http://www.kaburakis.com Attorney At Law Wed, 26 May 2010 12:17:32 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 http://www.kaburakis.com/2010/03/13/proposal-2009-22-in-2010/comment-page-1/#comment-148 Amateurism Policy news and props. « NOMOS LLC – International Sport Law and Policy Compliance consulting services Wed, 26 May 2010 12:17:32 +0000 http://www.kaburakis.com/?p=526#comment-148 [...] Proposal 2009-22 progress in 2010 and commentary here. [...] [...] Proposal 2009-22 progress in 2010 and commentary here. [...]

]]> http://www.kaburakis.com/2009/07/18/my-list-of-blog-contributions/comment-page-1/#comment-147 Proposal 2009-22 in 2010 « NOMOS LLC – International Sport Law and Policy Compliance consulting services Wed, 26 May 2010 12:14:52 +0000 http://www.kaburakis.com/?p=170#comment-147 [...] 5) Bottom line, what does all this mean? Reiterating what has been written elsewhere… we have come a long way. From conservative applications of amateurism and “failed professionals” preemption, narrowly interpreting the letter of the policy, to a liberal, flexible, and even arguably risking inconsistency reality. Per the recent Amateurism Cabinet’s report and significant discourse to that end, there needs to be continued monitoring of the benefits prospects receive for pre-enrollment athletic participation. It needs to be herein repeated that the continuation of the expense valuation methodology pilot program initiated by the amateurism certification (ACP) staff, utilizing the US Census Bureau Web site (w/ links to country-specific rates and standards), needs to be continued for the long-term. The main disagreement these lines would pose to recent discussion in the Amateurism Cabinet and among ACP staff would be that it is precisely now that this program is needed to start compiling the data that both recruiting institutions and overseas prospects would need to particularly define what is the extent of compensation/benefits a young athlete can receive in each region, to remain below the professionalization threshold and within the actual and necessary expenses rules of Bylaw 12.02.4. The reason for this being a more pressing necessity now, with the advent of the deregulation portion of 2009-22 effective Aug 1, 2010, is that overseas prospects will continue to be recruited, at higher rates, and now even from a higher competitive plane due to 2009-22’s amateurism deregulation and the reconsideration of withholding conditions for such prospects who play on top pro teams; thus, it will be imperative to ensure everyone has benchmarks and as clear data as possible to utilize during the “difference-makers” recruiting attempts, as it is these difference-makers, that will pose 12.02.4 interpretation problems in regard to their compensation limits, so now — correctly — it won’t be their teammates that affect their amateur status, rather their own (financial) relationship with a club; and that is exactly where each institution would love to have immediate financial reference points updated constantly per each region, for each sport and for each recruited prospect. If legislation continues to move along this deregulation path, it is conceivable that very meaningful research, practically useful for ACP staff, coaches and compliance personnel, would yield lists of allowable compensation limits for each region, broken down per sport, level, league, etc, i.e. hypothesize that in A1 Women’s basketball in Greece a prospect’s benefit from a club should not go over appx. 500 Euros/month as a total deemed permissible per several of the 12.02.4 actual and necessary expenses, in Paris and London those would be higher due to higher cost of living, in other parts of the world considerably lower… And there is still a tremendously significant point that policy-drafting bodies featuring learned colleagues and especially the ones trained in the fine art of the Law cannot discount. And that is the valid concern raised in various courtrooms of this country this past year and surely in ensuing ones as well, barring anticipated waves of litigation settlements, that progressive compromise of what traditionally has been the most successful line of defense and the one most appreciated and upheld by courts, amateurism, will lead to dangerous pitfalls in legal cases’ management, where more and more lower courts and even the appellate adjudication levels will hold that NCAA interpretations and applications of amateurism may no longer pass muster as effortlessly as in the past. On this more here and here. [...] [...] 5) Bottom line, what does all this mean? Reiterating what has been written elsewhere… we have come a long way. From conservative applications of amateurism and “failed professionals” preemption, narrowly interpreting the letter of the policy, to a liberal, flexible, and even arguably risking inconsistency reality. Per the recent Amateurism Cabinet’s report and significant discourse to that end, there needs to be continued monitoring of the benefits prospects receive for pre-enrollment athletic participation. It needs to be herein repeated that the continuation of the expense valuation methodology pilot program initiated by the amateurism certification (ACP) staff, utilizing the US Census Bureau Web site (w/ links to country-specific rates and standards), needs to be continued for the long-term. The main disagreement these lines would pose to recent discussion in the Amateurism Cabinet and among ACP staff would be that it is precisely now that this program is needed to start compiling the data that both recruiting institutions and overseas prospects would need to particularly define what is the extent of compensation/benefits a young athlete can receive in each region, to remain below the professionalization threshold and within the actual and necessary expenses rules of Bylaw 12.02.4. The reason for this being a more pressing necessity now, with the advent of the deregulation portion of 2009-22 effective Aug 1, 2010, is that overseas prospects will continue to be recruited, at higher rates, and now even from a higher competitive plane due to 2009-22’s amateurism deregulation and the reconsideration of withholding conditions for such prospects who play on top pro teams; thus, it will be imperative to ensure everyone has benchmarks and as clear data as possible to utilize during the “difference-makers” recruiting attempts, as it is these difference-makers, that will pose 12.02.4 interpretation problems in regard to their compensation limits, so now — correctly — it won’t be their teammates that affect their amateur status, rather their own (financial) relationship with a club; and that is exactly where each institution would love to have immediate financial reference points updated constantly per each region, for each sport and for each recruited prospect. If legislation continues to move along this deregulation path, it is conceivable that very meaningful research, practically useful for ACP staff, coaches and compliance personnel, would yield lists of allowable compensation limits for each region, broken down per sport, level, league, etc, i.e. hypothesize that in A1 Women’s basketball in Greece a prospect’s benefit from a club should not go over appx. 500 Euros/month as a total deemed permissible per several of the 12.02.4 actual and necessary expenses, in Paris and London those would be higher due to higher cost of living, in other parts of the world considerably lower… And there is still a tremendously significant point that policy-drafting bodies featuring learned colleagues and especially the ones trained in the fine art of the Law cannot discount. And that is the valid concern raised in various courtrooms of this country this past year and surely in ensuing ones as well, barring anticipated waves of litigation settlements, that progressive compromise of what traditionally has been the most successful line of defense and the one most appreciated and upheld by courts, amateurism, will lead to dangerous pitfalls in legal cases’ management, where more and more lower courts and even the appellate adjudication levels will hold that NCAA interpretations and applications of amateurism may no longer pass muster as effortlessly as in the past. On this more here and here. [...]

]]> http://www.kaburakis.com/2010/01/19/amateurism-policy-news-and-props/comment-page-1/#comment-146 Proposal 2009-22 in 2010 « NOMOS LLC – International Sport Law and Policy Compliance consulting services Wed, 26 May 2010 12:14:35 +0000 http://www.kaburakis.com/?p=407#comment-146 [...] For a retrospect on Proposal 2009-22, refer to earlier entries here. [...] [...] For a retrospect on Proposal 2009-22, refer to earlier entries here. [...]

]]> http://www.kaburakis.com/2010/03/13/proposal-2009-22-in-2010/comment-page-1/#comment-126 NCAA DI Amateurism & Proposal 2009-22 « National Sports and Entertainment Law Society Sun, 14 Mar 2010 00:29:55 +0000 http://www.kaburakis.com/?p=526#comment-126 [...] NCAA DI Amateurism lovers, this will be a brilliant trip, just sip on some coffee before perusing… In an attempt to sum it all [...] [...] NCAA DI Amateurism lovers, this will be a brilliant trip, just sip on some coffee before perusing… In an attempt to sum it all [...]

]]> http://www.kaburakis.com/2010/03/13/proposal-2009-22-in-2010/comment-page-1/#comment-125 The Bylaw Blog | A Detailed Take On the 2009-22 Override Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:03:03 +0000 http://www.kaburakis.com/?p=526#comment-125 [...] Anastasios Kaburakis has an exhaustive take on the override request of Proposal 2009-22. The request was not about the deregulation, as I had [...] [...] Anastasios Kaburakis has an exhaustive take on the override request of Proposal 2009-22. The request was not about the deregulation, as I had [...]

]]> http://www.kaburakis.com/2009/07/18/my-list-of-blog-contributions/comment-page-1/#comment-121 Dr. Anastasios Kaburakis » Proposal 2009-22 in 2010 Sat, 13 Mar 2010 06:49:05 +0000 http://www.kaburakis.com/?p=170#comment-121 [...] 5) Bottom line, what does all this mean? Reiterating what has been written elsewhere… we have come a long way. From conservative applications of amateurism and “failed professionals” preemption, narrowly interpreting the letter of the policy, to a liberal, flexible, and even arguably risking inconsistency reality. Per the recent Amateurism Cabinet’s report and significant discourse to that end, there needs to be continued monitoring of the benefits prospects receive for pre-enrollment athletic participation. It needs to be herein repeated that the continuation of the expense valuation methodology pilot program initiated by the amateurism certification (ACP) staff, utilizing the US Census Bureau Web site (w/ links to country-specific rates and standards), needs to be continued for the long-term. The main disagreement these lines would pose to recent discussion in the Amateurism Cabinet and among ACP staff would be that it is precisely now that this program is needed to start compiling the data that both recruiting institutions and overseas prospects would need to particularly define what is the extent of compensation/benefits a young athlete can receive in each region, to remain below the professionalization threshold and within the actual and necessary expenses rules of Bylaw 12.02.4. The reason for this being a more pressing necessity now, with the advent of the deregulation portion of 2009-22 effective Aug 1, 2010, is that overseas prospects will continue to be recruited, at higher rates, and now even from a higher competitive plane due to 2009-22’s amateurism deregulation and the reconsideration of withholding conditions for such prospects who play on top pro teams; thus, it will be imperative to ensure everyone has benchmarks and as clear data as possible to utilize during the “difference-makers” recruiting attempts, as it is these difference-makers, that will pose 12.02.4 interpretation problems in regard to their compensation limits, so now — correctly — it won’t be their teammates that affect their amateur status, rather their own (financial) relationship with a club; and that is exactly where each institution would love to have immediate financial reference points updated constantly per each region, for each sport and for each recruited prospect. If legislation continues to move along this deregulation path, it is conceivable that very meaningful research, practically useful for ACP staff, coaches and compliance personnel, would yield lists of allowable compensation limits for each region, broken down per sport, level, league, etc, i.e. hypothesize that in A1 Women’s basketball in Greece a prospect’s benefit from a club should not go over appx. 500 Euros/month as a total deemed permissible per several of the 12.02.4 actual and necessary expenses, in Paris and London those would be higher due to higher cost of living, in other parts of the world considerably lower… And there is still a tremendously significant point that policy-drafting bodies featuring learned colleagues and especially the ones trained in the fine art of the Law cannot discount. And that is the valid concern raised in various courtrooms of this country this past year and surely in ensuing ones as well, barring anticipated waves of litigation settlements, that progressive compromise of what traditionally has been the most successful line of defense and the one most appreciated and upheld by courts, amateurism, will lead to dangerous pitfalls in legal cases’ management, where more and more lower courts and even the appellate adjudication levels will hold that NCAA interpretations and applications of amateurism may no longer pass muster as effortlessly as in the past. On this more here and here. [...] [...] 5) Bottom line, what does all this mean? Reiterating what has been written elsewhere… we have come a long way. From conservative applications of amateurism and “failed professionals” preemption, narrowly interpreting the letter of the policy, to a liberal, flexible, and even arguably risking inconsistency reality. Per the recent Amateurism Cabinet’s report and significant discourse to that end, there needs to be continued monitoring of the benefits prospects receive for pre-enrollment athletic participation. It needs to be herein repeated that the continuation of the expense valuation methodology pilot program initiated by the amateurism certification (ACP) staff, utilizing the US Census Bureau Web site (w/ links to country-specific rates and standards), needs to be continued for the long-term. The main disagreement these lines would pose to recent discussion in the Amateurism Cabinet and among ACP staff would be that it is precisely now that this program is needed to start compiling the data that both recruiting institutions and overseas prospects would need to particularly define what is the extent of compensation/benefits a young athlete can receive in each region, to remain below the professionalization threshold and within the actual and necessary expenses rules of Bylaw 12.02.4. The reason for this being a more pressing necessity now, with the advent of the deregulation portion of 2009-22 effective Aug 1, 2010, is that overseas prospects will continue to be recruited, at higher rates, and now even from a higher competitive plane due to 2009-22’s amateurism deregulation and the reconsideration of withholding conditions for such prospects who play on top pro teams; thus, it will be imperative to ensure everyone has benchmarks and as clear data as possible to utilize during the “difference-makers” recruiting attempts, as it is these difference-makers, that will pose 12.02.4 interpretation problems in regard to their compensation limits, so now — correctly — it won’t be their teammates that affect their amateur status, rather their own (financial) relationship with a club; and that is exactly where each institution would love to have immediate financial reference points updated constantly per each region, for each sport and for each recruited prospect. If legislation continues to move along this deregulation path, it is conceivable that very meaningful research, practically useful for ACP staff, coaches and compliance personnel, would yield lists of allowable compensation limits for each region, broken down per sport, level, league, etc, i.e. hypothesize that in A1 Women’s basketball in Greece a prospect’s benefit from a club should not go over appx. 500 Euros/month as a total deemed permissible per several of the 12.02.4 actual and necessary expenses, in Paris and London those would be higher due to higher cost of living, in other parts of the world considerably lower… And there is still a tremendously significant point that policy-drafting bodies featuring learned colleagues and especially the ones trained in the fine art of the Law cannot discount. And that is the valid concern raised in various courtrooms of this country this past year and surely in ensuing ones as well, barring anticipated waves of litigation settlements, that progressive compromise of what traditionally has been the most successful line of defense and the one most appreciated and upheld by courts, amateurism, will lead to dangerous pitfalls in legal cases’ management, where more and more lower courts and even the appellate adjudication levels will hold that NCAA interpretations and applications of amateurism may no longer pass muster as effortlessly as in the past. On this more here and here. [...]

]]> http://www.kaburakis.com/2010/03/13/proposal-2009-22-in-2010/comment-page-1/#comment-120 Dr. Anastasios Kaburakis » Amateurism Policy news and props. Sat, 13 Mar 2010 06:44:08 +0000 http://www.kaburakis.com/?p=526#comment-120 [...] Proposal 2009-22 progress in 2010 and commentary here. [...] [...] Proposal 2009-22 progress in 2010 and commentary here. [...]

]]> http://www.kaburakis.com/2010/01/19/amateurism-policy-news-and-props/comment-page-1/#comment-119 Dr. Anastasios Kaburakis » Proposal 2009-22 in 2010 Sat, 13 Mar 2010 06:41:05 +0000 http://www.kaburakis.com/?p=407#comment-119 [...] For a retrospect on Proposal 2009-22, refer to earlier entries here. [...] [...] For a retrospect on Proposal 2009-22, refer to earlier entries here. [...]

]]> http://www.kaburakis.com/2010/01/19/amateurism-policy-news-and-props/comment-page-1/#comment-58 Become A Professional And Retain Student-Athlete Eligibility – SportsAgentBlog.com | Sports Agent News Sat, 24 Oct 2009 14:53:52 +0000 http://www.kaburakis.com/?p=407#comment-58 [...] Management Graduate Program at Southern Illinois University Edwardsville.  He wanted to share the announcement of NCAA Division I Proposal 2009-22.  The expectation is that the proposal will pass and go into effect on August 1, 2010.  Tassos [...] [...] Management Graduate Program at Southern Illinois University Edwardsville.  He wanted to share the announcement of NCAA Division I Proposal 2009-22.  The expectation is that the proposal will pass and go into effect on August 1, 2010.  Tassos [...]

]]> http://www.kaburakis.com/2010/01/19/amateurism-policy-news-and-props/comment-page-1/#comment-54 Dr. Anastasios Kaburakis » International Student-Athletes & NCAA Tue, 20 Oct 2009 16:00:03 +0000 http://www.kaburakis.com/?p=407#comment-54 [...] to the amateurism developments elaborated here, it is good to review the article on international student-athletes in the Fall edition of [...] [...] to the amateurism developments elaborated here, it is good to review the article on international student-athletes in the Fall edition of [...]

]]>