NCAA in "Deep Discussion" to Implement Revenue Sharing with Athletes

Admittedly, I haven't kept up with this as much as others because it simply isn't an enjoyable subject.

However, question....who exactly is pushing hard for the 105 roster limit to be totally implemented this year with no players being grandfathered in?  Is it the courts?  House? Some conferences/football ADs?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Admittedly, I haven't kept up with this as much as others because it simply isn't an enjoyable subject.

However, question....who exactly is pushing hard for the 105 roster limit to be totally implemented this year with no players being grandfathered in?  Is it the courts?  House? Some conferences/football ADs?
The NCAA,  as part of their House Settlement. The judge has said she will approve the settlement if they rewrite the roster limits part to grandfather in students currently on rosters- which will make it a real mess IMO.  Most of these  students have already been displaced. The NCAA initially refused to rewrite the roster limits clause, irking the judge.  

if it’s not approved, it will go to trial. Also, congress and President Trump, may step in. And the start date of the settlement is July 1st 

 
Admittedly, I haven't kept up with this as much as others because it simply isn't an enjoyable subject.

However, question....who exactly is pushing hard for the 105 roster limit to be totally implemented this year with no players being grandfathered in?  Is it the courts?  House? Some conferences/football ADs?


I think the schools are wanting to push down the limit so there aren't as many mouths to feed with revenue sharing/NIL.

 
I think the schools are wanting to push down the limit so there aren't as many mouths to feed with revenue sharing/NIL.
But why mandate a maximum?  Schools don’t have to carry the max.

for me, it’s interesting to watch the NCAA openly defy a federal judge. 

 
I’m perfectly fine with the max limit. The implementation was what was horrible. 
It’s still not implemented.  The gun was jumped in part because the judge gave her preliminary approval last fall.  The final approval was scheduled for April 7th, but here we are in mid May. 
 

I'm not fine with a cap. 

 
It’s still not implemented.  The gun was jumped in part because the judge gave her preliminary approval last fall.  The final approval was scheduled for April 7th, but here we are in mid May. 
 

I'm not fine with a cap. 
Of course it's not implemented.  I'm talking about how they were going to implement it with making it immediately all in one year.  That was idiotic.

I'm still perfectly fine with a cap.

 
Back
Top