forums

Protect College Sports Act [formerly “SCORE Act” thread]

Ispyin said:
This is Jason. It will never die. But never wins.
Click to expand...

Drama Queen Pain GIF by RainToMe
 
There’s so many parts in this bill, zero chance the whole thing gets struck down. Specific parts, def possible but hypothetical injuries won’t muster much, if any, justice
 
cookies said:
There’s so many parts in this bill, zero chance the whole thing gets struck down. Specific parts, def possible but hypothetical injuries won’t muster much, if any, justice
Click to expand...
I think anything that unfairly restricts NIL pay and the restriction that a program can't move from one power conference to another or be an independent for 5 years will be struck down by the courts.
 
dolemite79 said:
this feels bad for us
Click to expand...

Earlier this week from @RossDellenger at Yahoo Sports (probably better sourced on this issue than tone in College Football media)

“For instance, an anti-expansion provision remains a fluid subject that, as of the latest discussions, would cap conference membership at 19 schools and require programs moving from one power conference to another to operate as an independent for five years. Such a move may expedite another wave of conference expansion as schools jockey to elevate themselves — such as ACC programs moving to the Big Ten or SEC — before the bill passes.”

Keep an eye on this should the 19-team hard cap remain in place with the newly-approved PCSA
 
TboneJones said:
I think anything that unfairly restricts NIL pay and the restriction that a program can't move from one power conference to another or be an independent for 5 years will be struck down by the courts.
Click to expand...
agree more so on the former than the latter; because it’s going to take someone to test the latter for the latter to get struck down. But I’m not sure on what grounds it’d get struck down anyways

The former may end up struck down just on the basis that this was done without any collective bargaining of sorts by the athletes

I don’t quite know how strict this attestation framing by the CSC will be. And I also think it matters if a ton of schools hit that cap and how soon they hit that cap because obviously media rights are going to go up so that’ll be a point of contention if the cap ceiling doesn’t go up too
 
Opposed to collective bargaining and employment, college sports leaders are working to establish a harder cap like the NFL as opposed to the current state of affairs, where schools are exceeding the $21.3 million cap, in some cases, by triple that figure, by redirecting sponsorship and apparel cash from the athletic department to their roster. According to the bill, all athlete deals with university-contracted businesses (associated entities), such as multimedia rights partners, corporate sponsors and apparel brands, would be included in a school's revenue-share payments and count against the cap.

However, the legislation keeps open a lane for authentic deals by creating the attestation process.
Click to expand...
 
Hold My Beer said:
Earlier this week from @RossDellenger at Yahoo Sports (probably better sourced on this issue than tone in College Football media)

“For instance, an anti-expansion provision remains a fluid subject that, as of the latest discussions, would cap conference membership at 19 schools and require programs moving from one power conference to another to operate as an independent for five years. Such a move may expedite another wave of conference expansion as schools jockey to elevate themselves — such as ACC programs moving to the Big Ten or SEC — before the bill passes.”

Keep an eye on this should the 19-team hard cap remain in place with the newly-approved PCSA
Click to expand...
In general, the bill is the opposite of the narrow version that college leaders wanted. It is incredibly specific, touching on several concepts, including conference expansion and coaching movement. The legislation caps power conference membership at 19 schools and requires those programs moving from one power league to another to operate as an independent for five years.

The expansion provision may impact decisions from schools that are in position to move from the ACC to the SEC or Big Ten. Officials at Clemson, Miami, Florida State, North Carolina, Georgia Tech and others have expressed, some privately and other publicly in meetings, their opposition to the concept.
Click to expand...
 
Back
Top