CFB fans react with mixed opinions as NCAA NIL rules overturned by federal judge citing "antitrust law": "Incredibly disappointed"

The NCAA lost the legal battle over having power around its rules and regulations regarding name, image and likeness (NIL) deals. A federal judge recently overturned the NCAA's NIL rules and barred the organization from enforcing its prohibitions on NIL compensations and deals for recruits.

As per the ruling, the federal judge granted a preliminary injunction as demanded by the states of Tennessee and Virginia on Friday. It now puts a restriction on the NCAA from barring and punishing athletes and boosters for negotiating NIL deals during the recruiting process or in the transfer portal.

US District Judge Clifton Corker stated that the prohibitions were in violation of antitrust laws and harmful to students.

"The NCAA's prohibition likely violates federal antitrust laws and harm student-athletes."

This decision has left CFB fans divided over the future of how NIL deals will have a major impact on the game of college football in the coming days. One fan went on to talk about how this decision will now have a pay-for-play implication and increase recruiting inducements.

I'm incredibly disappointed, but not surprised, because Judge Corker is making this ruling with a very limited understanding of the facts and their implications. I was expecting a much narrower injunction, but it didn't happen. What's most disturbing is he did this despite the memorandum acknowledging the rules were put in place to reduce recruiting inducements. He seems to believe that pay-for-play rules can be enforced in this NIL world, which is a laughable concept.

Here's the tweet for the same:

Here are a few more reactions talking about the negative implications of overturning the NCAA's NIL rules:

On the other hand, some fans are also in support of this ruling and talked about how this has been going on for years now behind closed doors.

---

Tennessee's victory against the NCAA in legal battle

The National Collegiate Athletics Association puts restrictions on student-athletes from signing NIL deals that are meant to capture the interest of these players playing for a particular program.

The attorneys general of Tennessee and Virginia filed a lawsuit on January 31 arguing that these rules illegally restrict student-athletes from opportunities by hampering their option of agreeing to a NIL deal before deciding on which school to go to.

The lawsuit was filed one day after Tennessee's chancellor talked about how the program's athletic department was being investigated for potential recruiting violations.