[Goose]

Boosters have gained the right to use their money to influence who plays for their school of choice in a way they never could before. There is simply no way in hell they are giving that right up. None. Just like Ukraine isn't giving up its sovereignty and women aren't giving up their right to privacy.

OF, I think it is very, very hard to justify the idea boosters had anything at all to do with the Supreme Court declaring that the NCAA couldn't restrain trade. Yes, they boosters perhaps had a serendipity that increase their power, but the idea they are organized and wedded to that concept is not in evidence. It was not and is not an organized movement with a specific goal. Changing the NIL system yet again is not likely to change that. No comparison at all to the other two groups you cite.

When did I say boosters had anything to do with the SCOTUS decision? I said that given the NCAA waved the white flag on NIL (after the SCOTUS ruling), boosters gained a lot more power (rights) to influence the acquisition of talent for their team of choice and they are not giving it up.

I used examples of others not giving up things and rights as evidence of this to drive home the point. It isn't happening.

Indeed you did. And I pointed out that the other examples you used were nothing at all like the situation that existed in the NIL situation. The examples you used were powers (rights) that the people involved had fought for for YEARS, against bitter opposition. As you yourself just pointed out, the NIL situation is completely different. The boosters are the beneficiaries of a SCOTUS ruling that they had no part of. Your examples are therefore manifestly irrelevant.

[Goose]

Boosters have gained the right to use their money to influence who plays for their school of choice in a way they never could before. There is simply no way in hell they are giving that right up. None. Just like Ukraine isn't giving up its sovereignty and women aren't giving up their right to privacy.

OF, I think it is very, very hard to justify the idea boosters had anything at all to do with the Supreme Court declaring that the NCAA couldn't restrain trade. Yes, they boosters perhaps had a serendipity that increase their power, but the idea they are organized and wedded to that concept is not in evidence. It was not and is not an organized movement with a specific goal. Changing the NIL system yet again is not likely to change that. No comparison at all to the other two groups you cite.

When did I say boosters had anything to do with the SCOTUS decision? I said that given the NCAA waved the white flag on NIL (after the SCOTUS ruling), boosters gained a lot more power (rights) to influence the acquisition of talent for their team of choice and they are not giving it up.

I used examples of others not giving up things and rights as evidence of this to drive home the point. It isn't happening.

Indeed you did. And I pointed out that the other examples you used were nothing at all like the situation that existed in the NIL situation. The examples you used were powers (rights) that the people involved had fought for for YEARS, against bitter opposition. As you yourself just pointed out, the NIL situation is completely different. The boosters are the beneficiaries of a SCOTUS ruling that they had no part of. Your examples are therefore manifestly irrelevant.