As madness moves through March, SCOTUS considers NCAA case over athlete compensation

[DGUtley]

Just days before the March Madness tournament crowns a champion, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in a high-stakes battle between the National Collegiate Athletic Association and a legal class of student-athletes from the top revenue-producing sports of football and men’s and women’s basketball.
On one level, NCAA v. Alston is a thorny case about which level of antitrust scrutiny to apply to some rather arcane and ever-shifting rules on scholarships and other forms of education aid that colleges may provide to student-athletes.
On another level, it is potentially consequential to a larger debate that has reverberated from campuses to courtrooms to Congress in recent years about the definition of amateurism in intercollegiate sports and whether athletes deserve more compensation.
NCAA-Money.jpg

o-PILES-OF-AMERICAN-MONEY-facebook.jpg

supreme-court-exterior.jpg

IncompleteFairIndianrhinoceros-small.gif

download.jpg








https://www.abajournal.com/web/artic...-compensation?

[hanger4]

Hey, I know, pay the athlete fair compensation then charge same athlete for room, board, tuition and books.

[ripmeister]

Hey, I know, pay the athlete fair compensation then charge same athlete for room, board, tuition and books.

Sounds like a good idea to me.

[Tahuyaman]

The main argument I've heard is that the university is using a particular players likeness in advertising without compensating them. Then stop using a certain player's likeness and just make the likeness one of an unnamed player.

Then they'd probably complain that it lessens their worth as a professional prospect.