As a former Division I scholarship basketball athlete who is also a practicing sports law attorney (there aren't many of us), the Alston arguments before SCOTUS today were very interesting. My educated guess is that the court affirms the 9th circuit's decision 6-3.
THREAD
6
37
133
Replies
What would be the result? Let's start with what it does not mean. It does not mean schools would be able to pay athletes salaries. It does not mean athletes would become employees of their schools. It does not mean athletes would be able to be paid for their NILs.
1
1
14
Those are all separate issues. The 9th Circuit's (and the lower court's) decision only allowed schools to award athletes (1) unlimited educationally related benefits and (2) yearly cash payments as academic awards and incentives.
1
0
8
To comply with the court orders, the NCAA has already changed its rules to allow these benefits and payments. Schools could be giving them to athletes right now. Educationally related benefits include things such as computers, post-grad scholarships (law, medical, biz school),
1
0
9
post grad internships, and payment for study abroad programs. It could also include anything else that could be deemed educationally related, so schools could get creative.
1
0
6
Regarding the payments for academic awards and incentives, the trial court that issued the injunction has clarified that the annual limit on these payments is $5980 per athlete. Schools would likely set their own rules on being eligible for these payments.
1
0
4
For example, a school could create a rule that an athlete must obtain a 3.0 GPA for the academic year to receive a full or partial payment. It could create a sliding scale, where higher GPAs result in higher payments. It could require an athlete to graduate to receive payment.
1
0
5
There are many ways a school could approach these academic incentive payments. Finally, one point that hasn't been discussed much is that a decision in favor of the athletes would not mandate that schools actually do anything.
1
0
4
They could choose NOT to give any additionally educationally related benefits. They could choose NOT to give payments for academic awards and incentives.
1
0
3
Would it hurt them in recruiting if they didn't offer any of these? Probably, especially if the schools they are competing for recruits with are offering these benefits and payments.
2
0
3
But allowing these additional benefits and payments wouldn't change much about college athletics, in my opinion. Schools already compete for players in many ways, and the benefits each school can offer are already not equal and are often hard to quantify.
1
0
3
For example, some schools offer amazing facilities. Some offer famous, well-known coaches. Some offer more exposure and a more well-established path to the pros. Some offer a brand name degree that will help you in the job market post-college.
1
0
2
There are many other factors that go into making a college decision for a high school athlete. The educationally related benefits and academic payments would be additional factors added to the mix. For some they might move the needle, for others they won't.
1
0
1
One last thought. I also don't think allowing these benefits and payments would cause college athletes to focus more on athletics than they already do. Let's face it, college athletes already spend a ton of time on their sport.
2
0
5
Instead, I think offering these benefits and payments would cause many athletes to spend more time on academics. You can be sure that when I was in college if I knew I would receive a few thousand $$ for hitting a certain GPA I would have tried really hard to hit that number.
1
0
18
@WinterSportsLaw
Thank you for writing this.
I was very curious as to what the possible outcomes are and this clearly spells it out.
1
0
1
