As you've probably noticed, Lucca got screwed by the NCAA. Here's the link to their press release:
NCAA - NCAA Reinstates Iowa State Basketball Student-Athlete
Here's the link to the original thread. Go here to complain or discuss what a complete load of BS this ruling is:
http://www.cyclonefanatic.com/forum...-s-iowa-state-basketball-student-athlete.html
I'm hoping this thread can be dedicated to what we can do going forward. We've already shown our potential to get things done by producing an excellent website and through countless emails and contacts with media personalities.
I am still of the opinion that this needs to become a bigger story nationally. Unfortunately, despite our best efforts, media attention has been relatively lacking thus far. I can currently think of three things that could attract a lot more attention:
1. A wider impact of this decision. If we can show that this decision will impact a lot of players or a few big name players this could blow up. To do so we need examples of other players in the NCAA who played on a team with other players who were paid by that team. The only current player I know of that easily appears to fit this definition is Balby (sp?) of Texas.
2. Larger scale protest-type actions. (e.g. We go picket the NCAA, perhaps burn Miles Brand in effigy...)
3. A lawsuit.
I've been racking my brain for potential causes of action for a lawsuit and have come up with a few potential longshots. One would be to sue under Title VII for discrimination in employment or education based on national origin. It might be a stretch to put playing college basketball under employment or education, but I don't think the argument is ridiculous. At a minimum it would have to be shown that the NCAA's rules regarding amateur status have a disparate impact upon international players. Facts and numbers would be important.
Lucca could also potentially sue the NCAA based on statements made by them and which he relied on in coming here to play (an estoppel argument).
Estoppel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
He could potentially argue that the NCAA is estopped from not allowing him to play based on those statements.
He could also to try to recover any monies he could have made had he played for pay earlier in his career based on the theory that he detrimentally relied on the NCAA's statements when he chose not to do so. I get the feeling this argument would be the most compelling if he left and went back to Europe to play pro though... :no:
_____________________________________________
Since it is not our place to file a lawsuit, our actions are probably limited to 1 and 2. The biggest need appears to be credible, well-researched information regarding the impact this decision should have on other players. We can then use this information to make our case, especially to the media. Without that kind of information we cannot demonstrate any inconsistency or grave consequences, we can only argue the inherent stupidity of the rule.
The best type of information we could get would be of the following kind:
1. Player X is or will be playing on an NCAA team.
2. Player X played on a team where other players on the team were paid by that team.
Number two distinguishes this from cases like the capital city league (where some professionals are paid by other teams) and Oklahoma football (where some players are paid by outside sources).
NCAA - NCAA Reinstates Iowa State Basketball Student-Athlete
Here's the link to the original thread. Go here to complain or discuss what a complete load of BS this ruling is:
http://www.cyclonefanatic.com/forum...-s-iowa-state-basketball-student-athlete.html
I'm hoping this thread can be dedicated to what we can do going forward. We've already shown our potential to get things done by producing an excellent website and through countless emails and contacts with media personalities.
I am still of the opinion that this needs to become a bigger story nationally. Unfortunately, despite our best efforts, media attention has been relatively lacking thus far. I can currently think of three things that could attract a lot more attention:
1. A wider impact of this decision. If we can show that this decision will impact a lot of players or a few big name players this could blow up. To do so we need examples of other players in the NCAA who played on a team with other players who were paid by that team. The only current player I know of that easily appears to fit this definition is Balby (sp?) of Texas.
2. Larger scale protest-type actions. (e.g. We go picket the NCAA, perhaps burn Miles Brand in effigy...)
3. A lawsuit.
I've been racking my brain for potential causes of action for a lawsuit and have come up with a few potential longshots. One would be to sue under Title VII for discrimination in employment or education based on national origin. It might be a stretch to put playing college basketball under employment or education, but I don't think the argument is ridiculous. At a minimum it would have to be shown that the NCAA's rules regarding amateur status have a disparate impact upon international players. Facts and numbers would be important.
Lucca could also potentially sue the NCAA based on statements made by them and which he relied on in coming here to play (an estoppel argument).
Estoppel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
He could potentially argue that the NCAA is estopped from not allowing him to play based on those statements.
He could also to try to recover any monies he could have made had he played for pay earlier in his career based on the theory that he detrimentally relied on the NCAA's statements when he chose not to do so. I get the feeling this argument would be the most compelling if he left and went back to Europe to play pro though... :no:
_____________________________________________
Since it is not our place to file a lawsuit, our actions are probably limited to 1 and 2. The biggest need appears to be credible, well-researched information regarding the impact this decision should have on other players. We can then use this information to make our case, especially to the media. Without that kind of information we cannot demonstrate any inconsistency or grave consequences, we can only argue the inherent stupidity of the rule.
The best type of information we could get would be of the following kind:
1. Player X is or will be playing on an NCAA team.
2. Player X played on a team where other players on the team were paid by that team.
Number two distinguishes this from cases like the capital city league (where some professionals are paid by other teams) and Oklahoma football (where some players are paid by outside sources).
