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]

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:
Sifaka said:
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.
Expand ...
Randy Orton Wrestling GIF by WWE

Ouch!
 
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.
 
.-.
hoopsfan22 said:
That sucks because UConn doesn't have the money to compete with the $EC.
Expand ...
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
 
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.
 
.-.
visitingcock said:
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.
Expand ...

To be clear. The NCAA D1 Football playoffs are managed by the 10 FBS football conferences. The NCAA has nothing to do with them.
 
oldude said:
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.
Expand ...
My friends among the Wooly Mammoth community have stated unequivocally that they don't want Emmert polluting their gene pool.
 
oldude said:
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.
Expand ...
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.
 
hoopsfan22 said:
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.
Expand ...
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.
 
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.
 
LoboDays said:
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.
Expand ...
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 $$$$$$$$.
 
.-.
LoboDays said:
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.
Expand ...
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.
 
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.
 
Probably easier to just get rid of college sports at this point than continuing the charade of pretending these are anything but semi-pro athletes. If a free $200,000 education isn't enough, cool, go play in the D-league.
 
LoboDays said:
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.
Expand ...
Funny how hot messes seem to follow him around. Mediocrity personified.
 
.-.
Enjoyed this part by Kavanaugh:
"To be sure, the NCAA and its member colleges maintain important traditions that have become part of the fabric of America—game days in Tuscaloosa and South Bend; the packed gyms in Storrs and Durham; the women’s and men’s lacrosse championships on Memorial Day weekend; track and field meets in Eugene; the spring softball and baseball World Series in Oklahoma City and Omaha; the list goes on. 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."
 
Will the STUDENT/athletes be paying their own tuition, going forward, now? I have a real problem with students being paid to play. They are already getting hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of education, up to and including in some cases, a Masters degree, tutors to help them with their classes, and all the workout gear that they can possibly dream of, simply because they can dribble a basketball, or throw a football. Meanwhile, the kid who plays intramural basketball (is that even still a thing?) has to pay their tuition, pay for their own sweats and sneakers, all while, in most cases, trying to fit it in between their classes, studying, and a job.
 
Shenandoah said:
Will the STUDENT/athletes be paying their own tuition, going forward, now? I have a real problem with students being paid to play. They are already getting hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of education, up to and including in some cases, a Masters degree, tutors to help them with their classes, and all the workout gear that they can possibly dream of, simply because they can dribble a basketball, or throw a football. Meanwhile, the kid who plays intramural basketball (is that even still a thing?) has to pay their tuition, pay for their own sweats and sneakers, all while, in most cases, trying to fit it in between their classes, studying, and a job.
Expand ...
I want to say they should pay their own way, however, I keep coming back to this: if they weren't basketball players but instead math majors on an academic scholarship, how would we feel about them making money from their name, image, or likeness which is something every college kid that's not a student-athlete can already do without consequence? What about college kids on academic scholarships that also have jobs?
 
CocoHusky said:
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.
Expand ...
“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.



WORKERS! The decision is full of references to "workers." That is why I say the next rounds of litigation will be (1) minimum wage claims which will end up being a class action; and (2) worker's comp. claims for injuries.

MINIMUM WAGE: Basically there is a 2 or 3 year statute of limitations depending on the state. Every athlete above club level can argue that they were entitled to $7.75 per hour for the past two or three years. (Could be more under state laws.) What about Seattle State? $15.00 per hour since that law has been in effect anyway). Practice time, game time, travel time certainly would require payment. Class and study time would probably not. What about workouts and training? If the players can show that coaches were involved or even gave them a training plan, probably compensable. But then, does the school get to deduct the value of tuition? Maybe not because it is a requirement of the job. Dorms? Meal plans?

WORKERS COMP; This has a one year limitation, So, can a player who was injured in the past year file suit? Probably if he can show permanent injury or he missed "income" while in recovery? say somebody blows out a knee or two. All will say that ruined their hopes of a pro career. Pain compensation? Knees will hurt the rest of their lives (okay, maybe just rainy days) Are schools going to be required to pay for workers comp insurance like other employers?

And workers in a shop have a right to unionize - or reject unions in most Southern states.
 
hoopsfan22 said:
Probably easier to just get rid of college sports at this point than continuing the charade of pretending these are anything but semi-pro athletes. If a free $200,000 education isn't enough, cool, go play in the D-league.
Expand ...
I'm always triggered negatively by the notion that an athletic scholarship is a "free" education. For those that continue to think it is a free education try earning one. If you are fortunate enough to earn an athletic scholarship, imagine what happens when a student athlete (excluding those attending UNC) don't feel like going to class or practice. Imagine the same of the band member or that talented Chemistry student who might also be on scholarship.
 
hoopsfan22 said:
That sucks because UConn doesn't have the money to compete with the $EC.
Expand ...
Undoubtedly true, however, UConn’s brand value for woman’s basketball is likely considerably greater than all but a few SEC teams.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,523
Messages
4,580,415
Members
10,490
Latest member
7774Forever


Top Bottom