That’s a valid point. I will admit that I’m somewhat perpetually confused by the situation where the NCAA is constantly at odds with member schools. It’s almost like they realize they need some sort of central deliberative body but would prefer that it basically not exist outside of a brand/logo
I don’t really get that sense though? Like yeah people who are mad about getting a speeding ticket or can’t get tickets to the concert they want are mad, but are most member schools mad at the NCAA right now?
It’s much more of a political movement and legal movement from outside the schools that’s made at the NCAA.
I imagine the students/players broadly support it (not that this has ever really mattered to the NCAA).
I guess, if I take a step back, I’d acknowledge the fact that the one-time transfer rule is an attempt at reform, and that the schools that have specific examples of running afoul are the ones upset. But I’d also ask what the rationale of the rule is, other than an attempt to stabilize the process of roster building (which isn’t something that should be legally enshrined in my opinion). Look - I don’t want college sports to become profesional sports with perpertual free agency and no contracts (it kind of already is!) and this will usher that in. But I also don’t see a convincing argument (in a legal sense) why these kid’s freedom to find, essentially, the best employment opportunity available, should be restricted.
This guy(starts around 21min mark) is a very prominent agent/marketing type in the nil space and I thought his idea was wild but I am now starting to agree. His opinion is revenue share will be here in 12-18 months and eventually 40ish programs will essentially break off their football and basketball programs into their own companies and license brand from the university. This will allow the players to be employees and get around title nine. He also thinks many of the universities will either cut a bunch of women’s sports or sell off equity stakes in the newly formed football and basketball companies to fund the other sports off of investment residuals off the proceeds. Let the free market and people not in college sports fix it because too many in college sports are delusional.
It is grimly amusing that “Institutes of Higher Learning” have found themselves on the cusp of running professional sports franchises. Obviously, the blame for that lies mostly with them (the decision to monetize this thing to the gills).
The best part of revenue sharing in college sports will be eliminating all of these LinkedIn CEO Specialist Expert NIL types. 
Good grief what a fake industry.
6 Likes
The NCAA makes a ton of rules that have to do with roster building and competitive balance and whatever else. That’s their whole job.
I don’t get why that is a knock.
It’s their job, but I think there is a valid (legal) question over whether such a prerogative takes precedence over a student’s freedom of movement. Like, is making Tom Izzo’s job easier more important than, say, AJ Hoggard’s freedom to find the most beneficial situation for himself (I understand Hoggard, in this case does have some freedom (the one time transfer), the question is whether that adequately strikes the balance (and I think you’d find different opinions based on who you ask)).
1 Like
They all claim they are the true expert though!
Great for churning out podcasts with … checks notes … Doug Gottleib 
and whoever else.
If you want to get into that sort of granular legal discussion, then you are just going to burn the whole thing down.
There’s way more ridiculous stuff going on then transfer eligibility.
Why does AJ Hoggard have to follow any of the rules? Drug tests? Academics? Agents? Play professionally in the summer somewhere?
1 Like
The elephant in the room, that the lack of revenue sharing or pay for play compensation allows everyone to pretend doesn’t exist, is that the “best situation” will frequently just be based upon unspecified shadowly NIL deals that can essentially change on a dime.
It’s on the sec and b1g more than anyone at this point, they need to step up and come out with a true plan for revenue share, then other schools will fall in line. Trying to appease the other schools and ncaa at this point is ridiculous.
I’m not making this argument of my own belief, I’m merely trying to state what I believe it to be. However, I think I’d say that preventing a student from injecting anabolic steroids or heroin is probably a more valid goal than not making a head coach tear their hair out, and the American legal system absolutely does make value judgements over what goals/outcomes it seeks to protect over others (does my right to a quiet space of my own trump your right to play Jadakiss at 100,000,000 decibels?)
Okay – smoking weed, getting paid to play professionally in other places, not following agent restrictions, those are all things that are less melodramatic than steroids but fall into the same category.
If the legal case against one-time waivers is that the NCAA can’t make rules, the whole thing is doomed.
3 Likes
I think the problem is that in general most schools and even players probably don’t have a problem with the NCAA or rules…until it affects them. At that point without any sort of representation or compensation there’s nothing stopping one guy from hiring a lawyer and taking the NCAA to court. Sometimes it is for logical fair-play reasons and we cheer them (Shea Patterson maybe?) and other times we all agree with a logical rule (multi-transfer) and yet a couple of players or teams aren’t happy and rock the boat for everyone.
This happens in pro leagues too when players get suspended or fined and the union goes to bat for them, but in that case there is an entire structure for how to handle that outside of the courts. And a court is likely to say - this is your own company, figure it out by yourselves.
It is crazy to think that suddenly college sports will cease to exist as we know them and instead we’ll have the NCFL minor league football organization sponsored by the big universities with pro players who don’t even go to class anymore. While I want structure and competitive balance, I don’t want to go watch sterile pro-sports with pro-athletes. It sure would be nice if all parties decided it isn’t all about money and figure out a way to maintain the value of the sport with a little revenue sharing along the way.
I honestly think that a clarification of what the relationship between a school and the athlete is would go a long way. Also, a clarification of what “Division 1 Football and Basketball” is as well (is it a for-profit professional league, or a non-profit extra-curricular activity?). The reality is that none of these rules are foisted upon the Op/Ed Writer of the Daily transferring to Missouri, or the 1st chair violinist transferring to NYU, for extremely obvious reasons.
I do not like where this is going - at all. But I also think the original sin here was the decision to make $15.8 billion in revenue (in 2019) off of uncompensated workers, and the whole thing has been an ourobouros since.
2 Likes
Enjoy the version of March Madness we have now. It’ll be gone in <10 years
I agree with you. But I think people will (rightfully) roll their eyes when the NCAA throws its hands up and says “hey why is this all about money!!” in the face of athletes trying to get their’s after having spent decades raking in billions by selling and marketing this, literal, product.
This is the tragic part. It will be some sort of giant high major playoff.
5 Likes