Judge Rules In Favor of O'Bannon, NCAA Violates Anti-Trust Law

[Critical Kills]

Quote: Originally Posted by JustAnotherGamer

If it such a good deal, why won't the players appeal? I can't see any logic behind the $5K cap…

I would think if anyone would appeal it'd be the players but they may not because $5,000 is a lot better than zero which is what they could get if they appeal and lose.

[Cam Fan]

Here's a breakdown:

• If a school wants to offer its recruits $5,000 per year out of a trust fund, the NCAA can't stop them from doing that. However, the NCAA can require that the school has to pay all of its recruits the same amount, which is a big blow to middle-of-the-road schools, who could have potentially placed more value on players than the top schools, and thus saved up to offer those players more money.
• Schools don't have to offer any money, as long as they at least offer scholarships at the cost of attendance.
• Athletes still can't market themselves. Wilken wrote that those rules are pro-competitive.

[Critical Kills]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cam Fan

Here's a breakdown: If a school wants to offer its recruits $5,000 per year out of a trust fund, the NCAA can't stop them from doing that. However, the NCAA can require that the school has to pay all of its recruits the same amount, which is a big blow to middle-of-the-road schools, who could have potentially placed more value on players than the top schools, and thus saved up to offer those players more money. Schools don't have to offer any money, as long as they at least offer scholarships at the cost of attendance. Athletes still can't market themselves. Wilken wrote that those rules are pro-competitive.

Number two doesn't mean anything though as schools that would choose not to wouldn't be able to market players or football showing players and that'd never happen. They would make more money from marketing, even the smaller schools, than just $5,000 considering the money is pooled and not just ind. markets.

[coogrfan]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

Exactly. You know how many Winston jerseys FSU will sell now that they can put his name on it. Its a new stream of revenue and they can also increase the price of those jerseys. I wouldnt expect a game in 15 but I think 16 is a good shot. Gives the conferences time to get these likeness deals in place.

That seems a bit soon. Am I not right in thinking yesterday's ruling is only the opening salvo in what is likely to be a protracted series of appeals?

[Critical Kills]

Quote: Originally Posted by coogrfan

That seems a bit soon. Am I not right in thinking yesterday's ruling is only the opening salvo in what is likely to be a protracted series of appeals?

I stated reasons above why that is unlikely. Unless you just want to think the worst and hope for the best of course which is always smart to do..

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by coogrfan

That seems a bit soon. Am I not right in thinking yesterday's ruling is only the opening salvo in what is likely to be a protracted series of appeals?

The appeals wont be that protracted and probably only one more round unless Obannon is really upset about the fact college players cant get outside endorsements. I seriously doubt the Supreme Court is going to be willing to hear this case especially if Obannon wins both rounds.

The ruling doesnt stop the NCAA or the power 5 conferences from creating their own compensation rules related to likeness rights right now. The key here is that the her ruling remains in place and isnt stayed while under appeals. So that means if the appeal process runs past 2015, the NCAA will be forced to institute rules regarding likeness rights compensation anyway.

Also you have to remember that the power 5 conferences want to pay players. They were on the path of breaking off from the NCAA if they werent given some autonomy. So this decision is kind of a win for them. They want the new streams of revenue that this decision will open up and now they dont have to worry about an Obannon like lawsuit that names the conferences as defendants.

I could see EA going down the path they were planning to do this year by going around the NCAA and doing deals with individual schools who pay their players or agreeing to foot some of the costs for some of the mid-level schools. I dont see EA walking away from 80 plus million in revenue while they wait for the appeal process to work its way through.

The last thing I'll say is that this isnt even the big case. We focused on Obannon because its a video game case and this is a video game site but the real case is Kessler. That case could blow up whats left of the NCAA.

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by ODogg

I stated reasons above why that is unlikely. Unless you just want to think the worst and hope for the best of course which is always smart to do..

I wrote this long *** response and didnt see your posts. LOL. You made my point way more succinctly.

[dmslapped]

I don't understand anything. I just want my game back