Mark must have seen this coming:SCOTUS voted 9-0 against NCAA in case involving the granting of education related gifts to student athletes. Opinions indicate trouble for NCAA on compensation issues going forward.
To be clear, this was a narrowly defined antitrust case, but the vehemence of the decision was unusual.
“Nowhere else in America can businesses get away with agreeing not to pay their workers a fair market rate on the theory that their product is defined by not paying their workers a fair market rate. And under ordinary principles of antitrust law, it is not evident why college sports should be any different. The NCAA is not above the law,” Kavanaugh wrote.
“To the extent [the NCAA] means to propose a sort of judicially ordained immunity from the terms of the Sherman Act for its restraints of trade—that we should overlook its restrictions because they happen to fall at the intersection of higher education, sports, and money—we cannot agree,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the unanimous court.
minus 2 hoursHow long until schools are just paying players directly?
That sucks because UConn doesn't have the money to compete with the $EC.minus 2 hours
Will football money be spent on women athletes?That sucks because UConn doesn't have the money to compete with the $EC.
They already do. Lots of fathers driving around in Mercedes Benz.How long until schools are just paying players directly?
9-0 slam dunk.
This is going to reduce the NCAA to a tournament organizer only.
No wonder they seem to be pushing the football 12 team format.
My friends among the Wooly Mammoth community have stated unequivocally that they don't want Emmert polluting their gene pool.Most animals have an incredibly strong instinct towards self-preservation. In the next few days we will all learn if the NCAA has a similar instinct, or if they will go the way of the Woolly Mammoth.
Even if they choose Woolly Mammoth, what schools and tournaments would all those players play in 'cuz it won't be any place you find an NCAA logo.We are literally 24 hrs away from the 2-day meeting of the NCAA Council when they are scheduled to vote on NIL legislation, and a little over a week away from the July 1 date when many states have authorized athletes to begin signing NIL contracts.
Most animals have an incredibly strong instinct towards self-preservation. In the next few days we will all learn if the NCAA has a similar instinct, or if they will go the way of the Woolly Mammoth.
The NCAA is not going to go to court to defend lawsuits from hundreds of athletes who will be backed by the resources of their respective state governments as well as their colleges and institutions. The case against NIL was resolved in 2014 (NCAA vs O’Bannon). The NCAA lost.Even if they choose Woolly Mammoth, what schools and tournaments would all those players play in 'cuz it won't be any place you find an NCAA logo.
My point is that the NCAA will likely do what they have to in order to survive. Keep in mind that the NCAA is only doing exactly what their member institutions want them to do. The NCAA has effectively avoided compensating athletes for many years at the behest of the D1 member institutions the organization represents. In the end this isn’t about amateurism, competition or educational opportunities for student athletes. It’s all about $$$$$$$$.Emmett earns a 2.7 million salary plus who knows what else. The NCAA will fold as much as they have to before fading into oblivion.
We shall see and hopefully it works out, but I have pretty much zero faith in the NCAA. Getting them to change is a bit like knocking over a refrigerator. As of right now, if any players make money from NIL the NCAA could do any one of: ban a program from play, disqualify said players, vacate wins and championships if those players participate, and/or take away scholarships among a host of other administrative penalties on the NCAA's menu. There's of course the caveat that a UNC has a 0.00000% chance of that applying to them, but for smaller mid-majors like UConn who aren't one of the darling golden goose programs I would not be as confident. Lawsuits might ensue, but by the time cases like that saw a courtroom, the players in question would be well into their pro careers.Emmett earns a 2.7 million salary plus who knows what else. The NCAA will fold as much as they have to before fading into oblivion.
As @Sifaka has already mentioned the scope of the case under question was along very narrow grounds but when you make it through all 45 pages of the "unanimous" decision the SCOTUS essentially took a sledge hammer to EVERY argument the NCAA could possible make for not compensating the players more. The NCAA's amateurism model, anti-trust and charity (tax exempt) status just died when the Court rule that "The NCAA was organized to maximize revenue." Since no further appeal of this decision is possible the NCAA would be accumulating potential additional damages by operating under the old model. Expect a new model that includes full NIL rights for the players with no limits on compensation this fall. I would also expect the additional compensation for players which was the subject of this case such as computers, more sneakers, and possibly increases in stipends and medical benefits for players and dependents shortly. E.g. Dependents of players on full scholarship could receive medical benefits from the schools.The key appears to be the NCAA's ability to reach a consensus, particularly among the schools in the big conferences. Each sport also has its own set of rules with football likely the key. No idea how this can happen.
To repeat some of the points already made, I am not aware that the recent court case had anything to do with schools making direct payments to athletes. Appeared to be tightly tied to "benefits" involving education, which was not fully defined. Seemed to be leading the NCAA to take action without mandating anything specfic.
While there are no court cases I am aware of related to the financial value of scholarships, it is possible for schools to reclassify the "benefit" of scholarships to meet some of the compensation guidelines noted by Kavanaugh. While this could help schools meet some of the legal issues, no idea how this could be administered.
minus 100 yearsminus 2 hours