So easy, even the NFL can do it.

Why do I have the feeling the O’Bannon suit will cost the NCAA a lot more than that?

Details of the settlement can be found here.

About these ads

9 Comments

Filed under It's Just Bidness, The NCAA

9 responses to “So easy, even the NFL can do it.

  1. Mayor of Dawgtown

    I’m not certain that the issues are the same in both suits. On the surface they appear to be similar but…….

  2. Darrron Rovelll

    How are they not similar? The O’Bannon suit is about player likenesses etc. in even more comprehensive detail.

  3. Chuck

    You know, we owe you a debt of gratitude for keeping us up with this situation. It is the sort of thing that will have an effect on what we all love, but I know that most of us – at least me, anyway – would have no idea what was developing until it just hit without the news you give us. Then we’d be wondering where it all came from. Thanks, Senator. And not just for the information, but also for the even handed manner in which it is delivered.

    • Cojones

      I’m sure you want to add World Press to that accolade for not trying to repress the irrepressable remarks made herein that give flavor to our soup. That tied together with Bluto’s patience and legal insight makes for a nice experience.

      Now if we could just arrange to get everyone interested in becoming Poll WatchDawgs and participate as a “gtp” poll influencer entity this year right along with the computer program polls……

  4. 81Dog

    two words for the smart boys representing the NCAA: Uh oh.

    I wonder if they’ll be rebating any of their almost certainly tremendous legal fees when the proverbial waste products hit the judicial fan? I can just see the finger pointing now: Emmert says “but but but….our legal counsel assured us we were on solid ground here.” Silk suited Ivy League law review refugees reply “come now, old boy. We informed you that litigation involves risks. You instructed us to adhere to a position. By the way, here’s another bill for a couple of million for last month’s legal work. We take plastic.” Let the recriminations begin!!!!!!

    I dont buy the argument that “the kids who play the game get nothing.” They get a lot, much of which could be of great value or no value (ie, a college education) depending on how they choose to approach it. On the other hand, just because they get a scholarship, I dont think it’s right that the NCAA treats them as chattel by appropriating the right to market them and make money DIRECTLY OFF THE PLAYERS’ LIKENESSES. The “play football for a scholarship” paradigm is old and fairly honorable, but nobody was thinking about Nike or EA Sports or ESPN when the terms of the bargain were struck.

    While I suspect once the money genie gets out of the bottle, a lot of things that we all love about college sports will be negatively impacted, even an institution as altruistic as the NCAA has to follow the law (see what I did there?). You’d think they might have learned that lesson from the original television antitrust suit, but I guess some smart guys are just slow learners.

    • Cojones

      Nice summary, 81. We all would like the players benefitted, but the NCAA’s “A stiff dick has no conscious” philosophy is best dealt with in the courts. Wish it wasn’t so and that men of good conscience could sit down and untwist this Occam’s razor calamity.

    • AthensHomerDawg

      ” You’d think they might have learned that lesson from the original television antitrust suit, but I guess some smart guys are just slow learners.”
      I beg to differ sir. I once complained to my consigliere about a possible law suit with a development partner. I was quite indignant and annoyed. In fact I chided him to grow a pair and go kick some ass. Where upon he promptly told me to STFU and listen. ” I’m not paid to battle stupid law suits for you…. I’m paid to keep you out of them.” Staying out of court is a very important lawdawg rule. Apparently, some don’t follow it. Billable hours——— nothing slow about those guys.

      • 81Dog

        that’s what GOOD lawyers do: they anticipate problems, they tell the client what they NEED to hear, not just what the client WANTS to hear. The lawyer is an independent, rational professional, not a stooge, or a hitman who simply does what the client directs.

        unfortunately, some guys get rich by assuring the money that they, brilliant tacticians that they are, can make the client’s risky/ridiculous/half assed theory work just fine. I have no idea if the NCAA lawyers were this kind of arrogant, or just smart guys who warned of the risks and tried to defend a difficult position, but the lame argument previously reported (if you make us follow the law, it will be inconvenient and bad stuff will happen) suggests a decent possibility of the former.

        I’ve known a couple of the arrogant genius types. When the whole thing blows up, most of them are very good at deflecting responsibility. Imagine Mike Adams with a law degree.