The lawyers who work in the legal agreement of $ 2.8 billion designed to remodel College Sports presented a brief Monday night that did not include Changes a judge suggested With respect to the limits of the team’s list, say that such a late change would create ravages.
The plan on the table, the lawyers said: “It is a great improvement on the status quo” and last year is a great improvement on the status quo “that offered a few adjustments to the expanding agreement that will clear the way for schools to begin sharing millions in revenues with their athletes and paid hundreds of millions of previous and current athletes that they said they were prevented from money to earn money to earn money to earn money.
The presentation came in response to the United States District Judge Claudia Wilken’s suggestion last week that the terms of List limit rules Adjust “to the grandfather in a group of people with the list” that will lose their places in the teams if the limits come into play.
The defendants, the NCAA and the five largest conferences in the nation said that such a movement “would cause a significant interruption.” They said that innumerable movements of the list have already been made in advance that the agreement entered into force on July 1.
“These decisions, in turn, in a hull in tens of thousands of decisions by students individual athletes,” said lawyers. “Many maintained their pre -existing list points (and now they can receive scholarships), because the limits of the list were designed to capture the average number of participants in a season and, therefore, minimize transition interruptions. Some transferred to new schools to search for list points and improved opportunities for athletic competition … While the hopes of a ‘grandmothers could benefit from some athletes, some grandmothers could benefit from some athletes, At the same time, at the same time, the hopes of the concentrations, at the same time, the hopes of the concentrations, the same time, the hopes of those who feel, at the same time, the hopes of the concentrations, the same time, the same time, the same time, the same time, the same time, the hopes of the concentrations.
Wilken has already Preliminary Convention granted of the agreement. In addition to asking for the adjustments on Monday to lawyers on both sides of the case, Wilken has asked the objectors to respond to the new report on Tuesday.
Lawyers expect their final decision on the agreement to reach weeks, with the deadline of July 1.
In what was supposed to be the final hearing a week ago, more than a dozen athletes and their lawyers describe their objections to to the terms.
Of all the arguments on the agreement, which establishes a template for schools to pay athletes directly for the use of their name, image and likeness and describe $ 2.78 billion in the subsequent payment to the athletes who played before NIL, those on the limits of the list seemed to have the greatest impact on Wilken.
According to current rules, schools must adhere to a scholarship limit in each sport, but there are no list limits. There are places for partial scholarship receptors and scholarship receptors, all of which can then qualify for help.
The new rules propose the limits of the list and make everyone eligible for scholarships. It could increase the total amount of help available, but it is expected to tell athletes thousands of list points throughout the country, since schools seek to reduce expenses to absorb higher costs.
An example: some female swimming teams currently divide 14 scholarships by 40 or more athletes. According to the new rules, most lists would be limited to 30, but all those players could receive full trips.
Wilken said that discovering a way to delay implementation would not be so expensive and “would save a lot of will and anguish and unhappiness of many students and their parents, so why not just do it?”
In their presentation, the lawyers said it would be too “involuntary”, with athletes who seek to start over after making a change: “and every additional ’round’ of allowed re-two would create a new set of potentially affected students who could love themselves;
The report also argued that one of the most past parts overlooks the limits of the list is how much more help would be used for athletes.
“In fact, although it is unfortunate that a small number of athletes may have lost the list points as a result of the agreement, the agreement gave them the opportunity to compete for scholarships (or larger scholarships) and compensation and additional benefits that were not previously available,” the lawyers wrote.
The brief sought to address other concerns of the judge:
-For accept clarifying that future athletes of Division I (are covered by the 10 -year period of the agreement, even if they are not yet at the university, they will have the opportunity to oppose the agreement and not release any claim until they have the opportunity to be heard or until they finish their 60 -day objection window. The defendants hope to avoid an endless series of judicial challenges on the same issues of compensation of athletes.
“University sports would be completely unmanageable if future individual university athletes (or groups of future athletes) pursued different types of precautionary measures year after year,” said the presentation. The agreement “works only if it is durable and applicable to all current and future class members.”
– When addressing what some objectors said were technical problems in the system that athletes use to calculate the claims for damage and ask the judge to bring an extension of claims to May 16. A week ago, Gimnasta and influencer of Lsu Olivia Dunne He told Wilken that the agreement barely recognizes its true value and potential income power; Monday’s presentation said it would be among those who would receive an updated assignment.
___
AP College Sports: https://apnews.com/hub/college-sports
