I doubt they'd buy it, but that's the basic angle I'd take.That's definitely the counter-argument. Whether a judge would agree, I don't know.
I doubt they'd buy it, but that's the basic angle I'd take.That's definitely the counter-argument. Whether a judge would agree, I don't know.
This times infinity!!!If I'm a lawyer arguing against this, I'd make a distinction between transferring for academics is not and should not be put on the same footing as someone transferring for athletic play. I'd then rhetorically ask the court, "Are we now saying that playing a sport is on the same level as academics? Isn't the main point of going to college is to get a higher education? The overwhelming majority of college athletes will never play on a professional level, and the educational aspect of college is to prepare them for life after college and after sports. We cannot start treating sports like it is the same as academics."
And when the restriction of "the ability to make income" argument comes up, I'd point to no restriction at all. They are allowed to make income at the school they are at, and have the option to ask for more from the school, and also have the ability to solicit more potential NIL contracts freely via their agent or themselves in the open market from other businesses/corporations. The "restriction" of the ability to make money that is being put forth is not really a restriction of making money, it's more of a restriction on transferring, under the guise of "restricting the ability to make money". The reality is the players have the opportunity to make as much money as they want in the open market while still being allowed to transfer one time per year. I don't really see any rights being violated.
Problem is, Buzzard, the court these days would probably say “academics” is a moot point.If I'm a lawyer arguing against this, I'd make a distinction between transferring for academics is not and should not be put on the same footing as someone transferring for athletic play. I'd then rhetorically ask the court, "Are we now saying that playing a sport is on the same level as academics? Isn't the main point of going to college is to get a higher education? The overwhelming majority of college athletes will never play on a professional level, and the educational aspect of college is to prepare them for life after college and after sports. We cannot start treating sports like it is the same as academics."
And when the restriction of "the ability to make income" argument comes up, I'd point to no restriction at all. They are allowed to make income at the school they are at, and have the option to ask for more from the school, and also have the ability to solicit more potential NIL contracts freely via their agent or themselves in the open market from other businesses/corporations. The "restriction" of the ability to make money that is being put forth is not really a restriction of making money, it's more of a restriction on transferring, under the guise of "restricting the ability to make money". The reality is the players have the opportunity to make as much money as they want in the open market while still being allowed to transfer one time per year. I don't really see any rights being violated.
Alabama Crimson Tide Car Door Light
Get this and many more items at our TideFans.shop!
Purchases may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.