One of the chapters that students like to read from the book The Economics of Public Issues is the one about the NCAA being a cartel. All the schools agree not to pay the athletes. Those athletes generate alot of revenue for the schools but get paid very little. For the best players, the difference can be a a million dollars.
Excerpts from the article:
"A federal appeals court dealt another blow to the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s efforts to keep tight limits on compensating student-athletes, ruling that the organization’s restrictions violated federal antitrust law.
“NCAA limits on education-related benefits do not play by the Sherman Act’s rules,” the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said in a ruling Monday.
The decision, by a unanimous three-judge panel, said the NCAA unlawfully limited competition for student athletes by adopting a cramped view of the kinds of compensation the athletes could receive related to their education.
"The decision marks the latest instance in which judges have rejected the NCAA’s antitrust defenses of its old ways of doing business. At the same time, the courts have declined to give the athletes unrestricted remuneration.
Courts previously struck a blow against NCAA amateurism rules in a case brought by former UCLA basketball player Ed O’Bannon over the use of his likeness in a videogame, a case that made it easier for athletes to be compensated for the full cost of attending school.
The current case was filed by former West Virginia University running back Shawne Alston and other former Division I athletes who argued that the NCAA’s rules violated U.S. antitrust law by artificially depressing their compensation. The athletes won a decision from U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken in 2019 that the NCAA could no longer limit compensation and benefits as tightly.
The appeals court’s ruling, written by Chief Judge Sidney Thomas, affirmed Judge Wilken’s decision and allows college athletes to receive compensation for the cost of educational materials, such as laptop computers or musical instruments, or be guaranteed access to paid-for graduate or vocational school."
"The Ninth Circuit, however, didn’t go as far as the athletes wanted, declining to dismantle NCAA restrictions on compensation that aren’t connected to education-related benefits.
One member of the panel, Judge Milan Smith, said the courts should do more to protect college athletes from an NCAA that he described as a “cartel” that makes billions of dollars from their labor.
The NCAA was eyeing an onslaught of legislation from states, led by California, when it announced a once unthinkable reversal of position last fall and said it would move to allow college players to make some money from name, image and likeness rights."
Related posts:
Cost of attendance stipends in college sports
How The Economics Of College Sports Might Be Distorted
No comments:
Post a Comment