Supreme Court appears willing to side with college athletes against NCAA in compensation case

[DonViejo]

PUBLISHED WED, MAR 31 202111:43 AM EDTUPDATED WED, MAR 31 202112:22 PM EDT

Tucker Higgins
@IN/TUCKER-HIGGINS-5B162295/
@TUCKERHIGGINS

KEY POINTS

Division I student athletes looked poised for victory in their Supreme Court battle against the National Collegiate Athletic Association over whether the organization may impose restraints on compensation related to education.

The justices appeared skeptical of the claim made by the NCAA that payments to students for things like musical instruments and internships will sour fans who are drawn to the amateur quality of its competitions.

Division I student athletes looked poised for victory in their Supreme Court battle against the National Collegiate Athletic Association over whether the organization may impose restraints on compensation related to education.

During 90 minutes of arguments held by phone Wednesday, the justices appeared skeptical of the claim made by the NCAA that payments to students for things like musical instruments and internships will sour fans who are drawn to the amateur quality of its competitions.

The case is the latest legal challenge over the NCAA’s compensation policies and comes amid a high-profile and related push by student athletes seeking to profit off their own names, images and likenesses. The NCAA’s March Madness basketball tournament will hold its championships for women and men on Sunday and Monday.

Justices appointed by both Republicans and Democrats seemed persuaded by arguments made by the attorney for the student athletes, Jeffrey Kessler, that the NCAA was violating federal antitrust law with its restrictions on education-related payments.

more
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/31/supreme-court-appears-to-favor-college-athletes-in-ncaa-pay-case.html

[obamanut2012]

1. They deserve to be paid, and to make money off their merch

Let's face it, NCAA teams are literally farm leagues in this country.

[jimfields33]

2. I'm cool with it. I'm also cool with stopping college scholarships for sports

The pay can go towards tuition. I’m sorry but I don’t think having both is necessary.

[obamanut2012]

6. I agree!

[uponit7771]

3. K&R, on issues of "likeness" I think the athletes have a solid case

[dalton99a]

4. Share the wealth. Stop treating them like chattel. Pay them.

Face it, college sports is a business, and they are the workers that make the business profitable

[MichMan]

5. Nobody is forced to go to college. Just go straight from HS to the pros

[Celerity]

8. I think there are some rules blocking this, plus for 'football' (US style)

99% of high schoolers would get crushed by grown roided-up men.

I am London raised so only follow real football (what Americans call... cringe....soccer). We did go to a LA Galaxy game whilst I was reading for one of my degrees at UCLA, but it was so not the same level quality of play. Was fun though, and the weather was insanely better than most days/nights at Stamford Bridge, lolol.

[AZProgressive]

11. Look at it from an economics perspective

The NCAA is a cartel.

Monopsony in College Athletics—Posner

The most common type of cartel is an agreement among competitors not to sell their product below a fixed price that will generate monopoly profits for the parties to the agreement. But another type of cartel, termed monopsonistic (from the Greek words for “one” and “purchasing of food”) rather than monopolistic (one seller, versus one buyer in a monopsonized market), is an agreement among competitors not to pay more than a fixed price for a key input, such as labor. By agreeing to pay less, the cartel purchases less of the input (and perhaps of lower quality), because less is supplied at the lower price (and suppliers may lower quality to compensate, by reducing their costs, for the lower price they receive).

The National Collegiate Athletic Association behaves monopsonistically in forbidding its member colleges and universities to pay its athletes. Although cartels, including monopsonistic ones, are generally deemed to be illegal per se under American antitrust law, the NCAA’s monopsonistic behavior has thus far not been successfully challenged. The justification that the NCAA offers—that collegiate athletes are students and would be corrupted by being salaried—coupled with the fact that the members of the NCAA, and the NCAA itself, are formally not-for-profit institutions, have had sufficient appeal to enable the association to continue to impose and enforce its rule against paying student athletes, and a number of subsidiary rules designed to prevent the cheating by cartel members that plagues most cartels.

As Becker points out, were it not for the monopsonistic rule against paying student athletes, these athletes would be paid; the monopsony transfers wealth from them to their “employers,” the colleges. A further consequence is that college teams are smaller and, more important, of lower quality than they would be if the student athletes were paid.

One might ask why colleges choose to collude on the student athlete dimension rather than on some other dimension, such as tuition—agreeing to minimum tuition levels, or maximum scholarships. The answer I think lies in my earlier point—the “justification” (specious though it may be) that paying student athletes would corrupt the educational process, an argument that draws on a tradition of admiration for amateurism even in adult athletic competition, as in tennis until 1968. Efforts to fix the price for a college education would encounter sharper antitrust challenges—and indeed the Ivy League schools were forced by antitrust litigation to drop their attempt to limit competition in scholarship aid, a form of price fixing—in effect colluding on tuition discounts, which is what a scholarship is.

https://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2011/04/monopsony-in-college-athleticsposner.html

[xmas74]

21. In order to enter the NFL draft you must have at least

3 years between high school and entrance. It is preferred that all college eligibility be used up first but an athlete can petition for early entrance and not use up all eligibility. They are still required the 3 years even with early entrance.

The NBA has a requirement of a minimum age of 19 and at least one year out of high school though they've discussed revisiting this and possibly extending it to 2 years.

[MichMan]

26. LeBron James did not attend college and seemed to do OK

How is it that the players don't sue the NFL over their requirement that one must play 3 yrs in college in order to be drafted? That would seem to violate the constitution and be easily overturned in court.

[xmas74]

28. And the draft changed after Lebron James.

How is that a violation of the Constitution? My job states that you must have a minimum of a bachelor's degree and 5 years experience. Could someone sue my employer,stating that's unfair? I'm sure they could but they'd lose.

We don't really have a true minor league for football and basketball, compared to the MLB farm leagues. The time spent in college counts as experience that they wouldn't necessarily have out of high school. Some of the rules are different and the level of play is vastly different than what they had in high school.

I feel like you're here just to argue without doing any research to back up your claims. Do better.

[MichMan]

29. I think paying players will be the ruin of college sports.

My opinion; can't prove it with extensive research and an academic dissertation, if that is what you require.

When it becomes acceptable to pay college players, there will likely be big boosters showering huge sums of money recruiting top players to their colleges. I would hate to see a situation where rich business owners can buy the best team in college football or basketball for their alma mater and obliterate any competition. Should a Phil Knight be able to spend unlimited amounts to ensure that Univ. of Oregon has the best team money can buy ? Maybe Wal Mart could buy the best team in the country for University of Arkansas ? I'm sure many here would disagree with me and think that would be great!

Very few college athletes get drafted in the professional leagues. The remainder should feel fortunate that they were able to receive a full ride college scholarship to a top college and earn a degree, without incurring student loan debt like their other fellow students.

[xmas74]

31. I live in a college town.

Those athletes are not allowed to work while in school. Many don't know that. Some come from very poor families. They need some kind of income just for hygiene products, a trip home during the holidays, school supplies, even a occasional pizza with friends.

What happens if they are injured? They lose their scholarship.


At least guarantee if they maintain their GPA they can retain their scholarship, even if injured. A monthly stipend would go a long way with some students.

[MichMan]

32. A stipend would be OK

The reason they are not allowed to work is because of the fear a booster would give a top player a no show job for $100 per hour.

If the NCAA throws that out completely and states they are free to accept unlimited compensation, the same booster could offer them 100k per year or more as a recruit to come there in the first place. If that happens, college sports will be ruined.

[FlyingPiggy]

7. I am glad to hear this. College athletes need to be compensated for

Their contribution.

[MichMan]

9. They are compensated with free college

[FlyingPiggy]

10. that is chump change compared to what they are making the colleges

[MichMan]

12. Just how much does a 2nd string linebacker make for the college...

who doesn't even play until his senior year? How much does a plot vaulter or volleyball player make for the college over and above his/her free scholarship?

[AZProgressive]

13. I would let the invisible hand of the free market

Decide the salaries.

[FlyingPiggy]

14. how much do you think starters brings? let me tell you. BILLIONS. maybe not your pole vaulters (duh)

The question is rather, how much money does pole vaulting bring to the school?

Your marquee sports stars are the ones bringing in the bucks. SO not every athlete will be treated the same. But if you're a marquee player in the NCAA march madness or football bowls, you should be getting compensated well for your contribution.

[MichMan]

15. Billions ? Each starting player?

There was a recent controversy with the NCAA Men's teams getting much more lavish treatment than the Women in the Basketball tournament.

Given that men's sports generate a lot more revenue than the comparable women's sports, seems that not only do you think that the disparity is proper, the male players should also receive much higher compensation than the women as well. Doesn't seem equitable to me, so I will disagree.

[FlyingPiggy]

16. seriously? you honestly think 1 starting player would bring in billions? should not even be a

question. And I never said anything about the disparity between men v women's compensation (which there clearly is). I only commented that college sports players should be compensated for their contribution. I never said how or to what extent.

[MichMan]

17. You said that players should be compensated for their billions of revenue contribution

"how much do you think starters brings? let me tell you. BILLIONS. maybe not your pole vaulters (duh)"

While I was the one that mentioned disparities in gender treatments, that is a logical consequence of saying that players need to be compensated differently based upon the amount of revenue they earn the schools.

Men's sports bring in substantually more revenue than women's sports. Not only would that mean the star players in marquee sports were heavily compensated compared to other players and sports, it also means that men would far out earn women athletes. Either you believe amateur athletes should be treated equally or you don't.

[FlyingPiggy]

19. What? Quit making up other things to argue about. They should be compensated is what I said.

I stand by that. If you want to go into equal compensation, that is another discussion. This thread is about compensating college athletes.

[AZProgressive]

18. There are disparities now

The poster doesn't seem to have any ideas to change that.

Women's college basketball do get good ratings but women's sports don't do as well as their male counterparts but Women's college basketball probably does better than male sports other than football or basketball.

I look at it this way. You can't have basketball games without basketball players and coaches, networks, etc make big money off their labor. If they want to keep things amateur then they should remove the professional pressure and not have deals with networks.

Football and Men's basketball players would likely be paid more than women's basketball players & other women student-athletes. It would be like comparing NBA salaries to WNBA players. All that said there are disparities now. Part of the problem are the networks who rarely broadcast women's sports.

[FlyingPiggy]

20. I believe there ARE disparities in sports compensation. Without a doubt.

Whatever money the sport brings in is what they share. But I agree with you that there is also a discrepancy on airtime. Men’s sports do get more airtime and broadcast on more networks than women’s sports. And that should change.

[AZProgressive]

22. I was agreeing with you while also addressing MichMan's argument

MichMan didn't seem to want to engage with me in this thread so I decided to reply to your post

I took an Economics of Sports course at a community college and learned that the way NCAA does things is unusual when compared to other industries.

I think if the Supreme Court follows the law the players will win their case.

[FlyingPiggy]

23. That sounds interesting. How does the NCAA do things differently?

[AZProgressive]

24. The main thing is not paying the players

Post #11 has some info on that. I can't remember much details as it was several years ago but the labor rights are very different. The term "student-athletes" comes from a workman's comp case.

Friendly Reminder: The NCAA Invented The Term "Student-Athlete" To Get Out Of Paying Worker's Comp

Today, much of the NCAA’s moral authority—indeed much of the justification for its existence—is vested in its claim to protect what it calls the "student-athlete." The term is meant to conjure the nobility of amateurism, and the precedence of scholarship over athletic endeavor. But the origins of the "student-athlete" lie not in a disinterested ideal but in a sophistic formulation designed, as the sports economist Andrew Zimbalist has written, to help the NCAA in its "fight against workmen’s compensation insurance claims for injured football players."

"We crafted the term student-athlete," [NCAA president] Walter Byers himself wrote, "and soon it was embedded in all NCAA rules and interpretations." The term came into play in the 1950s, when the widow of Ray Dennison, who had died from a head injury received while playing football in Colorado for the Fort Lewis A&M Aggies, filed for workmen’s-compensation death benefits. Did his football scholarship make the fatal collision a "work-related" accident? Was he a school employee, like his peers who worked part-time as teaching assistants and bookstore cashiers? Or was he a fluke victim of extracurricular pursuits? Given the hundreds of incapacitating injuries to college athletes each year, the answers to these questions had enormous consequences. The Colorado Supreme Court ultimately agreed with the school’s contention that he was not eligible for benefits, since the college was "not in the football business."

The term student-athlete was deliberately ambiguous. College players were not students at play (which might understate their athletic obligations), nor were they just athletes in college (which might imply they were professionals). That they were high-performance athletes meant they could be forgiven for not meeting the academic standards of their peers; that they were students meant they did not have to be compensated, ever, for anything more than the cost of their studies. Student-athlete became the NCAA’s signature term, repeated constantly in and out of courtrooms.

Using the "student-athlete" defense, colleges have compiled a string of victories in liability cases. On the afternoon of October 26, 1974, the Texas Christian University Horned Frogs were playing the Alabama Crimson Tide in Birmingham, Alabama. Kent Waldrep, a TCU running back, carried the ball on a "Red Right 28" sweep toward the Crimson Tide’s sideline, where he was met by a swarm of tacklers. When Waldrep regained consciousness, Bear Bryant, the storied Crimson Tide coach, was standing over his hospital bed. "It was like talking to God, if you’re a young football player," Waldrep recalled.

https://www.insidenu.com/2014/1/28/5355988/ncaa-student-athlete-kain-colter-union-workers-comp

The NCAA is also a cartel but that isn't that unusual since other sports leagues are also cartels.

This was the textbook we used for the class. I'm not sure it is the same edition but Michael Leeds was definitely one of the authors.

https://www.thriftbooks.com/w/the-economics-of-sports-4th-edition_peter-von-allmen_michael-leeds/1822037/#edition=2753169&idiq=44338289

[FlyingPiggy]

25. Wow. Very interesting stuff. None of which surprises me at all.

I have always thought it was more nefarious in nature. And it really is. “Student Athletes” are exploited without proper compensation and thrown to the side if they can no longer be of use. Always amazes me how they wrap these turds up in soft fluffy sweetness. And yet they always seem to get away w it. Maybe things will be different now. Maybe we will see changes?

[MichMan]

27. Let the NFL and NBA set up their own minor leagues like Baseball and Hockey have done

While the NCAA offers both college baseball and hockey, the vast number of professional athletes do not come from the college ranks, but through the minor leagues. No reason the NBA and NFL can't do the same thing.

Let those athletes who understand that very few make it to professional sports, and that the opportunity to earn a paid college education is much more beneficial to them long term, choose go to college and play in the NCAA system. Their choice either way

I think paying players will be the ruin of college sports. There will be big boosters showering huge sums of money recruiting top players to their colleges. Hate to see a situation where rich business owners can buy the best team in college football or basketball for their alma mater and obliterate any competition. Should a Phil Knight be able to spend unlimited amounts to ensure that Univ. of Oregon has the best team money can buy ?

[Klaralven]

30. College sports should be run according to free market principles

Pay college athletes what they are worth. Starting quarterbacks get millions. Shot putters get minimum wage.

[MichMan]

33. The pros don't operate to free market principles

They have salary caps

[Klaralven]

34. Their monopoly exemption should be abolished