ADVERTISEMENT

For Goodness Sake, please read Kavanaugh’s Concurring Opinion in Alston (Google is your Friend):))

A

APanther

Scholarship
Oct 6, 2020
315
88
28
Here’s the thing. About 50% of posts I read on this site re: NIL, Transferring and pay for play (legal) are erroneous. Kavanaugh’s opinion is only 5 pages with little legalese. Very easy to read. What Kavanaugh makes clear is that the NCAA business model was built on price fixing where athletic oligarchs got rich at the expense of free labor. That conduct the Supreme Court unanimously found was illegal.
Reading on in Kavanaugh opinion, he is correctly pissed off at the NCAA for their illegal price fixing. In fact he implicitly dares the NCAA to litigate any barriers they seek to impose on compensation for athletes. There is such a case moving now through the very same courts as Alston. It’s called House v. NCAA. The plaintiffs in that case are college atheletes from 2015-present who demand back pay. Kavanaugh,,and I suspect the rest of the Sc.T. must be salivating to hear this one. If I’m counsel for NCAA, my advice is “SETTLE NOW”!
So what’s next? My guess is class action for atheletes since advent of first major TV contracts (circa 1983?) through 2014 for back pay.
In any event, it’s not complicated. But do read Kavanaugh simple 5 page concurring.
 
APanther said:
Here’s the thing. About 50% of posts I read on this site re: NIL, Transferring and pay for play (legal) are erroneous. Kavanaugh’s opinion is only 5 pages with little legalese. Very easy to read. What Kavanaugh makes clear is that the NCAA business model was built on price fixing where athletic oligarchs got rich at the expense of free labor. That conduct the Supreme Court unanimously found was illegal.
Reading on in Kavanaugh opinion, he is correctly pissed off at the NCAA for their illegal price fixing. In fact he implicitly dares the NCAA to litigate any barriers they seek to impose on compensation for athletes. There is such a case moving now through the very same courts as Alston. It’s called House v. NCAA. The plaintiffs in that case are college atheletes from 2015-present who demand back pay. Kavanaugh,,and I suspect the rest of the Sc.T. must be salivating to hear this one. If I’m counsel for NCAA, my advice is “SETTLE NOW”!
So what’s next? My guess is class action for atheletes since advent of first major TV contracts (circa 1983?) through 2014 for back pay.
In any event, it’s not complicated. But do read Kavanaugh simple 5 page concurring.
Click to expand...
Shut up.

Someone please ban this troll.

I agree players should be paid and should be employees. But the NCAA has a no pay for play rule so Addison should be ineligible. Or get rid of the rule.
 
Sean Miller Fan said:
Shut up.

Someone please ban this troll.

I agree players should be paid and should be employees. But the NCAA has a no pay for play rule so Addison should be ineligible. Or get rid of the rule.
Click to expand...
Ban him for his asking you to read a 5 page Supreme Court opinion on a current NCAA topic? What's the harm? You might learn something you did not know before. ...gee, your ilk sure does like censorship, I'll give you that...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fk_Pitt, cease10, ONGB and 1 other person
upj87 said:
Ban him for his asking you to read a 5 page Supreme Court opinion on a current NCAA topic? What's the harm? You might learn something you did not know before. ...gee, your ilk sure does like censorship, I'll give you that...
Click to expand...
I did read it. It sets the stage for making no pay for play illegal but currently it is. He is a paid NIL troll and should be banned.
 
Sean Miller Fan said:
I did read it. It sets the stage for making no pay for play illegal but currently it is. He is a paid NIL troll and should be banned.
Click to expand...
What law anywhere is “pay for play” illegal? Hint. NCAA rules are not law. As Justice Kavanaugh stated in the last sentence of his concurring opinion, “The NCAA is not above the law.”
 
Sean Miller Fan said:
I did read it. It sets the stage for making no pay for play illegal but currently it is. He is a paid NIL troll and should be banned.
Click to expand...
From some NIL pac I take it. ..hahahahaha

hey, you are a nutcase and no one here wants you banned...

btw, have any evidence on your accusation?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fk_Pitt and CJsE
APanther said:
Here’s the thing. About 50% of posts I read on this site re: NIL, Transferring and pay for play (legal) are erroneous. Kavanaugh’s opinion is only 5 pages with little legalese. Very easy to read. What Kavanaugh makes clear is that the NCAA business model was built on price fixing where athletic oligarchs got rich at the expense of free labor. That conduct the Supreme Court unanimously found was illegal.
Reading on in Kavanaugh opinion, he is correctly pissed off at the NCAA for their illegal price fixing. In fact he implicitly dares the NCAA to litigate any barriers they seek to impose on compensation for athletes. There is such a case moving now through the very same courts as Alston. It’s called House v. NCAA. The plaintiffs in that case are college atheletes from 2015-present who demand back pay. Kavanaugh,,and I suspect the rest of the Sc.T. must be salivating to hear this one. If I’m counsel for NCAA, my advice is “SETTLE NOW”!
So what’s next? My guess is class action for atheletes since advent of first major TV contracts (circa 1983?) through 2014 for back pay.
In any event, it’s not complicated. But do read Kavanaugh simple 5 page concurring.
Click to expand...
Hahaha………..Shut up and get out………
 
APanther said:
Here’s the thing. About 50% of posts I read on this site re: NIL, Transferring and pay for play (legal) are erroneous. Kavanaugh’s opinion is only 5 pages with little legalese. Very easy to read. What Kavanaugh makes clear is that the NCAA business model was built on price fixing where athletic oligarchs got rich at the expense of free labor. That conduct the Supreme Court unanimously found was illegal.
Reading on in Kavanaugh opinion, he is correctly pissed off at the NCAA for their illegal price fixing. In fact he implicitly dares the NCAA to litigate any barriers they seek to impose on compensation for athletes. There is such a case moving now through the very same courts as Alston. It’s called House v. NCAA. The plaintiffs in that case are college atheletes from 2015-present who demand back pay. Kavanaugh,,and I suspect the rest of the Sc.T. must be salivating to hear this one. If I’m counsel for NCAA, my advice is “SETTLE NOW”!
So what’s next? My guess is class action for atheletes since advent of first major TV contracts (circa 1983?) through 2014 for back pay.
In any event, it’s not complicated. But do read Kavanaugh simple 5 page concurring.
Click to expand...
You do know that the NCAA is only litigating current action to kill time so they can get Congress to do something, right? There isn't a lawyer alive who would advise the NCAA to settle anything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CJsE
APanther said:
What law anywhere is “pay for play” illegal? Hint. NCAA rules are not law. As Justice Kavanaugh stated in the last sentence of his concurring opinion, “The NCAA is not above the law.”
Click to expand...
Of course its not illegal you complete idiot. Neither is stealing signs from the opposing team. They are NCAA rules. Stop being an idiot. The NCAA has a rule against it and there is no current law that states that they cannot have such a rule. Perhaps they go to court and lose on this one day, they probably would but currently they have the rule so enforce it.
 
upj87 said:
From some NIL pac I take it. ..hahahahaha

hey, you are a nutcase and no one here wants you banned...

btw, have any evidence on your accusation?
Click to expand...
Yes, every single one of his posts are on NIL. We had paid trolls (on both sides) on the Locker Room Board. There are parties that pay people to post on message boards. I even linked an article about it awhile ago.
 
All this talk of "laws" and litigation and opinions on the law and google (which I don't use and would never use for obvious reasons) sure does take the fun out of trying to enjoy sports that are supposed to be fun and entertainment. If this is what college sports is coming to, they can have it. It's in the sewer now. But I guess that's exactly what lawyers want.
 
Last edited:
pittdan77 said:
You do know that the NCAA is only litigating current action to kill time so they can get Congress to do something, right? There isn't a lawyer alive who would advise the NCAA to settle anything.
Click to expand...
I would so advise in a heartbeat. Here’s why:
If you read Kavanaugh’s concurring and the unaminous decision in Alston, as well as every lower court in the Alston chain, they are just waiting for a case like House to hammer the NCAA et al. That’s your job as counsel. “Can we win this”? “”Uh. No.”
I get why NCAA didn’t settle Alston. They strung it out so all the oligarchs could reel in their god awful sums. That mission accomplished while the NCAA, Conferences and member universities forced to shell out $305MM in attorneys fees alone!
The Congress dynamic, is different. Remember. It was Kavanaugh who (correctly) recommended the NCAA go through Congress and/or collective bargaining. That’s the only solution I see as well.
Perhaps all the time wasted makes me cynical. Could be. So my take today is NCAA just playing long game. That is, no realistic expectation of winning, just ensuring the best they can, to keep getting big $$$$ for their patrons before the music stops. Just my .02.
 
HailToPitt1985 said:
All this talk of "laws" and litigation and opinions on the law and google (which I don't use and would never use for obvious reasons) sure does take the fun out of trying to enjoy sports that are supposed to be fun and entertainment. I only have one thing to say about any of these judgements and laws: F%$K that! If this is what college sports is coming to, they can have it. It's in the sewer now. But I guess that's exactly what lawyers want.
Click to expand...
I'm 100% done with college football besides Pitt games. If they start enforcing their rule or eliminate, allowing for the Pitt's of the world to give a Jordan Addison a 4 year contract out of HS, then I'm back in. I'm not watching a sport that cannot even police itself. I'll hold my nose and watch Pitt.
 
Sean Miller Fan said:
Yes, every single one of his posts are on NIL. We had paid trolls (on both sides) on the Locker Room Board. There are parties that pay people to post on message boards. I even linked an article about it awhile ago.
Click to expand...
Not paid. Just a Pitt grad ‘76. NIL is topical and important.
 
Sean Miller Fan said:
Of course its not illegal you complete idiot. Neither is stealing signs from the opposing team. They are NCAA rules. Stop being an idiot. The NCAA has a rule against it and there is no current law that states that they cannot have such a rule. Perhaps they go to court and lose on this one day, they probably would but currently they have the rule so enforce it.
Click to expand...
Why name calling?
 
The garbage threads like this one are one of the reasons I don't bother with this board all that much lately. Reading this crap takes the enjoyment out of college sports, and I'm trying as hard as I can to at least enjoy Pitt athletics, even if they do suck at times. The less I know about NIL's and Alston (whoever he or it is), the better.
 
Sean Miller Fan said:
I'm 100% done with college football besides Pitt games. If they start enforcing their rule or eliminate, allowing for the Pitt's of the world to give a Jordan Addison a 4 year contract out of HS, then I'm back in. I'm not watching a sport that cannot even police itself. I'll hold my nose and watch Pitt.
Click to expand...

I've not watched a game other than a Pitt game for a couple of years now. And I'm certainly not going to change that any time soon. I couldn't care less what anyone else is doing, no matter who they are. I just don't have the time to waste on the nonsense.
 
APanther said:
If you read Kavanaugh’s concurring and the unaminous decision in Alston, as well as every lower court in the Alston chain, they are just waiting for a case like House to hammer the NCAA et al. That’s your job as counsel. “Can we win this”? “”Uh. No.”
Click to expand...
I realize the NCAA would likely lose a pay for play suit. Then, have some balls and get rid of the rule then or you need to enforce it until Kavanaugh says you cant, which will take years anyway. Its amazing that its 2022 and the NCAA no pay for play model is STILL legal.
 
HailToPitt1985 said:
I've not watched a game other than a Pitt game for a couple of years now. And I'm certainly not going to change that any time soon. I couldn't care less what anyone else is doing, no matter who they are. I just don't have the time to waste on the nonsense.
Click to expand...
Good for you. Save your Saturdays for golf, fishing and swimming. Watch the real pros on Sundays.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ronnyp91
Sean Miller Fan said:
I realize the NCAA would likely lose a pay for play suit. Then, have some balls and get rid of the rule then or you need to enforce it until Kavanaugh says you cant, which will take years anyway. Its amazing that its 2022 and the NCAA no pay for play model is STILL legal.
Click to expand...
NCAA not enforcing it. Who cares. No party aggrieved. NCAA rules are no different from rules you may from for your book club. Not enforceable at law. Easy peezy.
 
APanther said:
I would so advise in a heartbeat. Here’s why:
If you read Kavanaugh’s concurring and the unaminous decision in Alston, as well as every lower court in the Alston chain, they are just waiting for a case like House to hammer the NCAA et al. That’s your job as counsel. “Can we win this”? “”Uh. No.”
I get why NCAA didn’t settle Alston. They strung it out so all the oligarchs could reel in their god awful sums. That mission accomplished while the NCAA, Conferences and member universities forced to shell out $305MM in attorneys fees alone!
The Congress dynamic, is different. Remember. It was Kavanaugh who (correctly) recommended the NCAA go through Congress and/or collective bargaining. That’s the only solution I see as well.
Perhaps all the time wasted makes me cynical. Could be. So my take today is NCAA just playing long game. That is, no realistic expectation of winning, just ensuring the best they can, to keep getting big $$$$ for their patrons before the music stops. Just my .02.
Click to expand...
Oligarchs?

Kavanaugh was a concurring opinion. It's nice and angry but it didn't speak for the rest of the court. It's a lone-gun opinion. It's safe to assume that the court isn't willing to allow the NCAA to operate as a trust on its own but that's about it. They purposely stopped short.

There is also some sort of middle ground that you don't seem willing to acknowledge. The NCAA and its member schools aren't going to continue with sports if it's not financially beneficial. Sport is not their primary purpose.
 
pittdan77 said:
Oligarchs?

Kavanaugh was a concurring opinion. It's nice and angry but it didn't speak for the rest of the court. It's a lone-gun opinion. It's safe to assume that the court isn't willing to allow the NCAA to operate as a trust on its own but that's about it. They purposely stopped short.

There is also some sort of middle ground that you don't seem willing to acknowledge. The NCAA and its member schools aren't going to continue with sports if it's not financially beneficial. Sport is not their primary purpose.
Click to expand...
The Court stopped short because the only issue before the court were so-called “educational” benefits. Kavanaugh, went further and suggested that any restrictions on compensation are DOA. As you correctly note, there is no law on point on that topic after Alston. However, Given unanimous courts up and down the line found NCAA liable for price fixing, and especially “jockish” Kavanaugh’s concurring, it’s not anything I would chance.
 
APanther said:
NCAA not enforcing it. Who cares. No party aggrieved. NCAA rules are no different from rules you may from for your book club. Not enforceable at law. Easy peezy.
Click to expand...
Its a big deal because if they got rid of the rule, a Pitt could have offered an Addison a 4 year contract out of HS worth X amount.....and then he couldn't have transferred. It levels the playing field somewhat
 
APanther said:
NCAA rules are not law. Do you not understand that?
Click to expand...
Why do you keep saying that? Leagues are allowed to have rules. Its not against the law to put 12 players on the field but the NCAA has a rule against that. Should Pitt play with 12 this year since it isn't illegal?
 
  • Like
Reactions: pittmeister
Sean Miller Fan said:
Why do you keep saying that? Leagues are allowed to have rules. Its not against the law to put 12 players on the field but the NCAA has a rule against that. Should Pitt play with 12 this year since it isn't illegal?
Click to expand...
That’s not against the law. Price fixing and any activities which restrain trade, eg price fixing, are. You get the distinction, yes? Where’d you get your JD if I may politely inquire?
 
APanther said:
That’s not against the law. Price fixing and any activities which restrain trade, eg price fixing, are. You get the distinction, yes? Where’d you get your JD if I may politely inquire?
Click to expand...
Are you a lawyer? If so, you are missing some pretty basic concepts even lay folks grasp.
 
APanther said:
NCAA rules are not law. Do you not understand that?
Click to expand...
But they do have a chilling effect on an athletes ability to get the full amount of the compensation he is able to negotiate for himself. So does the NFL's 3 years of college rule to be eligible for its draft.
 
  • Like
Reactions: APanther
APanther said:
Here’s the thing. About 50% of posts I read on this site re: NIL, Transferring and pay for play (legal) are erroneous. Kavanaugh’s opinion is only 5 pages with little legalese. Very easy to read. What Kavanaugh makes clear is that the NCAA business model was built on price fixing where athletic oligarchs got rich at the expense of free labor. That conduct the Supreme Court unanimously found was illegal.
Reading on in Kavanaugh opinion, he is correctly pissed off at the NCAA for their illegal price fixing. In fact he implicitly dares the NCAA to litigate any barriers they seek to impose on compensation for athletes. There is such a case moving now through the very same courts as Alston. It’s called House v. NCAA. The plaintiffs in that case are college atheletes from 2015-present who demand back pay. as Kavanaugh,,and I suspect the rest of the Sc.T. must be salivating to hear this one. If I’m counsel for NCAA, my advice is “SETTLE NOW”!
So what’s next? My guess is class action for atheletes since advent of first major TV contracts (circa 1983?) through 2014 for back pay.
In any event, it’s not complicated. But do read Kavanaugh simple 5 page concurring.
Click to expand...
Pseudo-intellectual fops humor me.....as do obvious trolls....
 
APanther said:
I would so advise in a heartbeat. Here’s why:
If you read Kavanaugh’s concurring and the unaminous decision in Alston, as well as every lower court in the Alston chain, they are just waiting for a case like House to hammer the NCAA et al. That’s your job as counsel. “Can we win this”? “”Uh. No.”
I get why NCAA didn’t settle Alston. They strung it out so all the oligarchs could reel in their god awful sums. That mission accomplished while the NCAA, Conferences and member universities forced to shell out $305MM in attorneys fees alone!
The Congress dynamic, is different. Remember. It was Kavanaugh who (correctly) recommended the NCAA go through Congress and/or collective bargaining. That’s the only solution I see as well.
Perhaps all the time wasted makes me cynical. Could be. So my take today is NCAA just playing long game. That is, no realistic expectation of winning, just ensuring the best they can, to keep getting big $$$$ for their patrons before the music stops. Just my .02.
Click to expand...
Your opinion is worth less than .02
 
APanther said:
NCAA rules are not law. Do you not understand that?
Click to expand...
You keep saying these rules are not enforceable. No enforcement action can likely be taken against the player. But enforcement actions can be taken against the school as I've already pointed out to you with examples. And it isn't illegal to do so.
 
NCPitt said:
You keep saying these rules are not enforceable. No enforcement action can likely be taken against the player. But enforcement actions can be taken against the school as I've already pointed out to you with examples. And it isn't illegal to do so.
Click to expand...
Different world now. See, last sentence of Justice Kavanaugh concurring opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back