House Settlement Approved | Page 13 | Syracusefan.com

House Settlement Approved

CU44SE said:
I am a little confused by this. Because unless something changed. I thought contracts could not be signed as that would make it pay for play. So I’m a little confused on this contract. I’m sure it’s for his payment but they I was under the impression they can’t say it’s for playing football at Washington.
Expand...
Revenue sharing is pay for play. It’s been legal since that went into effect. The issue is they need collectives to foot the bill above the rev sharing cap. It’s a mess and solely because they can’t help themselves. A bunch of us on this forum could resolve this in a day but the sport is devoid of leadership. And the big ten and sec are largely to blame.
 
richmondcuse03 said:
Revenue sharing is pay for play. It’s been legal since that went into effect. The issue is they need collectives to foot the bill above the rev sharing cap. It’s a mess and solely because they can’t help themselves. A bunch of us on this forum could resolve this in a day but the sport is devoid of leadership. And the big ten and sec are largely to blame.
Expand...
Any solution we might come up with would likely lose in court. Pro sports have been granted exceptions from the applicable laws, and college athletics would need similar considerations. But 2 competing bills circulating in Congress which purport to solve the problem have gone nowhere.
 
longtimefan said:
Any solution we might come up with would likely lose in court. Pro sports have been granted exceptions from the applicable laws, and college athletics would need similar considerations. But 2 competing bills circulating in Congress which purport to solve the problem have gone nowhere.
Expand...
Congress should have nothing to do with this.

Pro sports still being exempt from anti-trust laws baffles me to this day.
 
bnoro said:
Congress should have nothing to do with this.

Pro sports still being exempt from anti-trust laws baffles me to this day.
Expand...
According to AI:

"MLB's exemption comes from a 1922 Supreme Court ruling (Federal Baseball Club v. National League) that deemed baseball a "purely state affair," not interstate commerce, while the NFL (and other leagues like NBA, NHL) gets a limited, statutory exemption for collective TV broadcasting deals via the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961 (SBA). MLB's unique, long-standing exemption is broader, rooted in judicial precedent, but Congress narrowed it in 1998 (Curt Flood Act) to exclude player labor issues, leaving only non-labor actions (like franchise control) under the exemption, while the NFL's is strictly for pooling TV rights"

It's the conferences fighting each other for TV money that has wrecked the sport in large part, so a legislative fix is needed for at least that issue.
 
javadoc said:
It's the conferences fighting each other for TV money that has wrecked the sport in large part, so a legislative fix is needed for at least that issue.
Expand...
The only other option is for the conferences to work together. The SEC may be willing to bend here, I said bend, not break, but the B1G has no intent on bending as they are the ones trying to squeeze out anyone not in the B1G or SEC. Pettiti has proven to be a bad choice as the B1G commissioner, both where the NCAA and the B1G are concerned. Pettiti is only focused on money coming in (revenue), ignoring all other issues, including expenses. The B1G has yet to realize that they cannot "go it alone" or even do so with the SEC. The SEC has plainly stated that the two-power conference tier is not workable as is. More teams are needed, either via expansion or inclusion of more conferences for a separate top tier.
 
richmondcuse03 said:
Revenue sharing is pay for play. It’s been legal since that went into effect. The issue is they need collectives to foot the bill above the rev sharing cap. It’s a mess and solely because they can’t help themselves. A bunch of us on this forum could resolve this in a day but the sport is devoid of leadership. And the big ten and sec are largely to blame.
Expand...
Revenue sharing is yes, but NIL can’t be. Per the rules. Obviously the colleges said they wanted fair competitive balance and then of course look for round abouts.

The entire system has been broken and as much as I blame the NCAA. They truly are in a no win situation. Any rule they try to make, will just be held up in litigation.
 
HtownOrange said:
The only other option is for the conferences to work together. The SEC may be willing to bend here, I said bend, not break, but the B1G has no intent on bending as they are the ones trying to squeeze out anyone not in the B1G or SEC. Pettiti has proven to be a bad choice as the B1G commissioner, both where the NCAA and the B1G are concerned. Pettiti is only focused on money coming in (revenue), ignoring all other issues, including expenses. The B1G has yet to realize that they cannot "go it alone" or even do so with the SEC. The SEC has plainly stated that the two-power conference tier is not workable as is. More teams are needed, either via expansion or inclusion of more conferences for a separate top tier.
Expand...
There is no incentive for the conferences to work together at the moment, outside of some super-rational game theory type of strategy. There is zero point zero evidence that any conference is thinking that way.

I'll stretch the analogy, sure. Revenue-generating sports are operating under articles of confederation at the moment.
 
javadoc said:
There is no incentive for the conferences to work together at the moment, outside of some super-rational game theory type of strategy. There is zero point zero evidence that any conference is thinking that way.

I'll stretch the analogy, sure. Revenue-generating sports are operating under articles of confederation at the moment.
Expand...
Agreed. And several know this cannot continue as well as the proposed options won’t work yet none will view models that do work nor will they think outside the box.

Something will have to give soon, though. All but three of the B1G teams are in the red, 13 beyond the $200M mark (Rutgers Syndrome?). And they have more revenue than ever but still outspend their revenue.
 
An excellent article on the background of him returning to Washington. His other options fizzled out. He became too hot to touch.

www.cbssports.com

Why Washington's Demond Williams returned after $6 million transfer gamble

The day after his audacious announcement to break his contract and transfer, Williams sobered up to the reality he may need the Supreme Court's help to actually pull the move off
www.cbssports.com www.cbssports.com
 
FloridaCuse said:
An excellent article on the background of him returning to Washington. His other options fizzled out. He became too hot to touch.

www.cbssports.com

Why Washington's Demond Williams returned after $6 million transfer gamble

The day after his audacious announcement to break his contract and transfer, Williams sobered up to the reality he may need the Supreme Court's help to actually pull the move off
www.cbssports.com www.cbssports.com
Expand...
The players and, more importantly, the family and friends of the players, need to learn the hard way that contracts have meanings and rights. For his sake, I hope everyone is in a forgiving mood. For Washington’s sake a that of the donors, I hope the rift grows.

The amount of money being paid to players not yet ready for the NFL and many who will never have a shot at the NFL is ridiculous.
 
HtownOrange said:
The players and, more importantly, the family and friends of the players, need to learn the hard way that contracts have meanings and rights. For his sake, I hope everyone is in a forgiving mood. For Washington’s sake a that of the donors, I hope the rift grows.

The amount of money being paid to players not yet ready for the NFL and many who will never have a shot at the NFL is ridiculous.
Expand...
I totally agree re: contracts have meaning and ramifications

However, I think it's great that guys who will never sniff NFL money now have a chance to monetize their football careers in some way.
 
Last edited:
JKinUtah said:
I totally agree re: contracts have meaning and ramifications

However, I think it's great that guys who will never sniff NFL money now have a chance to monetize their football careers in some way.
Expand...
I'm not against them monetizing their careers. I am against overpaying for talent. If a player cannot make it in the NFL, it is unbelievable that he should be paid similar or more money at a lower level.
 

Similar threads

O
Parity?
Replies
2
Views
322
PAcuse
PAcuse
jordville
    • Wow
    • Haha
    • Angry
OSU gets a mid season kid to play 6th year…
Replies
6
Views
722
rhcuse
rhcuse
STEVEHOLT
    • Wow
I thought they couldn’t even drink caffeine ?
Replies
2
Views
366
Blanko97
B

Forum statistics

Threads
176,073
Messages
5,289,041
Members
6,195
Latest member
BackTo315

Online statistics

Members online
36
Guests online
2,298
Total visitors
2,334
Totals may include hidden visitors.


P
Top Bottom