Supreme Court: NCAA rules violate anti-trust laws

[frozenchief]

Big decision from the Supremes today. They unanimously (!) decide that NCAA rules that restrict educational benefits given to athletes, such as eligibility and scholarships, violate anti-trust rules. The lower court had said that the NCAA could restrict non-educational benefits, such as cash salaries and that issue was not appealed and so it was not before the court. In a rather strong concurrence, though, Justice Kavanaugh wrote that the same reasoning that the court applied today would apply to non-educational benefits, such as cash salaries. Put another way, he's strongly hinting that the court would rule the same way if student-athletes sought to challenges NCAA prohibitions against cash payments.

Initial analysis, including a link to the opinion, is here:

https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/06/in-unanimous-ruling-court-agrees-with-athletes-that-ncaa-violated-antitrust-laws/

I recognize that Court decisions usually go to the DC forum. However, this relates directly to NCAA rules of all sports and my purpose is not a discussion about the Court but about what effect this will have upon collegiate athletics.

[BigRichard]

It is my opinion that if student athletes start to get paid it will ruin competition in the college ranks. Those colleges with the most money will win all the time. You will basically be able to buy a championship.

[Mecca]

It is my opinion that if student athletes start to get paid it will ruin competition in the college ranks. Those colleges with the most money will win all the time. You will basically be able to buy a championship.

If you think Alabama, Clemson etc aren't already offering guys shit to come there you aren't paying attention.

[crispystl]

If you think Alabama, Clemson etc aren't already offering guys shit to come there you aren't paying attention.


Yeah I was about to say...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Prison Bitch]

It is my opinion that if student athletes start to get paid it will ruin competition in the college ranks. Those colleges with the most money will win all the time. You will basically be able to buy a championship.

Suppose it does. It’s still the right thing to do.

[DaneMcCloud]

It is my opinion that if student athletes start to get paid it will ruin competition in the college ranks. Those colleges with the most money will win all the time. You will basically be able to buy a championship.

This is extremely naïve. There are 130 college teams in the BCS.

National Champions since 2001:
Alabama: 6
Auburn: 1
Clemson: 2
Florida: 2
Florida State: 1
LSU: 3 (one shared with USC)
Miami: 1
Ohio State: 2
Oklahoma: 1
Texas: 1
USC: 2 (one shared with LSU)

Since 2011:
Alabama: 5
Clemson: 2
Florida State: 1
LSU: 1
Ohio State: 1

-----------
For the most part, only around 10 BCS teams will be in position to win a BCS National Championship but really, that number is closer to 5 or less.

The same programs win the BCS Championship over and over and over again, and no amount of money paid to college football athletes will change that stat.

[Buehler445]

It is my opinion that if student athletes start to get paid it will ruin competition in the college ranks. Those colleges with the most money will win all the time. You will basically be able to buy a championship.

So like it is now then?

[ModSocks]

It is my opinion that if student athletes start to get paid it will ruin competition in the college ranks. Those colleges with the most money will win all the time. You will basically be able to buy a championship.

That very well may be true.

But that's typically what happens when cheap/free labor dries up and a company has to start actually paying people for their work.

[Buehler445]

So in the ground, what does this mean for NCAA? They have to repeal their rules about getting external money? So boosters can give kids “jobs?”

[Kiimo]

Someone said the worst thing that can happen to you at the supreme court is not only being ruled against but the justices saying "hey everything else that the defendant is doing but you didn't appeal about? yeah thats illegal too you might want to sue them about that"



This is important for KU fans because if the NCAA goes overboard in the Adidas thing and roasts us without evidence you can bet your bottom dollar that KU will sue the next day.

[frozenchief]

So in the ground, what does this mean for NCAA? They have to repeal their rules about getting external money? So boosters can give kids “jobs?”

They don't have to repeal those rules yet. The only things on the table were educated-related compensation, such as eligibility, scholarships and similar matters.

However, Kavanaugh's concurrence and the basis of the court's opinion certainly mean that federal courts would look at other restrictions on payments to students as violations of anti-trust laws. So technically the rules prohibiting boosters giving kids "jobs" are still valid. It remains to be seen whether NCAA will withdraw those or if it will take further litigation to nullify those as well.

This will have a tremendous impact upon NCAA's investigation of KU Basketball, among other things.

[FloridaMan88]

It is my opinion that if student athletes start to get paid it will ruin competition in the college ranks. Those colleges with the most money will win all the time. You will basically be able to buy a championship.

This is already happening… schools with the most resources that can build the biggest/best football facilities, employ the largest football staffs with analysts, nutritionists, etc. and maintain the biggest recruiting budgets are usually able to attract the best recruits.

It’s not a 100% guarantee for success… see Texas… but it is a pre-requisite requirement for success especially in college football.

[sedated]

It is my opinion that if student athletes start to get paid it will ruin competition in the college ranks. Those colleges with the most money will win all the time. You will basically be able to buy a championship.

Like the MLB?

[BleedingRed]

its my opinion that these "Children" shouldn't have to go to college if they are ready to play now.

I don't know why any league is allowed to not hire people who are adults by society standards.

[Kiimo]

I sometimes think the future of college athletics (football, basketball and baseball) is completely abandoning the idea that the athletes are students. Just be the G League but located at colleges. You're still called Duke Bluedevils but the employed G League athletes don't have to pretend to go to class.

[frozenchief]

I sometimes think the future of college athletics (football, basketball and baseball) is completely abandoning the idea that the athletes are students. Just be the G League but located at colleges. You're still called Duke Bluedevils but the employed G League athletes don't have to pretend to go to class.

That could be where this ends up for high-profile sports, such as football and basketball. Baseball and hockey are popular but not as popular on the collegiate level.

But sports like swimming, gymnastics or rugby? I think they will continue to be student-athletes unless those sports become much more popular than they are now.

[mr. tegu]

I think a salary cap of sorts would actually increase the level of competition. If all division l football programs had the same budget, a terrible team like KU could decide to get crazy with some top QB recruit and in one move improve their standing compared to other schools. The top schools would still win out more often than not, but the same five or six maybe wouldn’t have the monopoly they do and it could spread to maybe 15-20 actual contenders.

[FloridaMan88]

I think a salary cap of sorts would actually increase the level of competition. If all division l football programs had the same budget, a terrible team like KU could decide to get crazy with some top QB recruit and in one move improve their standing compared to other schools. The top schools would still win out more often than not, but the same five or six maybe wouldn’t have the monopoly they do and it could spread to maybe 15-20 actual contenders.

Would your salary cap idea also help KU upgrade their crappy facilities and high school caliber football stadium?

Would it prevent them from making bad coaching hires… i.e. Charlie Weis and Les Miles?

[sedated]

Would your salary cap idea also help KU upgrade their crappy facilities and high school caliber football stadium?

Would it prevent them from making bad coaching hires… i.e. Charlie Weis and Les Miles?

No, and that's exactly why the teams at the top with the most money wouldn't automatically be the best. There are other factors. The Yankees don't always win the World Series. Indiana was a blue blood (and likely paid players) but some bad coaching hires have ruined that program. Kentucky got the top recruiting class every year for a long stretch but only won 1 title.