NCAA in "Deep Discussion" to Implement Revenue Sharing with Athletes

BigRedBuster said:
Geee….ya think?

but….a little late for a lot of them. 
Click to expand...
Talk about ruining the lives of the athletes they were to “protect”. 
 

maybe schools jumped ship a little fast. Or the athletes. Stupid of the NCAA to demand limits so quickly and without court approval. 

 
krc1995 said:
Talk about ruining the lives of the athletes they were to “protect”. 
 

maybe schools jumped ship a little fast. Or the athletes. Stupid of the NCAA to demand limits so quickly and without court approval. 
Click to expand...
And...have at least a few years of phasing it in.

 
BigRedBuster said:
And...have at least a few years of phasing it in.
Click to expand...
And really should be a function of conferences and not the NCAA. They’re just really trying to find some relevancy.  
 

but I will say Olivia Dunn arguing that the settlement is not enough is borderline on the other side too. At least that was my take on her testimony.  So confusing. Too much packed into one antitrust settlement. 

 
It's like they want to kill the Association. At every possible turn over the last few decades the NCAA has seemingly chosen the worst path for athletes and the sport. Again, the judge is telling them what they're doing is wrong, but they don't listen.

 
krc1995 said:
And really should be a function of conferences and not the NCAA. They’re just really trying to find some relevancy.  
 

but I will say Olivia Dunn arguing that the settlement is not enough is borderline on the other side too. At least that was my take on her testimony.  So confusing. Too much packed into one antitrust settlement. 
Click to expand...
Haven't followed this at all, but it would seem Dunn is confusing the difference between and collective and an individual. She's at the top of NIL deals, so of course this wouldn't be a good settlement for her.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top