Instead of Congress trying to swallow the ocean of problems with college sports by crafting a 111-page bill that needlessly addresses some topics that aren’t critical, perhaps Congress should address the least controversial problems one small bite at a time (transfers, 🧵
@unseen1_unseen under your scheme, neither the house nor the Senate will get anything done for the next five or 10 years given how long impeachment proceedings take. But maybe that’s your plan.
@elonmusk yes, but impeachment only means that the judge is charged by the House. He is not removed unless convicted by a 2/3 major majority in the Senate.
A beautiful day for football here in Berkeley, but the Gods of TV have decided it should be a night game, when it will be chilly and kids will be left home. Bad deal 😩
Your full article on this site says that a tiebreaker advantage is the equivalent of a one game lead, but that’s not really right. If the Padres finish one game ahead of the Dodgers, they will win the division, despite this mythical one game lead.
Final: Padres 2, Dodgers 1
WP: Darvish (3-3)
LP: Snell (3-2)
SV: Suárez (34)
The NL West is tied once more (although LA has the head-to-head tiebreaker). The Dodgers were held to three hits, and they got two of them in the 9th. Record: 73-56
Anyone who is deep in the weeds with NIL and rev-share discourse would appreciate this conversation on “The Bobby O Show.” Richard Kent (@Richard37215662) and Len Simon (@LenSimon2) deliver a master class on a highly relevant topic that is consuming my mind these days. Both are practicing attorneys and law school professors, which is evident by their careful articulation of well-informed views.
Well done, guys!
https://t.co/kUjuEYveJX
Post a picture of your favorite sign from today's protests.
I will go first.
I have no clue what city this was taken in, but it made me laugh.
How about you? Show me your favorite sign.
@SlangsOnSports Here’s a bizarre statistic. Martin Maldonado has hit HRs against all 30 MLB teams, but his batting average is barely over .200, and he’s only hit 117 career HRs. I would think that almost every player who has hit HRs in every major-league ballpark has a whole lot more total HRs.
Proud of @olivia_moultrie for all she has done to help young female soccer players achieve their dreams . . . and for all she continues to accomplish today 👏👏👏
#TeamWass
@RossDellenger You are certainly right that things are on hold, but they may be on hold for a long time. If one or more athletes appeal, the damage aspects of the settlement are stayed, BY THE TERMS AGREED TO BY NCAA AND CLASS COUNSEL, indefinitely.
You have nailed it, insofar as you have gone, but the same problem relates to the whole injunctive settlement, not just roster spots. Soccer players, women athletes, all kinds of folks are going to harmed by the cap on compensation, when schools spend it on other folks.
House v NCAA - An analogy to help explain the injunctive relief class conflicts.
Imagine some lawyers figure out there is a way to file class action lawsuit to get money for Wal-Mart employees. They search for and find a Wal-Mart employee to represent the class and they file a lawsuit on behalf of all Wal-Mart employees.
The lawyers and Wal-Mart agree to settle the class action and allocate more money to Wal-Mart employees.
They send a class action Notice to all Wal-Mart employees which tells them the good news, "Wal-Mart will pay more money to employees!"
The employees don't need to opt-in. They can't opt-out. They can object if they want, but why?. And they will be forced to release Wal-Mart for any past, present or future claims.
Then, only after the terms of settlement are made more public does the following become clear: only 20% of the the class members will get more money, 80% will get nothing, and worse, 10% of the class members will be fired to help pay for the 20%.
To be sure, Wal-Mart can make those types of tradeoffs and decisions in the normal course of business. But, in a class action, that type of tradeoff, and actual harm, to a subset of class members cannot happen. The 10% cannot be fired and sacrificed to pay more to the 20%. The class members have equal rights. Obviously, no judge would conclude that settlement meets the legal standard of "fair" to all class members.
That is what is happening in the House v NCAA case. The judge has recognized that there is a subset of class members being harmed by the terms of the settlement. She knows she cannot approve the settlement until the Parties agree to protect them. Granting grandfather protection from roster cuts related to the terms of the settlement is necessary, not optional. The lawyers for the Parties have proposed a plan that makes grandfather protection optional.
No judge can conclude that giving defendants the option to harm class members meets the legal standard of "fair".
You are correct. The revenue sharing does result in tradeoffs at the expense of many class members for the benefit of a minority of the class. It is my understanding that such tradeoffs may be permissible in class action settlements.
However, the "harm" upon which Judge Wilken is focused is that some class members will actually lose something very valuable when they lose their roster spot, including their status as class members. I am not aware of any precedent that permits that harm and the lawyers in this case have not cited one. That is beyond a tradeoff.
Even if that could work for the NCAA, it won’t work for the big conferences, who are also defendants. Can you see the Big Ten and the SEC declaring bankruptcy?
@RossDellenger I'm curious to know what would happen if the NCAA just threw up their hands and said, you know what, do whatever the hell you want. If a trail resulted in a financial award that exceeded what the NCAA could pay, they file bankruptcy and no one gets much of anything.
The settlement already harms some athletes to benefit others, or maybe to benefit the schools or both. How much money is a superstar player in a minor sport going to get out of that 21 million. The deal caps his or her compensation at a very low level, depending on school.
"Is this is a mandated grandfather-in or is it optional and each school will choose how to do that?"
This is not a policy discussion, it is a class action lawsuit. The athletes at issue are members of the class. The settlement can't harm those members to benefit others. Grandfather status for these athletes cannot be optional.