15.9 C

The Supreme Court case can change the nature of college sports

WASHINGTON (AP) – A Supreme Court dispute over the March madness this week could close the gap between college elite athletes and “professional sports stars.”

If former college athletes win the case, colleges can compete for talented student-athletes by offering tens of thousands of dollars in higher education benefits. And that can change the nature of college sports.

At least that’s a fear of the NCAA. But former judges who have sued say most college athletes will never play professional sports because NCAA rules limiting their educational benefits deprive them of the opportunity to be rewarded for their athletic talent and hard work. They say the NCAA rules are not only unfair, they are illegal, they want schools to be able to offer an education advantage that they find convenient.

“This allows schools to encourage better students, to be more educated, in return for full-time jobs at the school. What could be wrong with that? ” said lawyer ff efri L. Kessler in an interview before the case arguments scheduled for Wednesday.

Former players have won each round so far. The lower courts have agreed that NCAA rules restricting education benefits, schools may offer I Division men, women basketball players, football players violate federal antitrust law. The narrow decision still deters schools from paying directly to athletes, but the NCAA says it is a step in that direction.

In an interview, NCAA Chief Legal Officer Donald Remy defended the rules of the association. He said the Supreme Court had previously found preserving the amateur nature of college sports as “appropriate, competitive justification for restrictions on the college athletics system”.

The NCAA was unhappy with the outcome when its rules were last heard in the Supreme Court. In 1984, the Supreme Court rejected the NCAA Rules Restricting College Football Broadcasting. The judges’ decision transformed college sports, helping it become the multibillion-dollar business it is today.

This time, the judges will hear arguments over the phone, as they have been doing for almost a year due to the coronavirus epidemic. And the public can hear it live. The court cases will almost certainly decide on the case before they leave for their summer vacation at the end of June.

For former players, the ruling does not mean that college athletes are currently injecting cash. Currently, sports scholarships can cover the cost of college athletes attending college. This includes tuition, housing, books, plus a school-sponsored scholarship to cover things like travel expenses and other casualties. For students, the ruling means that the NCAA cannot prohibit schools from sweetening their offerings to Division I basketball and soccer players with additional education benefits.

Individual gymnastics conferences could still impose restrictions. But Kessler said he believes that if his clients win, “many schools” will eventually receive additional benefits.

This will mean that colleges can offer things like postgraduate scholarships, tutoring, study abroad opportunities, vocational tuition fees, computer equipment և internships to compete for the best players. And there are fears that some schools may try to disguise other, inadequate benefits as permissible education costs.

Former college athletes have some great supporters. The NFL, the NBA, and the WNBA, as well as a group of former NCAA executives, are all calling for justice for former athletes, such as the Biden administration.

Whatever happens in the Supreme Court, as college athletes are rewarded, is likely to change. The NCAA is trying to change its long-standing rules by allowing athletes to profit from their names, images, and similarities. This will allow them to earn money for things like sponsorship deals, online approval հաստատ personal appearance.

Those efforts, however, have stalled. For their part, the players of the Madness tournament in March this month demanded reforms on social media with the hashtag #NotNCAAProperty. Even if the NCAA changes its rules, any college athlete who can earn from approval deals still outweighs the educational benefits that schools can offer as incentives.

As for justice, they do not have to just look the other way. Most are also sports fans. Referees Samuel Alito, Sonia Sotomayor և Elena Kaga love baseball. Justice Neil Gorsuch is a Denver Broncos fan, while Clarence Thomas is a fan of the University of Nebraska. Amy Connie Barrett, a professor at Notre Dame, says she spent her football Saturdays in a tailing dump. Justice Brett Cavanaugh simply wrote to lawmakers, taking into account his 2018 Nomination. “I am a huge sports fan.”


Associated Press writer Ralph D. Rousseau contributed to this report.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here