forums

NCAA Meets with Ruiz to discuss NIL deals

Advertisement
#1cane said:
If I was Ruiz I would have said I will meet with you if you have people from other schools like USC, T&AM included in the meeting. Its an NCAA problem not a Miami problem. Why in the **** would they single Miami out!!
Click to expand...
The problem just got more complicated as well with the State of Louisiana basically removing the prohibition of boosters and universities DIRECTLY brokering NIL deals to athletes. That can't be interpreted any way besides Play FOR PAY. No idea how the NCAA get aligned with that change in law ... and if they do then it is wide open and there are basically no restrictions.
 
Cribby said:
Ive been clear from the beginning we will never be a tier one program with spending. I’ve said the 6-10 range is the likely sweet spot under Mario as for as average recruiting classes. . I dom‘t see the top 3-5 happening that much but I don’t see the 15-20’s happening much like previous coaches. We’re in a much better spot though.
Click to expand...
I somewhat agree.

I think if we start winning and winning BIG we will have top 5 classes.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
The Supreme Court ruling involved benefits provided by schools, and NOT the NIL rules.
Click to expand...
Correct, but I know you see the writing on the wall from the Alston decision, and Kavanaugh’s concurrence, that this Court is not sympathetic at all to the NC2A’s arguments about amateurism.
Do you agree that if the NC2A took a position against athletes receiving compensation for endorsements/marketing, that a lawsuit would ensue on behalf of athletes and the courts would side with the athletes?
 
AtlAtty said:
Correct, but I know you see the writing on the wall from the Alston decision, and Kavanaugh’s concurrence, that this Court is not sympathetic at all to the NC2A’s arguments about amateurism.
Do you agree that if the NC2A took a position against athletes receiving compensation for endorsements/marketing, that a lawsuit would ensue on behalf of athletes and the courts would side with the athletes?
Click to expand...


I'm gonna disagree on that one. Kavanaugh's dicta was just a schoolboy rant. He had a UNANIMOUS court and he couldn't get even one single justice to join him on his concurrence.

Of course, at the time he wrote it, NIL wasn't even a thing yet. I'm not saying he won't get a couple more votes once there is a case and controversy that actually involves NIL, I just think way too many people have made way too much out of Kavanaugh's Look-At-Me moment.

I do not think the NCAA will ever take a blanket position AGAINST compensation for endorsements/marketing, but I certainly think the NCAA could prevail with reasonble timing limitations. In fact, if you read Alston to see what the NCAA was actually arguing, they were using the same-old same-old arguments about the sanctity of amateurism and how a departure from that would damage the popularity of college football. However, given all the public statements made by coaches, journalists, and fans, I think the NCAA could easily argue that a timing-delay on signing NIL deals is completely in sync with the rest of the rules governing recruiting, boosters, and inducements.

But, yes, I do understand the "dim view" that the current Supreme Court has with the NCAA making the same arguments year-in and year-out. I'm also not convinced that the current Supreme Court is honestly and legitimately concerned with the rights of employees. This is just a high-profile litigant (the NCAA) that certain justices can use as a popular whipping boy. It's like when a judge delivers an impassioned and harsh sentencing to a convicted pedophile, were we really expecting sensitive and understanding?
 
TheOriginalCane said:
I'm gonna disagree on that one. Kavanaugh's dicta was just a schoolboy rant. He had a UNANIMOUS court and he couldn't get even one single justice to join him on his concurrence.

Of course, at the time he wrote it, NIL wasn't even a thing yet. I'm not saying he won't get a couple more votes once there is a case and controversy that actually involves NIL, I just think way too many people have made way too much out of Kavanaugh's Look-At-Me moment.

I do not think the NCAA will ever take a blanket position AGAINST compensation for endorsements/marketing, but I certainly think the NCAA could prevail with reasonble timing limitations. In fact, if you read Alston to see what the NCAA was actually arguing, they were using the same-old same-old arguments about the sanctity of amateurism and how a departure from that would damage the popularity of college football. However, given all the public statements made by coaches, journalists, and fans, I think the NCAA could easily argue that a timing-delay on signing NIL deals is completely in sync with the rest of the rules governing recruiting, boosters, and inducements.

But, yes, I do understand the "dim view" that the current Supreme Court has with the NCAA making the same arguments year-in and year-out. I'm also not convinced that the current Supreme Court is honestly and legitimately concerned with the rights of employees. This is just a high-profile litigant (the NCAA) that certain justices can use as a popular whipping boy. It's like when a judge delivers an impassioned and harsh sentencing to a convicted pedophile, were we really expecting sensitive and understanding?
Click to expand...

Can we keep the politics out of it?
 
Advertisement
OriginalCanesCanesCanes said:
Can we keep the politics out of it?
Click to expand...
I'd love to say yes, but until justices can step away from voting whichever way their party is leaning, I don't think we can. What I used to love about the Court was that you'd see justices (sometimes) vote against the thing their party was supporting because that vote was in line with the values the justice had always claimed. Now, not so much.

The other thing is that by virtue of mentioning a topic, you will be seen as being political. For instance, If I say "worker's rights" or mention race in any way, you're going to make an assumption about me and my politics. But the truth is that workers have rights and those rights are always under scrutiny, and people are of various races. This is something that really bothers me about discussion these days is that you can't talk about certain topics without being accused of bringing up politics. Like I can't have an opinion without being a puppet for some political party.

So as long as the Supreme or any other court is involved with football, it's going to be tough to keep politics all the way out of the discussion.
 
Hurracanes said:
You guys do realize Ruiz has NIiL deals with other athletes in schools not named Miami, right?
Click to expand...
The issue they'll try to push is that there's coordination between Ruiz and Miami for the purpose of recruiting. So it won't matter if he's covered himself by hiring some kids from other schools, they'll say Miami is using his money to recruit kids.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
I'm gonna disagree on that one. Kavanaugh's dicta was just a schoolboy rant. He had a UNANIMOUS court and he couldn't get even one single justice to join him on his concurrence.

Of course, at the time he wrote it, NIL wasn't even a thing yet. I'm not saying he won't get a couple more votes once there is a case and controversy that actually involves NIL, I just think way too many people have made way too much out of Kavanaugh's Look-At-Me moment.

I do not think the NCAA will ever take a blanket position AGAINST compensation for endorsements/marketing, but I certainly think the NCAA could prevail with reasonble timing limitations. In fact, if you read Alston to see what the NCAA was actually arguing, they were using the same-old same-old arguments about the sanctity of amateurism and how a departure from that would damage the popularity of college football. However, given all the public statements made by coaches, journalists, and fans, I think the NCAA could easily argue that a timing-delay on signing NIL deals is completely in sync with the rest of the rules governing recruiting, boosters, and inducements.

But, yes, I do understand the "dim view" that the current Supreme Court has with the NCAA making the same arguments year-in and year-out. I'm also not convinced that the current Supreme Court is honestly and legitimately concerned with the rights of employees. This is just a high-profile litigant (the NCAA) that certain justices can use as a popular whipping boy. It's like when a judge delivers an impassioned and harsh sentencing to a convicted pedophile, were we really expecting sensitive and understanding?
Click to expand...
Great points.
I think there should be some guard rails but with states like Louisiana involved, I think it could be states suing the NC2A. These state legislatures are nuts. They don’t even understand what they are doing but will push an agenda because they are fans of their state schools.
 
kryptonite said:
I'd love to say yes, but until justices can step away from voting whichever way their party is leaning, I don't think we can. What I used to love about the Court was that you'd see justices (sometimes) vote against the thing their party was supporting because that vote was in line with the values the justice had always claimed. Now, not so much.

The other thing is that by virtue of mentioning a topic, you will be seen as being political. For instance, If I say "worker's rights" or mention race in any way, you're going to make an assumption about me and my politics. But the truth is that workers have rights and those rights are always under scrutiny, and people are of various races. This is something that really bothers me about discussion these days is that you can't talk about certain topics without being accused of bringing up politics. Like I can't have an opinion without being a puppet for some political party.

So as long as the Supreme or any other court is involved with football, it's going to be tough to keep politics all the way out of the discussion.
Click to expand...

This thread is about NIL/Ruiz not politics, leave it out, please. This thread has nothing to do with politics. Personally don’t wanna see anything about party politics, we have a whole off topic forum up for that. I don’t care if you dislike a Justice or not because of his politics, I personally don’t wanna see it coming through on this. That’s how stupid arguments get started. Now I know I’m not a mod and I have no input to into it, I’m just expressing my opinion. I totally disagree.
 
OriginalCanesCanesCanes said:
This thread is about NIL/Ruiz not politics, leave it out, please. This thread has nothing to do with politics. Personally don’t wanna see anything about party politics, we have a whole off topic forum up for that. I don’t care if you dislike a Justice or not because of his politics, I personally don’t wanna see it coming through on this. That’s how stupid arguments get started. Now I know I’m not a mod and I have no input to into it, I’m just expressing my opinion. I totally disagree.
Click to expand...
My point was I didn’t see anyone making things political, so if you did, maybe you’re reading things in a way they weren’t intended. Like mentioning race isn’t a political statement. Just because politicians have views on race doesn’t mean I can’t talk about it without being political. If you choose to make it into something, that’s on you.

Anyhow, you won’t get politics here or anywhere else from me.
 
kryptonite said:
My point was I didn’t see anyone making things political, so if you did, maybe you’re reading things in a way they weren’t intended. Like mentioning race isn’t a political statement. Just because politicians have views on race doesn’t mean I can’t talk about it without being political. If you choose to make it into something, that’s on you.

Anyhow, you won’t get politics here or anywhere else from me.
Click to expand...

I’m done with this, but I’ll just add, or maybe I was reading things exactly the way they were intended.
 
Advertisement
OriginalCanesCanesCanes said:
Can we keep the politics out of it?
Click to expand...


There was absolutely no politics involved there. I said exactly the truth. There were justices across the spectrum who AGREED on the outcome, and Kavanaugh couldn't get a single one to join his concurrence. NOT ONE.

And, as a person who has read the entire opinion multiple times, there is some lofty language in Kavanaugh's concurrence that can be found NOWHERE ELSE in any of his opinions. Having nothing to do with "politics", I remain unconvinced that Kavanaugh or others will be writing opinions that support the rights of beleagured employees to earn a fair wage. The case was about UNIVERSITY-PROVIDED benefits, not NIL benefits, but Kavanaugh took his shot to grandstand on the NIL issue. And zero-point-zero other Justices went along with him.

Just facts. Nothing to do with politics.
 
Last edited:
TheOriginalCane said:
There was absolutely no politics involved there. I said exactly the truth. There were justices across the spectrum who AGREED on the outcome, and Kavanaugh couldn't get a single one to join his concurrence. NOT ONE.

And, as a person who has read the entire opinion multiple times, there is some lofty language in Kavanaugh's concurrence that can be found NOWHERE ELSE in any of his opinions. Having nothing to do with "politics", I remain unconvinced that Kavanaugh or others will be writing opinions that support the rights of beleagured employees to earn a fair wage. The case was about UNIVERSITY-PROVIDED benefits, not NIL benefits, but Kavanaugh took his shot to grandstand on the NIL issue. And zero-point-zero other Justices went along with him.

Just facts. Nothing to do with politics.
Click to expand...

Ok, boss. Whatever you say.
 


Good conversation between Dan wetzel and Ross dellinger about Miami Ruiz. Ross talked to Ruiz. Basically confirms exactly what I speculated earlier in this thread.

It’s about the first 20 min, and well worth a listen.
 
scrantoncane said:


Good conversation between Dan wetzel and Ross dellinger about Miami Ruiz. Ross talked to Ruiz. Basically confirms exactly what I speculated earlier in this thread.

It’s about the first 20 min, and well worth a listen.
Click to expand...

Lol yahoo sports. They still think nevin was legit. Interesting podcast though
 
Back
Top