Turn Off Ads?
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: SCOTUS invalidates a portion of the NCAA's "amateur" Rule

  1. #1
    Member adkindo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,249

    SCOTUS invalidates a portion of the NCAA's "amateur" Rule

    SCOTUSblog
    @SCOTUSblog

    NEW: In a victory for college athletes, SCOTUS unanimously invalidates a portion of the NCAA's "amateurism" rules. The court says the NCAA can no longer bar colleges from providing athletes with education-related benefits such as free laptops or paid post-graduate internships.

    10:12 AM · Jun 21, 2021
    SCOTUSblog
    @SCOTUSblog

    Here is the opinion in NCAA v. Alston. Justice Gorsuch delivered the opinion for a unanimous court. Justice Kavanaugh wrote separately to concur. https://supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-512_gfbh.pdf

    10:13 AM · Jun 21, 2021
    “The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.”
    ― Marcus Aurelius


  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Member adkindo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,249

    Re: SCOTUS invalidates a portion of the NCAA's "amateur" Rule

    Strong words in the closing of Kavanaugh's concurring opinion....

    To be sure, the NCAA and its member colleges maintain
    important traditions that have become part of the fabric of
    America—game days in Tuscaloosa and South Bend; the
    packed gyms in Storrs and Durham; the women’s and men’s
    lacrosse championships on Memorial Day weekend; track
    and field meets in Eugene; the spring softball and baseball
    World Series in Oklahoma City and Omaha; the list goes
    on. But those traditions alone cannot justify the NCAA’s
    decision to build a massive money-raising enterprise on the
    backs of student athletes who are not fairly compensated.
    Nowhere else in America can businesses get away with
    agreeing not to pay their workers a fair market rate on the
    theory that their product is defined by not paying their
    workers a fair market rate. And under ordinary principles
    of antitrust law, it is not evident why college sports should
    be any different. The NCAA is not above the law.
    “The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.”
    ― Marcus Aurelius

  4. #3
    Member texasdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    18,594

    Re: SCOTUS invalidates a portion of the NCAA's "amateur" Rule

    So, what is the end result of this ruling? I am not qualified to offer an educated opinion. Put another way, what happens now? Something? Nothing? Do the richer get richer, and the poor poorer?

  5. #4
    Member adkindo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,249

    Re: SCOTUS invalidates a portion of the NCAA's "amateur" Rule

    Quote Originally Posted by texasdave View Post
    So, what is the end result of this ruling? I am not qualified to offer an educated opinion. Put another way, what happens now? Something? Nothing? Do the richer get richer, and the poor poorer?
    Rich get richer as it creates more paths to compensate athletes as long as it can be connected to education. I think more importantly is the words of Kavanaugh. This is a narrow focused opinion, but I think his writing signals at least he (and likely the court) is almost inviting future cases related to student athlete compensation. If I was the NCAA, I would be very pessimistic about appealing future student athlete compensation cases to the current court. I would even go as far as the court is signaling to the NCAA to resolve these issues before they get to the court, because you will not have a sympathetic court to your positions as it relates to these issues in the future.
    “The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.”
    ― Marcus Aurelius

  6. Likes:

    Chip R (06-21-2021),texasdave (06-21-2021)

  7. #5
    Kentuckian At Heart WVRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Mid Ohio Valley
    Posts
    8,546

    Re: SCOTUS invalidates a portion of the NCAA's "amateur" Rule

    Quote Originally Posted by adkindo View Post
    Rich get richer as it creates more paths to compensate athletes as long as it can be connected to education. I think more importantly is the words of Kavanaugh. This is a narrow focused opinion, but I think his writing signals at least he (and likely the court) is almost inviting future cases related to student athlete compensation. If I was the NCAA, I would be very pessimistic about appealing future student athlete compensation cases to the current court. I would even go as far as the court is signaling to the NCAA to resolve these issues before they get to the court, because you will not have a sympathetic court to your positions as it relates to these issues in the future.
    On a side note, a former WVU football player was the Ed Obannon in this case.
    Quote Originally Posted by savafan View Post
    I've read books about sparkling vampires who walk around in the daylight that were written better than a John Fay article.

  8. #6
    Member Sea Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    21,016

    Re: SCOTUS invalidates a portion of the NCAA's "amateur" Rule

    This decision is so narrow I don't think it changes much and I wonder how it ever got to the SCOTUS. Is providing tutoring really a legal issue for our highest court?

    I disagree with this comment from Kavanaugh:

    But those traditions alone cannot justify the NCAA’s
    decision to build a massive money-raising enterprise on the
    backs of student athletes who are not fairly compensated.


    Very few athletes are raising money for the school. Power 5 men's football and basketball are about the only ones. With a few exceptions, all the others are a drain on the budget

  9. #7
    Rally Onion! Chip R's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    40,669

    Re: SCOTUS invalidates a portion of the NCAA's "amateur" Rule

    Quote Originally Posted by Sea Ray View Post
    This decision is so narrow I don't think it changes much and I wonder how it ever got to the SCOTUS. Is providing tutoring really a legal issue for our highest court?
    I don't know. Perhaps there will be some ticky-tack things that were violations before that won't be now.

    More importantly the decision sets a precedent about the compensation - or lack thereof - of student athletes. I'd like to see this decision apply to minor league baseball players but MLB has that antitrust exemption. Maybe this decision could be used as a precedent in overturning that exemption.
    Quote Originally Posted by Raisor View Post
    I was wrong
    Quote Originally Posted by Raisor View Post
    Chip is right


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | cumberlandreds | Gallen5862 | Kinsm | Plus Plus | Powel Crosley | RedlegJake | The Operator