirs. So they believe they have the right to take it from them. Your entire argument is that because the NCAA didn't pay them what you believe they should have, it's now the governments job to take away their rights and force it.
Social justice warriors are bad people.
Posted on 4/24/25 at 1:20 pm to 3down10
noted social justice warrior brett kavanaugh
Posted on 4/24/25 at 1:22 pm to TheSandman
quote:
noted social justice warrior brett kavanaugh
It's not at all surprising you believe the puppet show.
Posted on 4/24/25 at 1:24 pm to 3down10
aight
Posted on 4/24/25 at 1:33 pm to TheSandman
quote:
aight
Do you have an argument other than a weird appeal to authority logical fallacy?
What makes you believe you have the right to tell other humans they can't have a set of standards in a voluntary organization?
The NCAA was magically fine for over 100 years and created one of the most popular sports in the country, which at the same time provided free education to hundreds of thousands of kids every year.
Within 5 years of the government getting involved the sports are in shambles. And why does it happen? Because of social justice warriors who think they have a right to take away the rights of other people, under the claims of "making it fair" and other social justice type claims.
And it's all basically to the benefit of the top 1% of athletes.
You aren't a good person if you believe in taking away the rights of others. The entire thing is an anti free market campaign.
This post was edited on 4/24/25 at 1:37 pm
Posted on 4/24/25 at 1:45 pm to WG_Dawg
As we have discussed, they are treating it as a business not an amateur sport.
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News