The NCAA just tickled a sleeping dragon...

[Maroon Eagle]

Tom Mars just tweeted about a bylaw change that affects NIL...



The bylaw in question:

That may finally change, thanks to a new bylaw adopted by the NCAA in October that went into effect on Jan. 1.

Bylaw 19.7.3 states that “In cases involving name, image and likeness offers, agreements and/or activities in which related communications and conduct are subject to NCAA regulation, the infractions process shall presume a violation occurred if circumstantial information suggests that one or more parties engaged in impermissible conduct. The enforcement staff may make a formal allegation based on the presumption. The hearing panel shall conclude a violation occurred unless the institution or involved individual clearly demonstrates with credible and sufficient information that all communications and conduct surrounding the name, image and likeness activity complied with NCAA legislation.”

 

[OG Goat Holder]

Uh, pretty much everywhere else besides the 1st world countries.

We don't really understand how good we have it here.

 

[The Cooterpoot]

The NCAA is about to be extinct. The conferences will do whatever they want minus true legal issues.

 

[T-TownDawgg]

Wait, I’ve seen this one! Let’s burn them at the stake and if they survive they were guilty

 

[Dawghouse]

I'm sure the courts won't have any problem with guilty until proven innocent.

 

[57stratdawg]

I have a move on your mom called 'tickle the sleeping dragon'

 

[Rupert Jenkins]

President Trump has entered the chat

 

[Perd Hapley]

Tom Mars just tweeted about a bylaw change that affects NIL...



The bylaw in question:

They haven’t officially kicked it until they make an allegation against a school and try to actually exercise that bylaw. And you know what, they won’t ever do it because they know that will be the end of their existence. This is just the appearance of regulation that is in place to try and create the illusion that we aren’t in the wild west. No schools or boosters are going to give a 17 about this, nor should they.

 

[PooPopsBaldHead]

Yikes. Somebody actually took the time to write this bylaw and thought it sounded fine?


"hearing panel shall conclude a violation occurred unless the institution or involved individual clearly demonstrates with credible and sufficient information that all communications and conduct surrounding the name, image and likeness activity complied with NCAA legislation"

What a crock of ****. I'm no fan of what NIL has become, but presumption of guilt is 17ing idiotic. I hope everyone involved in approving that bylaw gets their testicles and tits ripped off by one of the gorillas that will soon escape the Dallas zoo.

 

[Rupert Jenkins]

I have a move on your mom called 'tickle the sleeping dragon'

I think you can take a pill to fix that sleeping dragon problem

 

[peewee.sixpack]

Isn't this what Congress does?

 

[patdog]

NCAA is a voluntary association that doesn't have subpoena power. This is a very poorly worded bylaw, but the standard of proof in a criminal case wouldn't apply here. They should have worded it a preponderance of the evidence available or something like that. And there may be a chance it could even withstand a legal challenge as worded (lawdawg might could help us here). But I tend to agree with Perd. I'll believe they try to enforce this when I see it. I'm afraid the horses have left the barn on this NIL stuff and the NCAA is about 5 years behind in trying to respond to it.

 

[Maroon Eagle]

Wait, I’ve seen this one! Let’s burn them at the stake and if they survive they were guilty

 

[LordMcBuckethead]

NCAA is a voluntary association that doesn't have subpoena power. This is a very poorly worded bylaw, but the standard of proof in a criminal case wouldn't apply here. They should have worded it a preponderance of the evidence available or something like that. And there may be a chance it could even withstand a legal challenge as worded (lawdawg might could help us here). But I tend to agree with Perd. I'll believe they try to enforce this when I see it. I'm afraid the horses have left the barn on this NIL stuff and the NCAA is about 5 years behind in trying to respond to it.

Legal challenge, the NCAA is a association with a membership and teams don't have to be part of that membership, only if they want to compete in NCAA events. The cost of membership is to follow the rules set by the membership. If I were the NCAA, I would write the rules however I saw fit and if someone wants to challenge that, I would kick the team, player, whatever out of eligibility.

Too much money at stake for individual schools to go out on their own. Entire conferences could leave, and that would hurt the NCAA. Short of that, you want to be a member you play by the membership rules.

 

[57stratdawg]

Also, for the record the NCAA is a private organization. They can set the burden of proof requirement to be as little or as high as they would like.

This isn't a court of law.

 

[patdog]

Too much money at stake for individual schools to go out on their own. Entire conferences could leave, and that would hurt the NCAA. Short of that, you want to be a member you play by the membership rules.

Ultimately, the SEC and Big 10 hold all the cards. If they left the NCAA, it would collapse. I don't think they ever will, but it gives them leverage to get what they want from a rules perspective. I'll believe the NCAA goes after an SEC or Big 10 school with this rule when I see it. Now, they might get a Central Missouri St. on it, but even that I doubt.

 

[T-TownDawgg]

Also, for the record the NCAA is a private organization. They can set the burden of proof requirement to be as little or as high as they would like.

This isn't a court of law.

Then how TF did entities like SCOTUS change the entire landscape of college athletics? The slightest legal challenge to this will be a slam dunk.

 

[PooPopsBaldHead]

I guess its a good thing you can't sue the NCAA in a court of law...Oh wait, how did NIL become a thing again?

 

[T-TownDawgg]

I guess its a good thing you can't sue the NCAA in a court of law...Oh wait, how did NIL become a thing again?

Exactly.

 

[johnson86-1]

Then how TF did entities like SCOTUS change the entire landscape? The slightest legal challenge to this will be a slam dunk.

SCOTUS didn't change the entire landscape. A bunch of state laws put the NCAA in a box. The SCOTUS did rule on a narrow antitrust issue and one justice issued a dissent making it pretty clear how he would rule on amateurism rules in general under the current setup.

It's not at all clear that courts would find that rules aimed at dissuading paying for commitments violate antitrust law. Putting an affirmative obligation on the schools to provide documentation showing that everything was above board is logically faulty because all schools have to do is not make any payments and not have any signed documents dated before signing day, but there's nothing wrong with it legally. That's essentially what they did to Renardo Sydney, was try to require his dad to produce enough financial documents to show that Renardo wasn't essentially getting shoe money when he was in high school. Renardo's problem was presumably that his dad couldn't show enough other income to explain how they travelled and lived. If he had had other income, and kept any shoe money in a separate account, he could have showed his accounts and "proven" that they didn't take shoe money by showing that he had legitimate income to cover his expenses, and just not provide anything from teh account with the shoe money. For NIL deals, this generally won't be a problem for most players because they're probably not going to get "NIL" money too far in advance of signing, so they should be able to show their bank records and show that there is no unexplained money in there and no major missing expenses.

 

[Cantdoitsal]

I didn't know NIL had rules. What are they? How does a school screw up and break them? I mean if a school can offer $13MM for a QB then back out and not fulfill it then what does it actually take to 17 up and break any "rules"?

 

[57stratdawg]

Then how TF did entities like SCOTUS change the entire landscape of college athletics? The slightest legal challenge to this will be a slam dunk.

SCOTUS said that a player’s name, image and likeness belong to the athletes, and the NCAA cannot stop them from monetizing what belongs to them already.

That’s different than saying the NCAA cannot determine what criteria to use when deciding their own rules enforcement. To me, this would be similar to refusing a drug test and then saying “but, I never tested positive”.

I agree though there is legal uncertainty either way.