And here comes another loss for the NCAA.

And it will be baseball's gain.

Front Office Sports reports:

(11-30-2022 10:51 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  And here comes another loss for the NCAA.

And it will be baseball's gain.

Front Office Sports reports:

I don't think so.

They are volunteers. They don't have to work. Its not like a cap on salaries. Its basically an unpaid internship. There are other volunteers who help programs without getting paid.

That said, I think the P5 want to do away with a lot of these limits, so they might just settle.

(12-04-2022 11:48 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-30-2022 10:51 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  And here comes another loss for the NCAA.

And it will be baseball's gain.

Front Office Sports reports:

I don't think so.

They are volunteers. They don't have to work. Its not like a cap on salaries. Its basically an unpaid internship. There are other volunteers who help programs without getting paid.

That said, I think the P5 want to do away with a lot of these limits, so they might just settle.

If they are suing to prevent the NCAA from imposing limits on the number of coaches a team can have, would that also suggest they can't impose limits on how many scholarship athletes they can have as well? I just don't see either of those things happening, and with good reason.

Don't want to be an unpaid coach? Don't volunteer to be one.

(12-08-2022 10:29 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(12-04-2022 11:48 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-30-2022 10:51 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  And here comes another loss for the NCAA.

And it will be baseball's gain.

Front Office Sports reports:

I don't think so.

They are volunteers. They don't have to work. Its not like a cap on salaries. Its basically an unpaid internship. There are other volunteers who help programs without getting paid.

That said, I think the P5 want to do away with a lot of these limits, so they might just settle.

If they are suing to prevent the NCAA from imposing limits on the number of coaches a team can have, would that also suggest they can't impose limits on how many scholarship athletes they can have as well? I just don't see either of those things happening, and with good reason.

Don't want to be an unpaid coach? Don't volunteer to be one.

Sometimes what you aim at is not the obvious target. They want full scholarships for baseball players period, not more "scholarship" athletes, which counts partial scholarships. They want more paid coaches for the staff, not more volunteers. Sankey is pushing this one pretty hard. I wouldn't bet against him. And it paints yet another reason why the NCAA should be dead!

(12-08-2022 10:55 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-08-2022 10:29 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(12-04-2022 11:48 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-30-2022 10:51 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  And here comes another loss for the NCAA.

And it will be baseball's gain.

Front Office Sports reports:

I don't think so.

They are volunteers. They don't have to work. Its not like a cap on salaries. Its basically an unpaid internship. There are other volunteers who help programs without getting paid.

That said, I think the P5 want to do away with a lot of these limits, so they might just settle.

If they are suing to prevent the NCAA from imposing limits on the number of coaches a team can have, would that also suggest they can't impose limits on how many scholarship athletes they can have as well? I just don't see either of those things happening, and with good reason.

Don't want to be an unpaid coach? Don't volunteer to be one.

Sometimes what you aim at is not the obvious target. They want full scholarships for baseball players period, not more "scholarship" athletes, which counts partial scholarships. They want more paid coaches for the staff, not more volunteers. Sankey is pushing this one pretty hard. I wouldn't bet against him. And it paints yet another reason why the NCAA should be dead!

It's one thing to say you want another paid baseball coach. It's another thing entirely to say you want no limits on the number of paid coaches in every sport. My point about scholarships wasn't about the distinction between full or partial scholarships for baseball players. It is that the same principle in law (if the courts find that such a principle does exist) that would demand no limits on paid coaches would apply equally to limits on paid athletes in all sports.

I don't think SCOTUS (or any lower court) would ever rule that four coaches is OK but three is not. That isn't based on any legal principle, but rather substituting the opinion of the court for the collective opinions of NCAA member schools, all of whom are voluntary members of that organization.

(12-08-2022 12:03 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(12-08-2022 10:55 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-08-2022 10:29 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(12-04-2022 11:48 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-30-2022 10:51 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  And here comes another loss for the NCAA.

And it will be baseball's gain.

Front Office Sports reports:

I don't think so.

They are volunteers. They don't have to work. Its not like a cap on salaries. Its basically an unpaid internship. There are other volunteers who help programs without getting paid.

That said, I think the P5 want to do away with a lot of these limits, so they might just settle.

If they are suing to prevent the NCAA from imposing limits on the number of coaches a team can have, would that also suggest they can't impose limits on how many scholarship athletes they can have as well? I just don't see either of those things happening, and with good reason.

Don't want to be an unpaid coach? Don't volunteer to be one.

Sometimes what you aim at is not the obvious target. They want full scholarships for baseball players period, not more "scholarship" athletes, which counts partial scholarships. They want more paid coaches for the staff, not more volunteers. Sankey is pushing this one pretty hard. I wouldn't bet against him. And it paints yet another reason why the NCAA should be dead!

It's one thing to say you want another paid baseball coach. It's another thing entirely to say you want no limits on the number of paid coaches in every sport. My point about scholarships wasn't about the distinction between full or partial scholarships for baseball players. It is that the same principle in law (if the courts find that such a principle does exist) that would demand no limits on paid coaches would apply equally to limits on paid athletes in all sports.

I don't think SCOTUS (or any lower court) would ever rule that four coaches is OK but three is not. That isn't based on any legal principle, but rather substituting the opinion of the court for the collective opinions of NCAA member schools, all of whom are voluntary members of that organization.

These cases and the push for full scholarships in every sponsored sport, and no restrictions on the number of coaches, is all about ending that voluntary relationship with the outdated and wholly irrelevant NCAA. These are all chisels to the wall that was the NCAA. And what you are witnessing is the push prior to the celebration of another wall which will come tumbling down!

(12-08-2022 12:03 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(12-08-2022 10:55 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-08-2022 10:29 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(12-04-2022 11:48 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-30-2022 10:51 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  And here comes another loss for the NCAA.

And it will be baseball's gain.

Front Office Sports reports:

I don't think so.

They are volunteers. They don't have to work. Its not like a cap on salaries. Its basically an unpaid internship. There are other volunteers who help programs without getting paid.

That said, I think the P5 want to do away with a lot of these limits, so they might just settle.

If they are suing to prevent the NCAA from imposing limits on the number of coaches a team can have, would that also suggest they can't impose limits on how many scholarship athletes they can have as well? I just don't see either of those things happening, and with good reason.

Don't want to be an unpaid coach? Don't volunteer to be one.

Sometimes what you aim at is not the obvious target. They want full scholarships for baseball players period, not more "scholarship" athletes, which counts partial scholarships. They want more paid coaches for the staff, not more volunteers. Sankey is pushing this one pretty hard. I wouldn't bet against him. And it paints yet another reason why the NCAA should be dead!

It's one thing to say you want another paid baseball coach. It's another thing entirely to say you want no limits on the number of paid coaches in every sport. My point about scholarships wasn't about the distinction between full or partial scholarships for baseball players. It is that the same principle in law (if the courts find that such a principle does exist) that would demand no limits on paid coaches would apply equally to limits on paid athletes in all sports.

I don't think SCOTUS (or any lower court) would ever rule that four coaches is OK but three is not. That isn't based on any legal principle, but rather substituting the opinion of the court for the collective opinions of NCAA member schools, all of whom are voluntary members of that organization.

Nonetheless, the NCAA has already lost numerous cases on the basis that their restrictions were illegal. I think this will be another one.

The schools may be voluntary members, I get that, but most of the rules were not created by big money schools. They have interest in pushing back because their representation in the membership doesn't have as much impact as one would think.

So there may come a time when we see a full on separation, but for now, these schools aren't really interested in leaving the NCAA.