NCAA Imposing Much Stricter NIL Rules

[S.CarolinaCane]

It absolutely will.

Lmao...we'll see.

It's going to be another brick pulled from the NCAAs wall. You simply cannot act you can make up the rules as you go. Legislation is in place, state by state, and it's based on what the NCAA set in place to begin with.

Have you not seen the Pepsi Doc about the Jet?

The NCAA is about to go to war with not just one lawyer, but a ****load of lawyers that are backed by guys with big *** pockets. Hence the origination of the majority of these NIL collectives to begin with.

It's definitely not a good look

 

[CreativeCane]

It absolutely will.

It will be run to the highest level again. Innocent until proven guilty is the bedrock of the US justice system (not talking public perception here). You can't say you have to prove yourself innocent. Just like NIL, this would go to SCOTUS and go 9-0 again.

 

[Katzenboyer]

Lmao...we'll see.

It's going to be another brick pulled from the NCAAs wall. You simply cannot act you can make up the rules as you go. Legislation is in place, state by state, and it's based on what the NCAA set in place to begin with.

Have you not seen the Pepsi Doc about the Jet?

The NCAA is about to go to war with not just one lawyer, but a ****load of lawyers that are backed by guys with big *** pockets. Hence the origination of the majority of these NIL collectives to begin with.

It's definitely not a good look

Nothing in the rule precludes players from collecting NIL checks. They're limiting the evidentiary standards for proving the "pay to play" arrangements we're seeing now, which are currently precluded in those same rules.

There's not a court in this country that's going to meddle in the evidentiary standards put in place by the NCAA. It just won't happen. You need a MAJOR issue -- for example, like NIL a few years back -- for courts to start sniffing around.

I practice law in this area. This is a big ol' nothing burger.

 

[Katzenboyer]

It will be run to the highest level again. Innocent until proven guilty is the bedrock of the US justice system (not talking public perception here). You can't say you have to prove yourself innocent. Just like NIL, this would go to SCOTUS and go 9-0 again.

It will not. Arbitration clauses often contain provisions that allow for burdens of proof to be far lower than what is required by the courts.

And innocent until proven guilty does not apply in civil cases (which is preponderance of the evidence), and at the end of the day choosing to be a part of the NCAA is a voluntary arrangement with schools abiding by the rules put in place by the NCAA. There's simply not enough here for the courts to step in.

 

[CreativeCane]

It will not. Arbitration clauses often contain burdens of proof that are far lower than what is required by the courts.

And innocent until proven guilty does not apply in civil cases (which is preponderance of the evidence), and at the end of the day choosing to be a part of the NCAA is a voluntary arrangement with schools abiding by the rules put in place by the NCAA. There's simply not enough here for the courts to step in.

Okay but NIL was also once part of voluntarily choosing to be a part of the NCAA and that got wiped out. It opens way too many legal doors to be able to punish people in a civil manner for any reason at all.

 

[TRick72]

They’re naming this the “Protect Nick at all cost and do his bidding” rule

 

[OriginalCanesCanesCanes]

Saban is behind this.

He speaks, the NCAA hollers.

He doesn’t always win, though. Remember when he tried to push to have instituted rules that would slow the game down because he didn’t think he could keep up with fast paced spread offenses?

 

[Katzenboyer]

Okay but NIL was also once part of voluntarily choosing to be a part of the NCAA and that got wiped out. It opens way too many legal doors to be able to punish people in a civil manner for any reason at all.

NCAA v. Alston - the case that opened the door for NIL - was an antitrust lawsuit. The scope of that case and ruling challenged the very bedrock of whether the NCAA could preclude athletes from receiving compensation.

This new regulation offered by the NCAA does nothing to impact that. It simply sets forth the evidentiary standards to be used when violators are charged with NIL violations.

The two are not in the same galaxy. There's not a district court in this country that would entertain an antitrust suit that complains about this proffered regulation. And it in no way impacts a player's ability to receive NIL compensation.

Again, this is a nothing burger. Miami appears to be doing things on the up and up. This shouldn't impact them whatsoever.

 

[ICANEDOIT]

We can never have nice things. Sigh.

 

[KANE]

NCAA is doing what they do best, being complete morons. They're trying to enforce some of their barely existent rules around NIL which is good, however, they are of course going about it in an idiotic way. Basically, they're saying that schools are guilty until proven innocent. NCAA can now use circumstantial evidence like an anonymous tip or random news story and don't even need anyone to go on record to charge a school. Of the school can't disprove it, they can be charged.

Complete ******* joke, curious what the lawyers have to say about this. Makes absolutely no sense to me.

The Doors Are Opening For NCAA to Close in on NIL Violations - Sports Illustrated

The NCAA and enforcement staff will no longer be hamstrung by uncooperative witnesses when it comes to potential violations, thanks to a new bylaw.

www.si.com

A good lawyer will tear that *** up in a courtroom.

 

[DerpaDerp]

Then, if Katzenfraudensheir is right, this will provide impetus for the schools to break away and eliminate the NCAA as a signed upon entity.

I don't like the Collectives. They are pay for play. But, as Young demonstrated, if you get paid for working to promote something using your own fame, then go for it. Dr Pepper pulled Young because he was a Heisman candidate.

However the guilty until proven innocent thing seems a bit like its being driven by Alabama. They never get investigated.

 

[KANE]

Hahahaha this is going to be fun. So no evidence needed and if a school cant provide evidence to disprove a hearsay allegation then they are penalized. Does NCAA have enough money for the lawsuits coming their way on this?

I forsee several *** kickings ahead.

 

[BS85]

It will not. Arbitration clauses often contain provisions that allow for burdens of proof to be far lower than what is required by the courts.

And innocent until proven guilty does not apply in civil cases (which is preponderance of the evidence), and at the end of the day choosing to be a part of the NCAA is a voluntary arrangement with schools abiding by the rules put in place by the NCAA. There's simply not enough here for the courts to step in.

Does it make a difference that you signed up for a set of rules and the didn't agree to drastic changes to those rules? Or by signing up initially you're basically going along with all future changes?

 

[KANE]

Lmao...we'll see.

It's going to be another brick pulled from the NCAAs wall. You simply cannot act you can make up the rules as you go. Legislation is in place, state by state, and it's based on what the NCAA set in place to begin with.

Have you not seen the Pepsi Doc about the Jet?

The NCAA is about to go to war with not just one lawyer, but a ****load of lawyers that are backed by guys with big *** pockets. Hence the origination of the majority of these NIL collectives to begin with.

It's definitely not a good look

Like I said, the amount of *** kickings that the NCAA is lining up to take will be numerous.

 

[Canesfan1899]

Saban must’ve went crying about how unfair NIL has been.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

NCAA v. Alston - the case that opened the door for NIL - was an antitrust lawsuit. The scope of that case and ruling challenged the very bedrock of whether the NCAA could preclude athletes from receiving compensation.

This new regulation offered by the NCAA does nothing to impact that. It simply sets forth the evidentiary standards to be used when violators are charged with NIL violations.

The two are not in the same galaxy. There's not a district court in this country that would entertain an antitrust suit that complains about this proffered regulation. And it in no way impacts a player's ability to receive NIL compensation.

Again, this is a nothing burger. Miami appears to be doing things on the up and up. This shouldn't impact them whatsoever.

Pretty accurate. While Alston was not an NIL case, the NCAA capitulated on NIL shortly after the ruling was announced.

And, yes, the NCAA is only changing the "burden of production" standard, and setting up a presumption. I'm curious to see if this results in an AVALANCHE of investigation and follow-up, for which the NCAA is woefully unprepared. I have a feeling that they will "selectively" follow up on their "anonymous tips".

The only part I'm worried about with Miami (and I've been saying this for over a year) is "timing". When have we talked and/or signed NIL deals, compared to the dates of verbal commits and LOI signings.

Other than that, I'm all good. I know Mr. Ruiz is smart and careful.

 

[AtlAtty]

This is going to be a mess of epic proportions and I’d love to get some of the other attorneys on this site to weigh in who do more civil litigation. My work was all criminal.

First, the NCAA rules are their own rules so they can ostensibly create whatever crazy rules they want so long as the members agree to the new rules. So yes the NCAA can create it’s own standard of proof that hearsay is considered actual evidence in this limited scenario. Because anonymous tips are the definition of hearsay since the person making the tip is unavailable to be examined by the party against whom he is making the tip. Think of someone calling the police and claiming you sell drugs, and the Govt can use that phone call as evidence in court and NOT have to produce the tipster. That is hearsay and NOT allowed in court unless the tipster testifies.

Second, while I hate to write these words, Nick Saban is correct. Without legal protection (Anit-Trust), the NCAA will be sued in court over and over again if their rule runs contrary to state law. And since states can have 50 different laws on NIL, and since I expect most state laws to protect their universities against the NCAA enforcement, the NCAA is screwed. What Saban is discussing is what Major League Baseball has which is an anti-trust exemption which makes it very hard to sue MLB in court. This was granted to MLB a very long time ago when baseball owners and congress people were much closer than they are today. This is how baseball kept people from becoming free agents until Kurt Flood and Marvin Miller kicked that door open. Today, Congress is much more concerned with it’s perception as being closer to the people and not tied to an institution that few care for; the NCAA

Third, going back to the 2nd point, the NCAA will be opening itself to litigation in 50 different states. And most importantly, in state court, not federal courts. So elected judges, or local juries, will be tasked with deciding state laws and rendering decisions for or against universities in their state. Guess which side will win? Not to mention that the NCAA rules on hearsay will not hold up in court. When an NCAA rule runs contrary to state law, state law wins.

Fourth, we have a very, very pro free market Supreme Court in its conservative justices, and very pro-individual rights Supreme Court in its liberal justices. Which means they can actually be unanimous in finding on behalf of the players and school against the NCAA and any rule that stifles the player’s right to make money from NIL. Indeed, the dislike of the NCAA may end up as the galvanizing force that brings conservatives and liberals together.

I just don’t see how this ends well for the NCAA.

 

[407cane]

I seriously doubt we’ll get caught in any wrong doings but I also believe they’ll find a way nationally to restrict the benefit that the likes of Ruiz have given us going forward

 

[Brains]

NCAA is doing what they do best, being complete morons. They're trying to enforce some of their barely existent rules around NIL which is good, however, they are of course going about it in an idiotic way. Basically, they're saying that schools are guilty until proven innocent. NCAA can now use circumstantial evidence like an anonymous tip or random news story and don't even need anyone to go on record to charge a school. Of the school can't disprove it, they can be charged.

Complete ******* joke, curious what the lawyers have to say about this. Makes absolutely no sense to me.

The Doors Are Opening For NCAA to Close in on NIL Violations - Sports Illustrated

The NCAA and enforcement staff will no longer be hamstrung by uncooperative witnesses when it comes to potential violations, thanks to a new bylaw.

www.si.com

Non-starter. This kind of stuff will violate actual law. NCAA is done on this issue.

 

[Brains]

This is going to be a mess of epic proportions and I’d love to get some of the other attorneys on this site to weigh in who do more civil litigation. My work was all criminal.

First, the NCAA rules are their own rules so they can ostensibly create whatever crazy rules they want so long as the members agrees to the new rules. So yes the NCAA can create it’s own standard of proof that hearsay is considered actual evidence in this limited scenario. Because anonymous tips are the definition of hearsay since the person making the tip is unavailable to be examined by the party against whom he is making the tip. Think of someone calling the police and claiming you sell drugs, and the Govt can use that phone call as evidence in court and NOT have to produce the tipster. That is hearsay and NOT allowed in court unless the tipster testifies.

Second, while I hate to write these words, Nick Saban is correct. Without legal protection (Anit-Trust), the NCAA will be sued in court over and over again if their rule runs contrary to state law. And since states can have 50 different laws on NIL, and since I expect most state laws to protect their universities against the NCAA enforcement, the NCAA is screwed. What Saban is discussing is what Major League Baseball has which is an anti-trust exemption which makes it very hard to sue MLB in court. This was granted to MLB a very long time ago when baseball owners and congress people were much closer than they are today. This is how baseball kept people from becoming free agents until Kurt Flood and Marvin Miller kicked that door open. Today, Congress is much more concerned with it’s perception as being closer to the people and not tied to an institution that few care for; the NCAA

Third, going back to the 2nd point, the NCAA will be opening itself to litigation in 50 different states. And most importantly, in state court, not federal courts. So elected judges, or local juries, will be tasked with deciding state laws and rendering decisions for or against universities inn their state. Guess which side will win. Not to mention that the NCAA rules on hearsay will not hold up in court. When NCAA rule runs contrary to state law, state law wins.

Fourth, we have a very, very pro free market Supreme Court in its conservative justices, and very pro-individual rights Supreme Court in its liberal justices. Which means they can actually be unanimous in finding on behalf of the players and school against the NCAA and any rule that stifles the player’s right to make money from NIL. Indeed, the dislike of the NCAA may end up as the galvanizing force that brings conservatives and liberals together.

I just don’t see who this ends well for the NCAA.

You'd be correct on civil hearsay, too. It's really barely different from criminal.