• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Supreme Court spanks NCAA on player "compensation"

horribilisfan8184

Well-known member
https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/31679946/supreme-court-sides-former-players-dispute-ncaa-compensation

The first step is here.

WASHINGTON -- In a ruling that could help push changes in college athletics, the Supreme Court on Monday unanimously sided with a group of former college athletes in a dispute with the NCAA over rules limiting certain compensation.

The high court ruled that NCAA limits on the education-related benefits that colleges can offer athletes who play Division I basketball and football can't be enforced.

"It's tremendous to win this 9-0. Hopefully it will be the major next step on the road to a true fair competitive system for these athletes. It should have positive effects immediately on NIL. We look forward to a world that's better for college athletes today than it was yesterday," Jeffrey Kessler, the plaintiffs' attorney, told ESPN's Dan Murphy.

Under current NCAA rules, students cannot be paid, and the scholarship money colleges can offer is capped at the cost of attending the school. The NCAA had defended its rules as necessary to preserve the amateur nature of college sports.

EDITOR'S PICKS

NCAA conference bosses eye minimalist NIL plan
But the former athletes who brought the case, including former West Virginia football player Shawne Alston, argued that the NCAA's rules on education-related compensation were unfair and violate federal antitrust law designed to promote competition.

The case doesn't decide whether students can be paid salaries. Instead, the ruling will help determine whether schools decide to offer athletes tens of thousands of dollars in education-related benefits for things such as computers, graduate scholarships, tutoring, study abroad and internships.
 
Therein lies the rub:

Jon Wilner
@wilnerhotline
SCOTUS ruling another reminder of difficult intercollegiate sports operating model: FBS schools have two profitable subsidiaries and 16+ that lose money. In the business and pro sports worlds, that structure doesn’t exist
 
Justice Kavanaugh sees it this way:

"The bottom line is that the NCAA and its member colleges are suppressing the pay of student athletes who collectively generate billions of dollars in revenues for colleges every year. Those enormous sums of money flow to seemingly everyone except the student athletes. College presidents, athletic directors, coaches, conference commissioners, and NCAA executives take in six- and seven-figure salaries. Colleges build lavish new facilities. But the student athletes who generate the revenues, many of whom are African American and from lower-income backgrounds, end up with little or nothing,"

But those traditions alone cannot justify the NCAA’s decision to build a massive money-raising enterprise on the backs of student athletes who are not fairly compensated. 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."

I wonder now if college amateurs playing in Open golf or tennis tournaments can now keep their tourney placement prize monies? Or is this the end of the "amateur" fiction?
 
Interesting take from a venture capital guy: http://pointsandfigures.com/2021/06/21/fascinating-ruling-by-scotus-on-athletes-vs-the-ncaa/
 
HelenaHandBasket said:
Therein lies the rub:

Jon Wilner
@wilnerhotline
SCOTUS ruling another reminder of difficult intercollegiate sports operating model: FBS schools have two profitable subsidiaries and 16+ that lose money. In the business and pro sports worlds, that structure doesn’t exist

Orwellian forecast for college sports. The box is wide open now.
 
horribilisfan8184 said:
Justice Kavanaugh sees it this way:

"The bottom line is that the NCAA and its member colleges are suppressing the pay of student athletes who collectively generate billions of dollars in revenues for colleges every year. Those enormous sums of money flow to seemingly everyone except the student athletes. College presidents, athletic directors, coaches, conference commissioners, and NCAA executives take in six- and seven-figure salaries. Colleges build lavish new facilities. But the student athletes who generate the revenues, many of whom are African American and from lower-income backgrounds, end up with little or nothing,"

But those traditions alone cannot justify the NCAA’s decision to build a massive money-raising enterprise on the backs of student athletes who are not fairly compensated. 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."

I wonder now if college amateurs playing in Open golf or tennis tournaments can now keep their tourney placement prize monies? Or is this the end of the "amateur" fiction?

THEREIN lies the rub. Like everything else these days, it seen as a racial/racist issue.
 
fanofzoo said:
HelenaHandBasket said:
Therein lies the rub:

Jon Wilner
@wilnerhotline
SCOTUS ruling another reminder of difficult intercollegiate sports operating model: FBS schools have two profitable subsidiaries and 16+ that lose money. In the business and pro sports worlds, that structure doesn’t exist
Orwellian forecast for college sports. The box is wide open now.
And guess where the first cuts will come?

How many assistant coaches will be dumped from the non-revenue sports? At least at programs that already lose money ... which is all but a couple dozen. Also, I can easily see a push to reduce the number of sports the schools have to sponsor to qualify for Division I status.
 
This will present some interesting title 9 issues, since only football and men's basketball make any money.
 
AZGrizFan said:
horribilisfan8184 said:
Justice Kavanaugh sees it this way:

"The bottom line is that the NCAA and its member colleges are suppressing the pay of student athletes who collectively generate billions of dollars in revenues for colleges every year. Those enormous sums of money flow to seemingly everyone except the student athletes. College presidents, athletic directors, coaches, conference commissioners, and NCAA executives take in six- and seven-figure salaries. Colleges build lavish new facilities. But the student athletes who generate the revenues, many of whom are African American and from lower-income backgrounds, end up with little or nothing,"

But those traditions alone cannot justify the NCAA’s decision to build a massive money-raising enterprise on the backs of student athletes who are not fairly compensated. 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."

I wonder now if college amateurs playing in Open golf or tennis tournaments can now keep their tourney placement prize monies? Or is this the end of the "amateur" fiction?

THEREIN lies the rub. Like everything else these days, it seen as a racial/racist issue.

kavanaugh, the trump appointee wrote that opinion.
 
argh! said:
AZGrizFan said:
THEREIN lies the rub. Like everything else these days, it seen as a racial/racist issue.

kavanaugh, the trump appointee wrote that opinion.

yes, the irony of that can't possibly escape those who pilloried him during his hearings.

On second thought, it probably does escape them. :lol: :lol:
 
horribilisfan8184 said:
I wonder now if college amateurs playing in Open golf or tennis tournaments can now keep their tourney placement prize monies? Or is this the end of the "amateur" fiction?

Well, for golf, that would have to include the involvement of the USGA. If you think the NCAA has a stick up its ass, oh buddy, do I have a useless bureaucracy to tell you about . . .
 
CDAGRIZ said:
horribilisfan8184 said:
I wonder now if college amateurs playing in Open golf or tennis tournaments can now keep their tourney placement prize monies? Or is this the end of the "amateur" fiction?

Well, for golf, that would have to include the involvement of the USGA. If you think the NCAA has a stick up its ass, oh buddy, do I have a useless bureaucracy to tell you about . . .

:lol: :lol:
 
argh! said:
AZGrizFan said:
THEREIN lies the rub. Like everything else these days, it seen as a racial/racist issue.

kavanaugh, the trump appointee wrote that opinion.

Open your eyes a little on this. Facebook, Twitter, Amazon are taking notice. Kavanaugh knows the Sherman anti trust act inside and out.
 
This will have devastating consequences for college athletics. 3 sports make any real kinda of money for colleges. The P5 will fair better but most G5 and FCS will struggle. Non revenue sports will be cut to be able to offer something to football, men’s bball and women’s bball. So then what happens if the NCAA keeps the minimum number of sports offered to be DI? We could see many schools dropping to DII or lower. One could easily see schools having four or five sports.
Will colleges then tighten up and sign contracts with the athletes so they have to stay in school four to five years and if they leave or break contract they don’t receive benefits or have to pay back benefits? If that happens do we then see the XFL or similar become a football G league and take kids out of high school? Colleges will go after only the most elite players and colleges basically become farm league for NFL and NBA. Does the NFL and NBA then start funneling money into the colleges to get these athletes? I just don’t see this being a good thing in the long run. Probably wrong but makes me wonder.
 
OrgonGriz said:
This will have devastating consequences for college athletics. 3 sports make any real kinda of money for colleges. The P5 will fair better but most G5 and FCS will struggle. Non revenue sports will be cut to be able to offer something to football, men’s bball and women’s bball. So then what happens if the NCAA keeps the minimum number of sports offered to be DI? We could see many schools dropping to DII or lower. One could easily see schools having four or five sports.
Will colleges then tighten up and sign contracts with the athletes so they have to stay in school four to five years and if they leave or break contract they don’t receive benefits or have to pay back benefits? If that happens do we then see the XFL or similar become a football G league and take kids out of high school? Colleges will go after only the most elite players and colleges basically become farm league for NFL and NBA. Does the NFL and NBA then start funneling money into the colleges to get these athletes? I just don’t see this being a good thing in the long run. Probably wrong but makes me wonder.

With CFB, I could see a situation where the top programs get the top athletes because they are willing to spend the money to get them and are able to give them higher profiles for draft status. With CBB, I bet the best recruits will go to the programs with the most money and most success putting guys in the NBA. The players will probably only stay like one year before declaring for the draft. Imagine a college sports landscape like that. ;)
 
CDAGRIZ said:
OrgonGriz said:
This will have devastating consequences for college athletics. 3 sports make any real kinda of money for colleges. The P5 will fair better but most G5 and FCS will struggle. Non revenue sports will be cut to be able to offer something to football, men’s bball and women’s bball. So then what happens if the NCAA keeps the minimum number of sports offered to be DI? We could see many schools dropping to DII or lower. One could easily see schools having four or five sports.
Will colleges then tighten up and sign contracts with the athletes so they have to stay in school four to five years and if they leave or break contract they don’t receive benefits or have to pay back benefits? If that happens do we then see the XFL or similar become a football G league and take kids out of high school? Colleges will go after only the most elite players and colleges basically become farm league for NFL and NBA. Does the NFL and NBA then start funneling money into the colleges to get these athletes? I just don’t see this being a good thing in the long run. Probably wrong but makes me wonder.

With CFB, I could see a situation where the top programs get the top athletes because they are willing to spend the money to get them and are able to give them higher profiles for draft status. With CBB, I bet the best recruits will go to the programs with the most money and most success putting guys in the NBA. The players will probably only stay like one year before declaring for the draft. Imagine a college sports landscape like that. ;)

Damn! Are there schools out there that believe in the one and done philosophy! Do you think Calipari tells a kid "Come play for me for a year and you'll be a millionaire this time next year."

I thought schools in conferences like the SEC already got the best players and have the best facilities. Maybe I'm wrong but aren't there a few teams that get more than one player drafted in the first round every year? Guess I've been missing an awful lot and it strikes me as strange that the Power 5 coaches who advocated for the Full Cost of Attendance are the ones in the filthy rich conferences.
 
Boosters are back in business. The athletes won't have to fake "work" for the car dealer to get the car and $5K per month, just do a commercial or ad poster selling their personal endorsement. That's what will get them to the school. As for compensation, it is the successful team not the star player that drives the big revenues. Giving the athletes a% cut of gate and broadcast revenue as a group with equal distribution should survive employment law scrutiny
 
CDAGRIZ said:
OrgonGriz said:
This will have devastating consequences for college athletics. 3 sports make any real kinda of money for colleges. The P5 will fair better but most G5 and FCS will struggle. Non revenue sports will be cut to be able to offer something to football, men’s bball and women’s bball. So then what happens if the NCAA keeps the minimum number of sports offered to be DI? We could see many schools dropping to DII or lower. One could easily see schools having four or five sports.
Will colleges then tighten up and sign contracts with the athletes so they have to stay in school four to five years and if they leave or break contract they don’t receive benefits or have to pay back benefits? If that happens do we then see the XFL or similar become a football G league and take kids out of high school? Colleges will go after only the most elite players and colleges basically become farm league for NFL and NBA. Does the NFL and NBA then start funneling money into the colleges to get these athletes? I just don’t see this being a good thing in the long run. Probably wrong but makes me wonder.

With CFB, I could see a situation where the top programs get the top athletes because they are willing to spend the money to get them and are able to give them higher profiles for draft status. With CBB, I bet the best recruits will go to the programs with the most money and most success putting guys in the NBA. The players will probably only stay like one year before declaring for the draft. Imagine a college sports landscape like that. ;)

The horror. Are you telling me we will no longer be competitive with Alabama and Ohio State for football recruits? :twisted: :twisted:
 
AZGrizFan said:
CDAGRIZ said:
With CFB, I could see a situation where the top programs get the top athletes because they are willing to spend the money to get them and are able to give them higher profiles for draft status. With CBB, I bet the best recruits will go to the programs with the most money and most success putting guys in the NBA. The players will probably only stay like one year before declaring for the draft. Imagine a college sports landscape like that. ;)

The horror. Are you telling me we will no longer be competitive with Alabama and Ohio State for football recruits? :twisted: :twisted:

We may not be competitive with the JMU/NDSU's of the world either.
 
I am wondering where the line is going to be drawn between fair pay and flat out bribery. Maybe there isn't going to be one. This is going to be interesting to watch unfold.
 
Back
Top