5 ms·

This is Option 1. They can't litigate a state to change the law. And given that the only choice is to remove the largest state from you organization. With that

This is Option 1. They can't litigate a state to change the law. And given that the only choice is to remove the largest state from you organization. With that cali makes their own league and now the NCAA has a huge competition for the top talent. Why would you go to school anywhere else than Cali.

MisterBastahrd 7y ago
They don't have to litigate a state to change a law. They can simply say "your student-athlete is ineligible to participate." Can California create their own league? Sure. Will doing so decimate their schools' athletic budgets? Probably. There's not going to be much national demand for a state-only organization, and it's going to get particularly ugly when the feds discover schools colluding with rich boosters talent in order to attract them there because of Title IX.
- wgerard 7y ago
  > There's not going to be much national demand for a state-only organization Uh, this would be true of many states but not of states like CA/TX/FL. There would absolutely be demand for a CA-only athletic organization. There's a reason California did this and not, say, Alaska (no offense to Alaska of course).
  - MisterBastahrd 7y ago
    There's not one example of a regional sports league that has had any sort of success in recent memory. One of the foundational reasons that the WWF / WWE became the dominant power in the wrestling market is that they were the first to ignore regional barriers. Rinse, repeat.
    - jessaustin 7y ago
      Every collegiate conference is regional. [0] Long flights are expensive and inconvenient. You could maybe justify a national conference for men's basketball, but that would eliminate all the minor sports and also would probably violate Title IX. [0] admittedly, minor confused conferences like Conference USA and Big 12 stretch the definition a little bit, but they're still essentially regional.
    - wgerard 7y ago
      > There's not one example of a regional sports league that has had any sort of success in recent memory. Er, we're talking about them right now. College sports are extremely regional but still have significant national appeal. Many, many people tune into SEC conference games who have no connection to the SEC. If you think people wouldn't watch an SEC-only league (I'm using the SEC here because it's the most obvious example), then I think that betrays your knowledge of college sports.
      - MisterBastahrd 7y ago
        I think that the SEC has the drawing power it does because of how it competes on a national level. The SEC in and of itself is a bunch of mediocre to good teams and a few powerhouses that bear the load for its reputation. Every P5 conference in existence would be irreparably harmed if they engaged in purely regional competition / contracts.
- DeonPenny 7y ago
  I think there a lot of conclusion jumping. The NCAA only make $1 billion in revenue with 900 million in expenses. A state-only organization the size of California can easily compete especially when any player in any sport with financial planning would move to California. Why would anyone watch the NCAA in football, basketball or anything else when we'd know all the best player are in the California League. Also, the point is that rich boosters colluding wouldn't be illegal. This wouldn't have anything to do Title IX. I do agree those rich donors will pull all the best talent to California though.
dragonwriter 7y ago
> This is Option 1. They can't litigate a state to change the law. Sure, they can (well, that is, litigate against a state to neutralize the law), usually by claiming it violates federal law (including the Constitution). That's tough here, but I suppose you could throw a hail mary at either a contracts clause or a dormant commerce clause action.
- throwaway_law 7y ago
  I think there is a strong argument to be made for violation of the constitutional right to contract. If a college/university contracts to be included in a athletics association, there is nothing wrong with requiring the schools to comply with NCAA rules/regulations. If a student athlete contracts with a college/university to play a sport for them, there is nothing wrong with the college/university requiring them to comply with both the college and NCAA rules/regulations. Without the benefit of looking at all the various agreements and the actual CA Bill, it sounds like their approach to cure the issue may amount to an unconstitutional restriction on the athletes' Constitutional right to contract.

MisterBastahrd 7y ago

They don't have to litigate a state to change a law. They can simply say "your student-athlete is ineligible to participate." Can California create their own league? Sure. Will doing so decimate their schools' athletic budgets? Probably. There's not going to be much national demand for a state-only organization, and it's going to get particularly ugly when the feds discover schools colluding with rich boosters talent in order to attract them there because of Title IX.

wgerard 7y ago
> There's not going to be much national demand for a state-only organization Uh, this would be true of many states but not of states like CA/TX/FL. There would absolutely be demand for a CA-only athletic organization. There's a reason California did this and not, say, Alaska (no offense to Alaska of course).
- MisterBastahrd 7y ago
  There's not one example of a regional sports league that has had any sort of success in recent memory. One of the foundational reasons that the WWF / WWE became the dominant power in the wrestling market is that they were the first to ignore regional barriers. Rinse, repeat.
  - jessaustin 7y ago
    Every collegiate conference is regional. [0] Long flights are expensive and inconvenient. You could maybe justify a national conference for men's basketball, but that would eliminate all the minor sports and also would probably violate Title IX. [0] admittedly, minor confused conferences like Conference USA and Big 12 stretch the definition a little bit, but they're still essentially regional.
  - wgerard 7y ago
    > There's not one example of a regional sports league that has had any sort of success in recent memory. Er, we're talking about them right now. College sports are extremely regional but still have significant national appeal. Many, many people tune into SEC conference games who have no connection to the SEC. If you think people wouldn't watch an SEC-only league (I'm using the SEC here because it's the most obvious example), then I think that betrays your knowledge of college sports.
    - MisterBastahrd 7y ago
      I think that the SEC has the drawing power it does because of how it competes on a national level. The SEC in and of itself is a bunch of mediocre to good teams and a few powerhouses that bear the load for its reputation. Every P5 conference in existence would be irreparably harmed if they engaged in purely regional competition / contracts.
DeonPenny 7y ago
I think there a lot of conclusion jumping. The NCAA only make $1 billion in revenue with 900 million in expenses. A state-only organization the size of California can easily compete especially when any player in any sport with financial planning would move to California. Why would anyone watch the NCAA in football, basketball or anything else when we'd know all the best player are in the California League. Also, the point is that rich boosters colluding wouldn't be illegal. This wouldn't have anything to do Title IX. I do agree those rich donors will pull all the best talent to California though.

dragonwriter 7y ago

> This is Option 1. They can't litigate a state to change the law. Sure, they can (well, that is, litigate against a state to neutralize the law), usually by claiming it violates federal law (including the Constitution). That's tough here, but I suppose you could throw a hail mary at either a contracts clause or a dormant commerce clause action.

throwaway_law 7y ago
I think there is a strong argument to be made for violation of the constitutional right to contract. If a college/university contracts to be included in a athletics association, there is nothing wrong with requiring the schools to comply with NCAA rules/regulations. If a student athlete contracts with a college/university to play a sport for them, there is nothing wrong with the college/university requiring them to comply with both the college and NCAA rules/regulations. Without the benefit of looking at all the various agreements and the actual CA Bill, it sounds like their approach to cure the issue may amount to an unconstitutional restriction on the athletes' Constitutional right to contract.