If the NCAA had never accepted Ed O’Bannon, it might not have been dunked so crazily by the Supreme Court

The organization has a chance to reach a settlement before choosing to place an important element of its rulebook in a case called “O’Bannon v. the NCAA”. The mere inclusion of the case in the files of the U.S. District Court indicates that there may be some problems with the plaintiff’s argument. Losses there may redefine the future of college sports in ways that may be unpredictable or manageable.

The NCAA did not reject the settlement agreement designed by lawyers for Obannon and 19 other class action members, including Basketball Hall of Fame members Bill Russell and Oscar Robertson. The NCAA refused to listen to this proposal.

“The only thing we got from them is to show us the door,” antitrust law expert Michael Housefield told Sports News. “They deceived themselves to believe that they have absolute immunity because students cannot get paid, so that they take a completely fearless absolutist position.”

Based on the NCAA’s loss in the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday-a stunning 9-0 ruling in the National College Athletic Association v. Alstom case-the organization has no better than a cicada about to encounter the windshield of Cadillac Escalade More scared.

more: The Supreme Court opposed NCAA’s 9-0 restrictions on athletes’ compensation

The references mentioned by Housefield were included in the 1985 Supreme Court ruling, which ruled that the NCAA has no right to control all college football television broadcasts. Judge John Paul Stevens wrote that the organization should Retaining “sufficient degrees of freedom” to design rules believes in preserving amateurism and its educational benefits. Housefield was not the first accomplished lawyer to raise this issue on Monday.

In the Alston case, Judge Brett Kavanaugh condemned the NCAA’s practice of compensating athletes, and at the same time referred to Stevens’s comments as “dicta”-the meaning of legal terms is not part of the legal precedent established by the NCAA and the board of directors. The case of the University of Oklahoma. This is hopeless for any future cases involving athlete compensation that the NCAA may wish to bring in court.

If the NCAA agrees to resolve the O’Bannon case, the future of college sports will be more secure. Housefield said: “I think the universe will be very different not only for the benefit of the athletes, but also for the schools, conferences and competitions themselves.”

NCAA lost O’Bannon. This cost the organization US$42.2 million. The judge in the case, Claudia Wilken, later approved a $208 million settlement to pay for the retroactive attendance of Class I basketball and football players in 2010-17. These are just the latest of the many legal failures of the NCAA, and don’t assume that Monday has reached the finish line.

The Alstom case involves whether sports subsidies related to education expenses can be restricted, and whether additional items such as computers and internships can be included. Why the NCAA will fight for these restrictions is still confusing, but it is clear why they lost so badly.

In the 2021 calendar year, it seems almost impossible for Republicans and Democrats to agree on anything. They will not only fight for challenging themes, such as whether LeBron is better than Michael, but also fight for problems such as “Rocky” becoming the greatest of all sports movies. However, college athletes in the blue state (California) and the red state (Alabama) have passed laws granting name/image/similarity (NIL) rights. The Supreme Court justices appointed by both parties unanimously agreed to make a ruling on the Alstom case.

This is a clear sign that the NCAA has lost the public.

The NCAA’s statement after Alstom’s failure stated: “Although today’s decision retains the lower court’s ruling, it also reaffirms the NCAA’s power to adopt reasonable rules and repeatedly pointed out that NCAA is still free to clarify what the real educational benefit is. What is not a real educational benefit is in line with the NCAA’s mission to support student athletes.”

Sonny Vaccaro spent most of his life fighting for college athletes, but helped organize the O’Bannon case more than a decade ago.

“I think it is now causing this: they should listen to what the players want to do,” Vaccaro told SN. “I think there is no way out now. The key I took today is 9-0. It’s very clean. I don’t know where they went.

“I think what happened. I have been observing these years. Since Obannon… they have never gotten better. They still have problems within the NCAA.

“They can only answer:’We have always been like this; they are amateurs. This is their only answer.”

Vaccaro believes in the value of college sports, even though it seems counterintuitive. He told Sports News that his successful career in the sports business, including helping to establish Nike and later the basketball department at Adidas, grew from a football scholarship he received to Youngstown State University, despite his injury, he never Able to get honor to play.

“We need college sports,” he said. “It’s not only deeply rooted, it’s great.”

If the NCAA organization can be separated from its leadership, then it also has great value. Hundreds of outstanding individuals have done outstanding work for the organization and related athletes, including staff at the Indianapolis headquarters and volunteers for many of its management committees.

However, those who are responsible for making the biggest decisions are not capable stewards of important matters for them lately.

All of this can be traced back to the O’Bannon case. Housefield said that if people look at the underwear in the Alstom case, “I think if you don’t see O’Bannon, you can only read about one page at most. The same is true for the opinions of the District Court and Alstom’s appeal. , Because Obannon laid the foundation for NCAA to be understood as a large enterprise.”

If there was no O’Bannon court case, there would be no O’Bannon decision. Without O’Bannon’s decision, there might be no Alstom case. If the NCAA hears the settlement proposal, all this may end in a different way, better.

“This is not the end,” Housefield told SN.

For the NCAA, this does not sound optimistic.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *