Started By
Message
Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Former Athletes in Dispute with NCAA
Posted on 6/21/21 at 12:27 pm
Posted on 6/21/21 at 12:27 pm
I put a copy of a tweet in the football thread but it really crosses all sports. Here’s the SI write up:
Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Former Athletes in Dispute with NCAA
The ruling was made in unanimous fashion, possibly paving the way for athletes on college campuses to obtain greater opportunity for education-related compensation
Excerpt from the ruling:
Full ruling here
Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Former Athletes in Dispute with NCAA
The ruling was made in unanimous fashion, possibly paving the way for athletes on college campuses to obtain greater opportunity for education-related compensation
quote:
While the ruling from SCOTUS does not mean that athletes can now be paid by colleges, it does go a long way to promote the ever-shifting nature of amateurism in college athletics. On July 1, multiple states' laws regarding Name, Image and Likeness will go into affect, allowing athletes to sign contracts with companies and earn a dollar figure for their association with their brand.
Excerpt from the ruling:
Full ruling here
3
Posted on 6/21/21 at 1:00 pm to Alabama_Fan
Under Bart's reasoning, the question of whether or not players should be paid depends entirely on whether the athletics department at that school turns a profit. If they break even or operate at a loss they're not money making enterprises and therefore not businesses based on what he's laying out. So should some 7A Texas high school in a rich part of Dallas or Houston have to pay their players if they bring in more money from ticket sales, fundraisers, merchandise, etc. than they spend on coaching salaries, equipment, etc? Also, does an 8th grader who makes varsity violate child labor laws in that situation?
This post was edited on 6/21/21 at 1:01 pm
Posted on 6/21/21 at 1:02 pm to Robot Santa
The high schools don't impede or hand out capital punishment to kids who make money using their image or likeness...
When you kill the kids ability to make anything yet you benefit substantially off of them (in some parts due to them not being able to); you make this an easy case.
When you kill the kids ability to make anything yet you benefit substantially off of them (in some parts due to them not being able to); you make this an easy case.
Posted on 6/21/21 at 1:05 pm to Alabama_Fan
I expect a lot of schools to drop many of their sports to lower levels. The FBS probably won’t be standing at 130 schools for long.
Posted on 6/21/21 at 1:14 pm to 1BamaRTR
NIL has nothing to do with the question of classifying an athletics program as a business. Nice straw man though.
Posted on 6/21/21 at 1:18 pm to Robot Santa
quote:
NIL has nothing to do with the question of classifying an athletics program as a business. Nice straw man though.
I didn’t mention that at all
Posted on 6/21/21 at 1:19 pm to 1BamaRTR
My bad, did not mean to reply to you.
I actually agree with what you said though. Covering all education related expenses is fine to me because it's part of the cost of attendance, but signaling that they are willing to classify an athletics department as a business and the athletes as employees is a huge problem and will very likely lead to schools making massive budget cuts. And how does Title IX play into this? If you pay the football team you have to pay the women's soccer team despite all those programs operating at a big loss and doing very little to financially benefit individual universities or the NCAA. It's a football and men's basketball problem, not a non-revenue sport problem.
I actually agree with what you said though. Covering all education related expenses is fine to me because it's part of the cost of attendance, but signaling that they are willing to classify an athletics department as a business and the athletes as employees is a huge problem and will very likely lead to schools making massive budget cuts. And how does Title IX play into this? If you pay the football team you have to pay the women's soccer team despite all those programs operating at a big loss and doing very little to financially benefit individual universities or the NCAA. It's a football and men's basketball problem, not a non-revenue sport problem.
This post was edited on 6/21/21 at 1:25 pm
Posted on 6/21/21 at 1:41 pm to Alabama_Fan
I'm just here for the geriatrics to talk about how "the game isn't what it used to be."
You know who you are, and, please proceed.
You know who you are, and, please proceed.
Posted on 6/21/21 at 1:46 pm to Robot Santa
I think you also have to take into account that many of these sports opportunities wouldn't exist without the massive TV contracts. A lot of these schools wouldn't be involved in college athletics at all if not for the revenue that it can generate and many are very reliant on that revenue to prop up their entire athletics program. If you take money from that pie, then those schools will have to start dropping sports and the opportunities for athletes will decrease.
It will be interesting to see how this affects the overall landscape of college athletics moving forward.
It will be interesting to see how this affects the overall landscape of college athletics moving forward.
Posted on 6/21/21 at 1:50 pm to Robot Santa
quote:
If you pay the football team you have to pay the women's soccer team despite all those programs operating at a big loss and doing very little to financially benefit individual universities or the NCAA.
As I read it, the ruling does not mean that schools have to pay athletes. It means that athletes can make money on their name, image, and a company can pay them. But, I'm not sure about a couple of things: 1. If JD Davison gets an offer to do a NIKE commercial, can he do so wearing an Alabama uniform, and if so, 2. what is the split as then both player and school have a NIKE contract. Also, if Kool Aid has officially changed his name to Kool Aid, does he owe Kool aid (or whoever makes it) money if he sells a t-shirt with that name on it? It's going to be interesting to see how all this plays out. I hope the offensive line gets some big money moving big rocks with CraneWorks machines. Hope Robert Dunning, national champion hurdler, gets to do a commercial leaping buildings to deliver Taco Casa hot tacos.
Posted on 6/21/21 at 1:56 pm to YStar
quote:
When you kill the kids ability to make anything yet you benefit substantially off of them (in some parts due to them not being able to); you make this an easy case.
We all know it's way more complex than that.
There are a lot of things that institutions and the NCAA can be doing to make this a lot more fair (allowing players to Major in their sport is one I'm a big fan of). But if this isn't regulated in some form or fashion, it has the potential to get very nasty, very quickly.
I'll be interested in seeing what types of restrictions they place on this moving forward and how it evolves.
Posted on 6/21/21 at 1:59 pm to AbSnopes
quote:
As I read it, the ruling does not mean that schools have to pay athletes.
It doesn't. It has to do with the NCAA not allowing schools to cover education related expenses beyond just tuition, room & board, meal plan, etc. However, the SCOTUS typically isn't in the business of waxing poetic about a topic in an opinion just for the sake of doing it. Kavanaugh is essentially asking for a lawsuit to have athletes declared employees and universities declared employers.
Posted on 6/22/21 at 9:34 pm to YStar
quote:
The high schools don't impede or hand out capital punishment to kids who make money using their image or likeness...
It really all boils down to one question with this NIL stuff.
Should a human being be allowed to profit off of their NIL? If you don't believe so... wow.
Posted on 6/23/21 at 10:24 am to King Cam
quote:
Should a human being be allowed to profit off of their NIL?
LOL. That way oversimplifies the situation. That’s like saying “Do you believe everyone should earn a living wage” or “Should every woman have the right to decide what to do with their body?”
It’s obviously a lot more complicated than that and it isn’t black & white. The whole reason I’ve opposed it isn’t because I don’t believe that a human being shouldn’t be able to profit from NIL, it’s because it’s a Pandora’s Box of issues that could be almost impossible to regulate and IMO, the benefits that a bigtime college athlete currently receive (especially in football) shouldn’t be scoffed at.
Posted on 6/23/21 at 10:33 am to King Cam
quote:
Should a human being be allowed to profit off of their NIL? If you don't believe so... wow.
Lots of fields restrict their employees from profiting off their name, image, and tie to an organization. It isn't a new concept.
Should a police chief be able to don his uniform, introduce himself as the chief, and do a commercial for a local alarm company?
Posted on 6/23/21 at 8:10 pm to JustGetItRight
CBS Sports:
NCAA waiver to effectively allow name, image and likeness rights for athletes near completion
The waiver would go into effect before numerous states enact new laws beginning July 1
NCAA waiver to effectively allow name, image and likeness rights for athletes near completion
The waiver would go into effect before numerous states enact new laws beginning July 1
Posted on 6/23/21 at 8:20 pm to JustGetItRight
Posted on 6/24/21 at 2:49 am to JustGetItRight
quote:
Lots of fields restrict their employees from profiting off their name, image, and tie to an organization. It isn't a new concept. Should a police chief be able to don his uniform, introduce himself as the chief, and do a commercial for a local alarm company?
So the players are employees?
Posted on 6/24/21 at 10:00 am to BamaSaint
i'm curious to see if the schools handle the NIL for the players or will they be allowed to hire an agent?
Posted on 6/24/21 at 5:02 pm to crimsontater
Lengthy write up of his interview with Jay Barker
Q&A: Alabama AD Greg Byrne on NIL, Playoff Expansion and Energizer Bunny Nick Saban
Crimson Tide athletic director covered a lot of ground, from amateurism to the evolution of college sports during an interview on the Jay Barker Radio Show.
Q&A: Alabama AD Greg Byrne on NIL, Playoff Expansion and Energizer Bunny Nick Saban
Crimson Tide athletic director covered a lot of ground, from amateurism to the evolution of college sports during an interview on the Jay Barker Radio Show.
Page 1 of 2
Latest Alabama News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News