The Big Ball Theory

Uh, he can't and he doesn't.

 

In NCAAland, cashing in on your athletic fame in any way means you're a professional and you aren't eligible because you are sullying the purity of "amateur" athletics.

 

I can't stand pops. He a cretin. But if he pays his son's tuition and the son doesn't collect pay from outside his family, the Ball family will break the NCAA.

Do Phil Knight's grandchildren forfeit the ability to play D1 because Nike pays their way?

 

There's still the NCAA regs on using your athletic ability for publicity. Even if the player supposedly doesn't get paid, the NCAA and schools still demand that the kid's likeness belongs to them.

It is interesting, however, if the kid does play in college and Dad tells him not to wear any corporate logos. The NCAA and schools will have their heads explode.

 

(a) If you'd like to defend the NCAA's position on this one, fire away. I think it's damn close to impossible. LaVar is absolutely right in this particular fight.

(b) LaVar Ball is an asshole, but an entertaining asshole. I still find all of the pearl-clutching hilarious.

 

What the hell makes you think that?

No, that's not how it works. If ruled ineligible, then you're ineligible. Period. Doesn't matter who's paying tuition, you still can't play.

 

If he's not taking a grant package from the University, essentially he's a walk on, non scholarship athlete. As long as he's not being paid to attend school to play a sport, he can probably do what he wants. If the NCAA tries to interfere, in the end, they will be out of luck, as long as he's a non scholarship athlete. NCAA rules be damned, they can't prevent a kid from attending and playing as long as he's not being paid, AND his family is paying his tuition.

 

You are just clueless and wrong. This scholarship/walk on distinction you keep harping on is utterly irrelevant to the issue here.

The issue is whether this compromises his amateur status. If a player is ruled ineligible to play on those grounds, then he ineligible to play NCAA ball for the time period covered by the ruling. Period. Doesn't matter if he's a walk on or on scholly, he's still ineligible. This isn't one of those things you can end run around by paying your own bills.

 

I get what the NCAA rule is, but I don't think it will hold up today if there is an absense of quid pro quo. The NCAA gets to set the rules because you take a benefit, the scholarship. Without the benefit, the consideration, conferred there is no contract, the rule doesn't apply. That's the theory. The Big Ball Theory. The NCAA can't prevent a players' father from Making money

 

It's a fool's errand to try to predict how the NCAA will rule from case to case. But Ball deciding to pay his own tuition wouldn't change anything. That was my point. If I'm wrong, maybe a Kansas booster can hire Zion Williamson as a model who also happens to walk on to a certain basketball team in Lawrence. I'd be down with that.

There's a lot of things people with time and money could fight the NCAA on, but for the one-and-done's it's not worth the time, and for everybody else it's rarely worth the money.

 

Under this theory, LeBron James could go walk on at Ohio State.

 

He's already looking at transferring to USC.