Article this morning in The Atheltic. Sounds like the converstation has been started.
theathletic.com
Lots of active lawsuits against the NCAA; one in particular that could potentially bankrupt it (possible back pay for student athletes who missed the NIL train).
"The most notable example is the NCAA v. Alston case in 2021, in which a historically divided Supreme Court ruled unanimously against the NCAA, voting 9-0 to uphold a lower-level court decision stating the NCAA cannot limit education-related payments to student-athletes due to federal antitrust principles. This decision came in the wake of O’Bannon v. NCAA, which cleared a path for universities to provide “cost of attendance” stipends to student-athletes. Both cases sparked the NCAA to ultimately remove restrictions on college athletes collecting name, image and likeness (NIL) earnings in July 2021."
"The NCAA has long governed over — and clung to — an amateurism model of competition. But as college sports, football in particular, have grown wildly lucrative in terms of television dollars and other media rights, that model has been increasingly condemned."
"In the two years since Alston, a flurry of lawsuits and legal action have been mounted against the NCAA, serving as a backdrop to the memo NCAA president Charlie Baker released last month proposing the creation of a new subdivision within DI athletics that would allow the highest-resourced programs to directly compensate athletes through a trust fund and/or in-house NIL agreements."
This would hopefully lessen the burden of "paying athletes" by the fans through collectives and have the schools and NCAA shoulder much of it.
Why is the NCAA proposing a new subdivision? Explaining the related legal battles
The subdivision proposal was brought forward as the NCAA's legal challenges continue to compound.
theathletic.com
Lots of active lawsuits against the NCAA; one in particular that could potentially bankrupt it (possible back pay for student athletes who missed the NIL train).
"The most notable example is the NCAA v. Alston case in 2021, in which a historically divided Supreme Court ruled unanimously against the NCAA, voting 9-0 to uphold a lower-level court decision stating the NCAA cannot limit education-related payments to student-athletes due to federal antitrust principles. This decision came in the wake of O’Bannon v. NCAA, which cleared a path for universities to provide “cost of attendance” stipends to student-athletes. Both cases sparked the NCAA to ultimately remove restrictions on college athletes collecting name, image and likeness (NIL) earnings in July 2021."
"The NCAA has long governed over — and clung to — an amateurism model of competition. But as college sports, football in particular, have grown wildly lucrative in terms of television dollars and other media rights, that model has been increasingly condemned."
"In the two years since Alston, a flurry of lawsuits and legal action have been mounted against the NCAA, serving as a backdrop to the memo NCAA president Charlie Baker released last month proposing the creation of a new subdivision within DI athletics that would allow the highest-resourced programs to directly compensate athletes through a trust fund and/or in-house NIL agreements."
This would hopefully lessen the burden of "paying athletes" by the fans through collectives and have the schools and NCAA shoulder much of it.
