NCAAF  > General NCAAF  > NCAA Under Seige: Ed O'Bannon and Todd Mcnair both win their cases.
February 1, 2013, 01:14 PM
So, what do these cases mean as far as the CFB landscape?

The Todd Mcnair case, where the ex USC RB coach received a show cause by the NCAA, which basically took away his profession for at least a year and even after most schools will forever see him skeptically. The judgement against the NCAA said they had malice in their persuit of TM, and by extension USC.

Ed O'Bannon had a Judge rule on Tuesday that the NCAA can't prevent college atheletes from legally pursuing a portion of live broadcast revenues. He has alredy had a ruling, I believe, that states a player's image can't be used without their permission. This is described at:

http://tinyurl.co m/Ed-OBannon-Case

What are your thoughts? Is the NCAA as we know it doomed? Will atheletes eventually be able to pursue their own deals? Will the NCAA have a heavier burden of proof when seeking judgement against individuals and institutions?

And mainly, are the almost certain changes good or bad for the sport we all love?
February 1, 2013  01:23 PM ET

I think it may be a good thing if the rule book is changed in a positive way (for instance, if changes mandate looking at precedence before handing down penalties, if student are treated as any other students would be as far as using their brand (being able to persue legal loans NOT coming from the U or it's reps, and if the definition of a 'booster' undergoes change so that people like Lloyd Lake, who are only interested in their own payday, are no longer boosters because they gave an athelete a summer job.

I realize we have discussed these issues, and I'm not trying to start a war, but with every court case it's becoming more real. Especially when the resolution of 1 of the cases (O'Bannon) could be in the BILLIONS of dollars

February 1, 2013  01:29 PM ET

The NCAA is bigger than football... Though, under Emmert's leadership, I am reminded of MIB, "All is lost! All is lost!"

I guess I'll have to buy the White Album, again.

February 2, 2013  11:31 AM ET
QUOTE(#1):

I think it may be a good thing if the rule book is changed in a positive way (for instance, if changes mandate looking at precedence before handing down penalties, if student are treated as any other students would be as far as using their brand (being able to persue legal loans NOT coming from the U or it's reps, and if the definition of a 'booster' undergoes change so that people like Lloyd Lake, who are only interested in their own payday, are no longer boosters because they gave an athelete a summer job.I realize we have discussed these issues, and I'm not trying to start a war, but with every court case it's becoming more real. Especially when the resolution of 1 of the cases (O'Bannon) could be in the BILLIONS of dollars

The only thing McNair won was a pre-trial motion by the NCAA to dismiss his case. That was 3 months ago. As far as I know, the actual case still hasn't gone to trial or settlement yet. If you have a link for more recent action, please share.

Lloyd Lake was never considered a 'booster', at least not by the NCAA.

February 2, 2013  01:24 PM ET
QUOTE(#3):

The only thing McNair won was a pre-trial motion by the NCAA to dismiss his case. That was 3 months ago. As far as I know, the actual case still hasn't gone to trial or settlement yet. If you have a link for more recent action, please share.Lloyd Lake was never considered a 'booster', at least not by the NCAA.

That's what I know as well. The most recent news on McNair's case I can find is from late November.

Comment #5 has been removed
February 3, 2013  02:55 AM ET

Ed, we're bigger than U.S. Steel.

February 5, 2013  01:40 PM ET
QUOTE(#4):

That's what I know as well. The most recent news on McNair's case I can find is from late November.

OK, given TM hasn't 'won', but the statement in November puts the NCAA in a bad light. What I am basically saying here is that things are piling up against them. And not mentioned is the Miami investigation and the 'conflict of interest' in obtaining documents.

IMO the NCAA is in the hot seat right now as much as any coach. I will admit tht I would be happy if the NCAA was put under enough pressure to bring about change, and the money involved in the Ed O'Bannon class action might be enough in itself. Also this animosity towards the NCAA isn't some new found feeling since the Bush sanctions, though I do feel that case is a prime example of the NCAA abusing the power they have. No, I have been feeling the NCAA was out of line since they started chasing Tark all over the country.

I know many peeps think all is fine the way it is, and nothing will change. That's cool, it's why I wrote this thread; to see where peeps are on the relatively recent cases involving the NCAA.

Oh, BTW, there is also the Jo Pa case where the Pennsylvania Gov is suing the NCAA, I believe cuz they broke their own rules and punished PSU without even an investigation, not citing any rules they broke, etc. It's piling up, whether all the cases are finished or not...

February 5, 2013  01:51 PM ET
QUOTE(#5):

I've beating the Ralph Nader drum on this issue for some time now, UTF2, probably ad nauseam. But I think the NCAA and college athletic departments, and especially their big time Div. I cash cow football and basketball programs, need to own up to their semi-professional status and stop living the tax-exempt charade. Reform major college sports, take away the scholarships, pay the athletes a healthy stipend, acknowledge the programs for the money-making entities they truly are, detach the athletic departments from their academic ties, and tax them for the big businesses they've become.Of course, one counter-argument will be that not all college programs are created equal in terms of appeal/success/income. Perhaps we need to make a superconference of the 10-16 highest-grossing programs that need a league of their own. It's worth a try, and (IMHO) a more realistic model than the corrupted and hypocritical one that exists now.This is a blasphemous proposal, to be sure, and it will rankle a lot of college sports fans out there. But change is coming, whether we like it or not, to the world of college athletics. The NCAA and the courts already see the handwriting on the wall and are determining a new course of action.

We're both 'kinda' on the same frequency. Where we dif is in how the atheletes are reimbursed, You feel like it should come from the school, I feel like they should be allowed to profit off their brand.

Some atheletes aactually use their scholly not to go to the NFL, but to get an education. For those the scholly should be enough. But the top of the heap could care less about the scholly, and their name/popularity is enuff to make them some money legally if not for the NCAA rules. Those are the guys that are getting all the booster cash, free books, free tats, money to sign. The ability to retain an agent, retain a loan against future earnings, might be enuff to keep those hids in line.

February 5, 2013  02:01 PM ET
QUOTE(#7):

OK, given TM hasn't 'won'

Whaddaya mean, "I haven't won?" I'm a winner! I've laurels aplenty! Some from back before cell phones, cable TV, the Internet, or word processors.

February 5, 2013  05:55 PM ET
QUOTE(#9):

Whaddaya mean, "I haven't won?" I'm a winner! I've laurels aplenty! Some from back before cell phones, cable TV, the Internet, or word processors.

Yes you have. mos def a winner, all the way!

But the OTHER TM, Todd Mcnair, has not yet won his case. With you as an example tho, how can he not win?

February 5, 2013  07:29 PM ET

Police agencies and especially prisons are wary of cases against them that go to a verdict. Not because of a monetary award, but because of rulings by the judge that force restrictive changes to procedures. I think with the McNair case and the JoePa case the NCAA could be facing the same jeopardy. These civil cases may go to trial, but unless the NCAA is absolutely sure they would win a verdict, they'll settle before it's over to keep the courts out of their business.

On the other hand, I would think the NCAA would very much want the McNair case to go to trial so they can compel Reggie Bush to testify. I think they're convinced their conclusions about McNair were correct despite the absence of sufficient evidence. Bush and Lake's testimony is what they've been trying to get for 8 years, and I doubt they'll skip an opportunity to finally get it.

Personally, I think McNair's suit is a shakedown. If McNair was in cahoots with Bush, there's no way he will let this go to trial.

February 6, 2013  02:02 PM ET
QUOTE(#11):

Police agencies and especially prisons are wary of cases against them that go to a verdict. Not because of a monetary award, but because of rulings by the judge that force restrictive changes to procedures. I think with the McNair case and the JoePa case the NCAA could be facing the same jeopardy. These civil cases may go to trial, but unless the NCAA is absolutely sure they would win a verdict, they'll settle before it's over to keep the courts out of their business. On the other hand, I would think the NCAA would very much want the McNair case to go to trial so they can compel Reggie Bush to testify. I think they're convinced their conclusions about McNair were correct despite the absence of sufficient evidence. Bush and Lake's testimony is what they've been trying to get for 8 years, and I doubt they'll skip an opportunity to finally get it. Personally, I think McNair's suit is a shakedown. If McNair was in cahoots with Bush, there's no way he will let this go to trial.

Given the evidence at the time it seems to me the NCAA unjustly gave TM a 'Show Cause' penalty. I'm not a lawyer, don't have a clue how these things work. But my question is, if they get the evidence in the trial that wasn't there at the time, is that enough for the courts to say they were justified in their penalty toward Mcnair?

I don't know whether TM is guilty or not, I just know, IMO, there wasn't enough to hang him at the time.

February 6, 2013  02:17 PM ET

One thing I find odd: that is, of all the things facing the NCAA right now it seems the O'Bannon is the most dangerous to the NCAA way of doing things. If this goes like the 1984 TV ruling by the supreme court, it could potentially change the landscape as much as that case. It seem right now that a good portion of the rule book is based on the fact that once the sign their LOI student atheletes are devoid of rights. The O'Bannon case would give them their name rights, and from that the whole house of cards could tumble.

JMO...

 
February 6, 2013  08:54 PM ET
QUOTE(#12):

Given the evidence at the time it seems to me the NCAA unjustly gave TM a 'Show Cause' penalty. I'm not a lawyer, don't have a clue how these things work. But my question is, if they get the evidence in the trial that wasn't there at the time, is that enough for the courts to say they were justified in their penalty toward Mcnair?

Good question. Courts don't expect administrative processes like NCAA investigations to satisfy rules of evidence, but if the process has the appearance of abuse of power, judges will act to prevent future abuses. IMO it will be hard to say the NCAA was 'unjust' toward McNair if they can prove their conclusions were right.

As law professors are fond of saying, "Truth is the ultimate defense."

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Clippers, Warriors exchange barbs
    Views
    463
    Comments
    236
  2. 2
    Tuukka Rask takes blame for Bruins' Game 1 loss
    Views
    2476
    Comments
    231
  3. 3
    Smush Parker allegedly punches high schooler
    Views
    2082
    Comments
    140
  4. 4
    Time to penalize NHL's perennial losers?
    Views
    368
    Comments
    124
  5. 5
    Quarterback freefalling down draft boards
    Views
    7171
    Comments
    90

SI.com

SI Photos