OT: - NCAA loses in SCOTUS in a 9-0 decision [merged thread] | The Boneyard

OT: NCAA loses in SCOTUS in a 9-0 decision [merged thread]

Bama fan

" As long as you lend a hand"
Joined
Jan 11, 2017
Messages
6,387
Reaction Score
36,781
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.
 

CocoHusky

1,000,001 BY points
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
17,208
Reaction Score
73,885
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.
Mark must have seen this coming:
"Since that time, many states have enacted NIL legislation and 10 state laws can take effect this July. It is therefore essential we now enact rules before the end of the month,"

 

Sifaka

O sol nascerá amanhã.
Joined
Dec 21, 2017
Messages
962
Reaction Score
8,456
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.

Gorsuch's opinion is highly restrained in scope. Yet its reasoning contains some gems.

“The NCAA does not contest that its restraints affect interstate trade and commerce and are thus subject to the Sherman Act. See D. Ct. Op., at 1066. The NCAA acknowledges that this Court already analyzed (and struck down) some of its restraints as anticompetitive in Board of Regents. And it admits, as it must, that the Court did all this only after observing that the Sherman Act had already been applied to other nonprofit organizations—and that “the economic significance of the NCAA’s nonprofit character is questionable at best” given that “the NCAA and its member institutions are in fact organized to maximize revenues.” “

Emphasis added.

Finally, before anyone goes off half-cocked, assuming that this court ruling allows schools or conferences to pay athletes, the ruling very blatantly limits the decision to
benefits directly involving education, such as payment for graduate school tuition.
This ruling does not include any sort of salary or other monetary compensation such as that received by professional players.

It's only 45 pages. Please read at least the 2 page summary before jumping to conclusions. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-512_gfbh.pdf
 
Last edited:

CocoHusky

1,000,001 BY points
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
17,208
Reaction Score
73,885
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.
Randy Orton Wrestling GIF by WWE

Ouch!
 
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
5,057
Reaction Score
17,749
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.
 
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
5,057
Reaction Score
17,749
That sucks because UConn doesn't have the money to compete with the $EC.
Will football money be spent on women athletes?

One thing I like, The potential effect on baseball. Basically, schools can only give 11.5 scholarship while having a roster of @ 25 players. The players usually only got half scholarships and had to make up the difference with other scholarships or student grants and loans.

Most minority students couldn't afford to play college baseball. Instead, they chose to go to the minor leagues. NCAAbaseball was predominantly white. Now, the field is levelled
 

RockyMTblue2

Don't Look Up!
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
21,882
Reaction Score
95,770

oldude

bamboo lover
Joined
Nov 15, 2016
Messages
16,733
Reaction Score
147,317
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.
 

oldude

bamboo lover
Joined
Nov 15, 2016
Messages
16,733
Reaction Score
147,317
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.

To be clear. The NCAA D1 Football playoffs are managed by the 10 FBS football conferences. The NCAA has nothing to do with them.
 

Sifaka

O sol nascerá amanhã.
Joined
Dec 21, 2017
Messages
962
Reaction Score
8,456
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.
My friends among the Wooly Mammoth community have stated unequivocally that they don't want Emmert polluting their gene pool.
 
Joined
Sep 19, 2018
Messages
7,357
Reaction Score
27,369
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.
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.
 

oldude

bamboo lover
Joined
Nov 15, 2016
Messages
16,733
Reaction Score
147,317
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.
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.

Since that time the NCAA, and the institutions they represent, have done everything possible to delay implementation of the inevitable. The time is now at hand for the NCAA to step up or fade into oblivion.
 
Joined
Feb 10, 2021
Messages
1,064
Reaction Score
6,155
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.
 

oldude

bamboo lover
Joined
Nov 15, 2016
Messages
16,733
Reaction Score
147,317
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.
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 $$$$$$$$.
 
Joined
Sep 19, 2018
Messages
7,357
Reaction Score
27,369
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.
 
Joined
Mar 8, 2016
Messages
3,734
Reaction Score
15,178
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.
 

eebmg

Fair and Balanced
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
20,037
Reaction Score
88,660
Am I the only one who thinks SCOTUS sounds terrible? No majesty in it like the "Supreme Court" and maybe also sounds a bit dicey. :eek:
 

CocoHusky

1,000,001 BY points
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
17,208
Reaction Score
73,885
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.
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.
 

Online statistics

Members online
153
Guests online
2,363
Total visitors
2,516

Forum statistics

Threads
155,752
Messages
4,030,463
Members
9,864
Latest member
leepaul


Top Bottom