UNC ONLY BASKETBALL 2024-25 SEASON

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 2K
  • Views: 32K
  • UNC Sports 
donbosco said:
This morning I put our remaining games on my phone calendar.
Click to expand...

It would require better play than we've seen all season but if they can somehow get to the Duke game with 0 or 1 loss...

SMU will be a TALL task on Tuesday (starting 6'7-6'11'-7'2) and as a team shoot it fairly well

Interested to see how they look at home in a big game. Only one of those so far on the year
 
finesse said:
That's all of college sports, fwiw. Otoh, I'm not convinced that this is a lot worse than the shamateurism after WWII or the point shaving scandals of the 50s and 60s. At least this more open and potentially easier to adjust. Once the amount of money became so large, there was no excuse for the players to just get crumbs from the cake. I doubt all the inequities will ever be completely dealt with. Money and prestige will always have influence. I do expect that there will be an adjustment in how NIL is handled so there isn't such a great dichotomy between schools. Maybe colleges need a salary cap.
Click to expand...
I’m in favor of the changes though there does probably need to be some regulation.

Regardless, college sports has been altered forever and the days of as well as the facade of “student-athletes” are over.
 
Centerpiece said:
Definitely need a salary cap - coaches included. But NIL and sneaker deals will always cloud the waters.

Also need 2 year contracts and go back to sit one year for transferring unless extenuating circumstances intervene - just like the rules stipulated before the portal.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure it’s legal to restrict transfers without collective bargaining.
 
That was exactly the kind of win they needed. Had they blown them out or even kept that 10-12 point lead the whole way, it would’ve been nice but they wouldn’t have learned much.

This way they were in a dogfight in a road environment a thousand miles from home, and actually showed the toughness to not only hang, but to pull it out.

That’s potentially big for the psychology of this team. Whether or not they actually apply a lesson like this will be the trick. They haven’t shown a knack for sustained growth so far.
 
“Yes it is. Contracts do not run afoul of antitrust laws.”
that’s what I was thinking. I was also thinking the contract would be between the NIL check writer and the player.
 
Last edited:
superrific said:
Yes it is. Contracts do not run afoul of antitrust laws.
Click to expand...
Could well depend on the state. Non-competes (which is effectively what an anti-transfer clause in a contract is) are largely unenforceable in California. And absent a contract, the courts have already ruled that NCAA anti-transfer restrictions violate antitrust.

You didn't believe me on this issue around the Tez Walker case, but the judicial writing is on the wall now. In the absence of collective bargaining, Claudia Wilkens is going to be ruling for the players for the foreseeable future.
 
Calheel said:
Could well depend on the state. Non-competes (which is effectively what an anti-transfer clause in a contract is) are largely unenforceable in California. And absent a contract, the courts have already ruled that NCAA anti-transfer restrictions violate antitrust.

You didn't believe me on this issue around the Tez Walker case, but the judicial writing is on the wall now. In the absence of collective bargaining, Claudia Wilkens is going to be ruling for the players for the foreseeable future.
Click to expand...
You don't need an anti-transfer clause. You just need a two or three year contract, with option to terminate for going pro but not for transfer. There would be a liquidated damages clause that would make transferring undesirable. Not to mention that break-up fees and the like are routinely included in M&A contracts, even in CA.

A non-compete is a contractual provision that applies after the employment is terminated. Contracts that are still in effect are OK.

Even in CA, coach contracts contain buyouts, right? We can't just go poach a coach from CA -- if there's a buyout, it has to be paid. Because the contract is still in effect
 
Calheel said:
You didn't believe me on this issue around the Tez Walker case, but the judicial writing is on the wall now. In the absence of collective bargaining, Claudia Wilkens is going to be ruling for the players for the foreseeable future.
Click to expand...
I don't recall disagreeing with you on any predictions re: Tez. I just didn't think Josh Stein's threat letter was all that strong. I wouldn't have denied that the plaintiffs could win in federal court. I probably said that I thought the NCAA could have won, but not with the stupid student-athlete theory they were pushing.
 
superrific said:
I don't recall disagreeing with you on any predictions re: Tez. I just didn't think Josh Stein's threat letter was all that strong. I wouldn't have denied that the plaintiffs could win in federal court. I probably said that I thought the NCAA could have won, but not with the stupid student-athlete theory they were pushing.
Click to expand...
You made a parens patriae attack on Josh Stein and said that AG's didn't have a basis to bring antitrust claims against the NCAA for the transfer rules. You also were a fan of the 2018 7th Circuit case upholding the transfer rules. Two months later, a West Virginia judge struck down the transfer rules on antitrust grounds based on seven AG's filing suit.

That said, we are getting a bit far afield of UNC basketball talk, and maybe you've come around a bit to the pro-player view on NCAA restraints of trade.

​

 
superrific said:
You don't need an anti-transfer clause. You just need a two or three year contract, with option to terminate for going pro but not for transfer. There would be a liquidated damages clause that would make transferring undesirable. Not to mention that break-up fees and the like are routinely included in M&A contracts, even in CA.

A non-compete is a contractual provision that applies after the employment is terminated. Contracts that are still in effect are OK.

Even in CA, coach contracts contain buyouts, right? We can't just go poach a coach from CA -- if there's a buyout, it has to be paid. Because the contract is still in effect
Click to expand...
You allow the buy-out to go away if you go pro but not if you transfer to a competitor? I'd think that would be highly problematic.
 
Interested to see how defenses are going to adjust vs Ian and whether that opens up more for RJ

I've yet to see SMU play but Duke just smacked them around pretty bad on their home court. Big front line but don't seem to block many shots and rate even worse than UNC does defensively, if that can be believed

Seems like a good test case for the 4 guard lineup and exploiting mismatches. Hopefully Seth is good to go
 
Icky Mettle said:
Maybe I shouldn’t complain about anything after a win, but what was up with us calling a timeout after Cadeau hit his free throw on the 4-point play? Wasn’t there just a timeout before the shot? Why didn’t we discuss at that point what we needed to do after he hit the shot. Why burn a timeout? I understand that with 4.8 seconds left and Notre Dame having possession, the likelihood of having to use a timeout was extremely slim, but what if Notre Dame scored quickly and we still had time left? We may want to use a timeout there. Or what if we forced a turnover and had to inbound the ball? We may want to have a timeout left in case we had trouble inbounding the ball (which we have had issues with this season).
Click to expand...
There was not a called timeout before the Free Throw. There was a slight delay while the refs stupidly looked at the monitor to confirm Cadeau's three pointer was in fact shot from behind the arc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top