Supreme Court rules for Athletes v. NCAA

Good for Justice Kavanaugh to bring simplicity to what is a simple argument: the current NCAA model is based on anti-competitive, monopolistic competition between the NCAA member schools, where the students athletes are merely pawns. Title 9 does not change that. Any person who attempts to use Title 9 as a reason to deny compensation for college athletes is being naive at best and disingenuous at worst. If it were not for the billions generated by Mens BB and Football, there would be no women’s sports. Does this mean that major universities will have to dig in their pockets to subsidize women’s sports more heavily? Yes. Does it mean that some schools will choose to cancel all sports? Certainly possible. Ultimately, it is what it is.

It should also be added, that the language used in the opinion can easily be applied to non-P5 schools as well. The current CFP model automatically prevents non-P5 schools from competing on a level playing field. How do we know? Consider this stat that one of our fine Coogs posted some days ago: currently every P5 member school gets $67M a year from the CFP even if they don’t win a single game. On the other hand, if a G5 school were to actually make the current CFP, the most they could earn is $10M. That is in spite of on the field performance or any other competitive aspect of the respective teams. If that is the case, then the G5 should and can file an anti-trust suit along the same lines that the players did. They could argue that the CFP (1) is a restraint of trade, (2) harms the G5 schools by its restraint of trade by requiring such schools to compete on an uneven playing field where no matter how good they are, the P5 schools can simply refuse to even allow them to compete and (3) as a result, the G5 schools suffer monetary harm. This could be easily quantified. It should also be added that the because they CFP is a system set up by the media networks, they may also be on the hook. Remember that the USFL sued the NFL under similar arguments and won. It’s just that because the person who brought the suit, Donald Trump, could only show that the NFLs anticompetitive behavior resulted in a loss of $1, which when trebled, became $3. As they say, bad facts make bad law.

Ultimately, the market will decide what people are willing to watch. If there are people out there who will no longer watch college sports because the young men who generate all of the value are now paid, well that says more about them as people than the athletes.

I tell you who I am really sad for in all of this, Dabo Sweeney. I mean, what is he going to do now? He said he would quit if they started paying athletes. I guess Lakewood Church is always looking for a few good charlatans!

1 Like

I guess the only difference is that the NCAA could argue that these are students, not workers or employees, and as such, that different rules apply.

The USSC isn’t really seeing it that way though, especially not Kavanaugh.

Given some of the court’s language the NCAA should step carefully in formatting their proposals for a 12 team playoff.

1 Like

Athletes are already compensated. 99% of scholarship athletes have more spent on them by schools then they would have gotten on the open market.

I wonder if the present media contracts could be seen by the Courts as promoting anti-competitive behavior?

How many schools do you think can afford to keep on bidding up the price of coaches, facilities, and now, players? The bulk would come from the SEC and B1G, with a handful from the other conferences.

Schools could make athletes sign a contract saying they get a free education as compensation and the school gets all advertising rights. That would make it legal, the ones that dont sign can go pro

We now are off to the races in College Sports!

Notice that scholarship limits are not changed. Thus only 25 can obtain the “Tuscaloosa Compensation Package” each year.

Only so many Razer Blade 15 laptops available for taking notes in class.

I doubt too much will change in way of who gets who; the rich will stay rich and the poor will still be poor.

Actually, the divide between the haves and have nots may actually GROW as a result of this, with P5s and blue bloods now being able to “out compensate” the rest, and thus, gain an even BIGGER recruiting advantage than they already have.

Hell, Kavanaugh seemed to suggest that only the MARKET should limit athlete compensation, which would open up the door to salaries, signing bonuses, cars, etc.

If that were taken to its logical extreme, then national signing day would become, in essence, a semi-pro free agency day, with the highest ranked recruits signing for the most lucrative compensation packages provided by the highest bidders.

In home recruiting visits may be replaced by meetings between school representatives and SPORTS AGENTS.

I’ve been saying for years the NCAA needs to get in front of this ever getting to the courts, especially the supreme court. Their model was complete BS and illegal. They could have been slowly adjusting things but dug their feet in and now are reacting to legislature in states and a supreme court ruling.

On the 12 team playoff part, this ruling could be great for the G5. Likely makes them set up payouts like the basketball tournament with credits for making it and advancing. Instead of the G5 just getting thrown some pennies and being told they are lucky to have a spot, now it should be a more fair system. Of course the SEC will still end up making the most money with multiple bids and championships, but if an AAC team makes a run it would mean big money for the conference (just like our final four run was).

Non-Athletes already do this.

The best High School talent gets offered various scholarships, Grants, On Campus jobs, and career promises as to future jobs.

Once you hit your Junior Year Internships open up and thus more Aid. My oldest Grandchild is going to Barcelona next Spring and will then acquire a Summer Intern job there for 2022. Her only cost is airfare. She is Straight A’s and thus can earn this reward.

This will sort itself out. Amazing things will happen.

What is the “open market” to you? Sounds like you are trying to talk about a closed market system where only some minor league sports organization is involved. College football is part of any real open market and many players are valued over the current scholarship costs.

Just a thought, if the players get paid, they are then employees. As such, are they then free to opt out of post season? It should be be in the employment agreement, aka letter of intent, that they cannot opt out of post season unless injured.

Don’t think you have to worry about Dabo going anywhere until Saban retires. Dabo is one of the good guys in sports.

It’s not going to be salaries which opens up taxation of athletic depts etc.

UH already has employees, including some current students. They withhold taxes and report earnings. No reason schools can’t process payments for players. Not advocating for it, just saying that it would all be within the scope of the school, which already charges for tickets to opera, theater, etc. in addition to athletics revenues.

Get the **** outta here with slave bs. How can you even equate anything today to the pain and suffering of slavery? I dont care if the mods kick me out of here. It just pisses me off.

4 Likes

The only equating I am making is rich people making billions off of unpaid labor. That’s slavery.