- Joined
- Aug 13, 2013
- Messages
- 8,896
- Reaction Score
- 8,431
If you look at Kavanaugh's add on to the decision...it may be telling...
“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.”
Now, the P5 might be able to pay a fair market rate that is different than what is the market rate for a player at program like Tulane or Akron. If the Justices want player remuneration tied to the revenue that they produce for the school, surely Alabama, LSU, Ohio State, et al, should offer more.
“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.”
Now, the P5 might be able to pay a fair market rate that is different than what is the market rate for a player at program like Tulane or Akron. If the Justices want player remuneration tied to the revenue that they produce for the school, surely Alabama, LSU, Ohio State, et al, should offer more.