UCLA players should get paid after Under Armour deal?

[sbdude]

Sure, I'll bet someone would challenge it in court. They'd lose, and we'd move on.

I don't see any way they would lose that in court. Title IX scope has broadened every year and keeps being applied in areas it was never intended to be. Even the enforcement of has changed over the years. As an example, there were 3 prongs for compliance but now the only way to ENSURE compliance without being sued and losing is by quota. And that quota means you need the same percentage of female athletes to male athletes as you have female students to male students. Absolutely not the way it was intended but that is the way it is currently enforced. The 3 prongs for compliance are still written in the law but if you are a school that doesn't want to get sued and lose, then you only have one choice.

 

[shoot90draw]

I don't see any way they would lose that in court. Title IX scope has broadened every year and keeps being applied in areas it was never intended to be. Even the enforcement of has changed over the years. As an example, there were 3 prongs for compliance but now the only way to ENSURE compliance without being sued and losing is by quota. And that quota means you need the same percentage of female athletes to male athletes as you have female students to male students. Absolutely not the way it was intended but that is the way it is currently enforced. The 3 prongs for compliance are still written in the law but if you are a school that doesn't want to get sued and lose, then you only have one choice.

Im curious, if one of those 3 prongs of compliance is violated, what is the punishment? Is it based on severity of violation? Repeated violations?

 

[wcowherd]

I don't see any way they would lose that in court. Title IX scope has broadened every year and keeps being applied in areas it was never intended to be. Even the enforcement of has changed over the years. As an example, there were 3 prongs for compliance but now the only way to ENSURE compliance without being sued and losing is by quota. And that quota means you need the same percentage of female athletes to male athletes as you have female students to male students. Absolutely not the way it was intended but that is the way it is currently enforced. The 3 prongs for compliance are still written in the law but if you are a school that doesn't want to get sued and lose, then you only have one choice.

It's clear how they lose. Schools pay employees different amounts depending on their value added. If athletes are now employees, then they fall under the same camp.

 

[shoot90draw]

It's clear how they lose. Schools pay employees different amounts depending on their value added. If athletes are now employees, then they fall under the same camp.

So would a university pay a 5th year senior more than an incoming freshman?