OT: Huge win for college sports athletes from Supreme Court

Advertisement
Justice Kavanaugh bringing the heat.

“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.”

Unanimous decision 15-0
 
Don't think that's right. The decision is the NCAA can't ban those types of payments or benefits, not that the schools have to do any of that. You will be at a competitive disadvantage if you don't, but from what I have seen schools are not compelled to. Now, if every school does not change anything, that may spur a second anti-trust lawsuit, but that is a different story.

I meant that “can” could be construed to mean they actually want to when the polar opposite is the truth.
 
Advertisement
I meant that “can” could be construed to mean they actually want to when the polar opposite is the truth.
Some schools may want to. Plus, some of the expenses are funny money anyways. Like tuition for graduate school. It's nonsense. There are no unit costs to another person in an MBA program. You aren't hiring more professors for that one person or buying more desks for them.
 
Now maybe we can compete with top 10 teems! All we gots to do is give our players money. Why didn’t da U think of this b4? Oh wait a minute Devin Shapiro knew da secret. What happened to dat dude?
 
Don't think that's right. The decision is the NCAA can't ban those types of payments or benefits, not that the schools have to do any of that. You will be at a competitive disadvantage if you don't, but from what I have seen schools are not compelled to. Now, if every school does not change anything, that may spur a second anti-trust lawsuit, but that is a different story.
Correct. Basically schools have greater flexibility to give students when they need to complete their education. This has nothing to do with paying players for NIL.
 
Advertisement
All this means is schools can pay players more.
A childhood friend is an AD (yes you've heard of the school, no they aren't a big power). Here is their take on today's ruling (apparently much broader $$$ impact to smaller schools than bigger):

"... The COA (Cost of Attendance) is a number determined for all students as determined by an institution's financial aid office. It includes tuition, room, board, transportation, books, fees, and others expenses related to attending the university.

The NCAA only allows student-athletes to receive the maximum GIA (GRANT IN AID). BUT this only includes tuition, books, fees, room, and board ...not really a full COA.

So if you're a student-athlete on a full ride, you're only able to get a maximum GIA under NCAA rules.

This is always less than someone on a full academic scholarship when the university bases that scholarship on a COA... "
 
Correct. Basically schools have greater flexibility to give students when they need to complete their education. This has nothing to do with paying players for NIL.
As I understand, this case focuses on COA vs GIA $$$ determinations.
 
So lets say this evens the playing field in getting kids to come to the U.

If we're now keeping all the top local kids home do we go on a serious run?

I can't see how UM could be stopped if the top kids stay home.
 
Advertisement
Anyone of the opinion that this will hurt other college sports?? In my opinion they need to change the amount of schoolies they give out for baseball. 12 1/2 or whatever minimal amount they allow is a joke.
 
Advertisement
"The NCAA couches its arguments for not paying student athletes in innocuous labels. But the labels cannot disguise the reality: The NCAA's business model would be flatly illegal in almost any other industry in America." - Justice Kavanaugh
 
Advertisement
Back
Top