NCAA Business Law Since earlier this year a series of court rulings and decisions has begun to change the landscape of armature college athletics. In early March, the National Labor Relation Board in Chicago ruled that football players at Northwestern University are employees and therefore have the right to unionize. In addition, in August, of this year, a federal judge ruled in favor of a former UCLA Basketball star whose likeness was used in a video game. These rulings have set the stage for more cases to be open up against the NCAA and its treatment of college athletes. Along with this ligation the NCAA settled outside of court with college athletes who sued them for damages from head injuries they suffered while playing. These ligations have also brought to question about how it will affect requiting and players transferring from schools. Now on the business law side, we have the question of tort regarding player’s injuries and requiting. In addition, we have the question of trademarks (using payer’s likeness), legal capacity (player’s unionizing and signing contracts) and leaving employment (players transferring from schools). The first legal concepts we will cover are Torts. By definition a tort is a civil wrong or wrongful act, whether intentional or accidental, from which injury occurs to another. Now when dealing with torts the first question that needs to be answer is a question of liability. There are: intentional liability, negligence liability, and strict
For about a decade, the debate between whether collegiate athletes should be paid while playing has been contemplated. Now, the focus has moved from all sports to two specific areas, football and men’s basketball. Sprouting from many court cases filed against the NCAA to some ugly sandals dealing with the athletes themselves. In the 2010 – 2011 time frame, this controversy really sparked up chatter; eventually leading the current pled for sport reformation. Our student athletes are the ones who are at the expense here stuck in between this large argument. Over the past 10 years, there has been minor things done for either side and the players themselves have started taking things into their own hands. The year 2010 a total of 7 student
“College Athletes for Hire, The Evolution and Legacy of the NCAA’s Amateur Myth” written by Allen L. Sack and Ellen J. Staurowsky. In their book, the authors enlighten the reader on such issues as athletic scholarships, professionalism in college sports, and favoritism for athletes as well as many more important legal, and ethical issues that we as a country need to address. In this paper I will not do a standard book report by simply regurgitating the information I read in their book.
Thesis: As the popularity, and revenue continues to grow in college sports, the debate will be taken to new heights about whether or not college athletes are being exploited, and if they should be compensated monetarily.
Abstract: Collegiate athletes participating in the two revenue sports (football, men's basketball) sacrifice their time, education, and risk physical harm for their respected programs. The players are controlled by a governing body (NCAA) that dictates when they can show up to work, and when they cannot show up for work. They are restricted from making any substantial financial gains outside of their sports arena. These athletes receive no compensation for their efforts, while others prosper from their abilities. The athletes participating in the two revenue sports of college athletics, football and men's basketball should be compensated for their time, dedication, and work put forth in their respected sports.
(Solomon 1) In the NCAA there are many laws that prevent the athletes from doing certain things. These laws are called the “Laws of Amateurism”. In general, amateurism requirements do not allow salary for participating in athletics, or prize money above actual or necessary expenses (NCAA Center). However Judge Claudia Wilken partially granted class action status in a lawsuit concerning the use of college athletes' names and likenesses. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken ruled the plaintiffs, including former and current Division I men's basketball players and Football Bowl Subdivision players, will be allowed to challenge the NCAA's current restrictions on what athletes might receive in exchange for playing sports. The ruling sets up the prospect of a fundamental change in scholarship rules and the concept of amateurism (Berkowitz 3). This would help athletes to be able to fight for the compensated pay.
Every year the financial cost required for college sports to occur is increasing. From gigantic stadiums being built to hold 80,000 plus spectators, to multi million-dollar TV deals, and the sales of thousands of jerseys leaving campus stores. The revenue generated from college sports is a billon dollar industry, one that rewards coaches, staff members, and universities with ostentatious contracts, and gratuitous bonuses. Case and point, “Nick Saban is paid $5 million dollars more than Alabama 's chancellor” (Has College Football Become A Campus Commodity?). Amidst the profiteering, the NCAA is completely capitalizing on their student athletes’ likeness and achievements. The NCAA standard states college athletes should not receive payment since they are merely amateurs representing their schools. I contest this standard, arguing that athletes must be paid a salary in order to redeem the legitimacy of the NCAA.
During the summer of 2013 one of the biggest outrages in all sports, not just the collegiate division, was the story of Texas A&M’s golden boy Johnny Manziel. At the beginning of the football season Manziel shocked fans around the country with his remarkable abilities; abilities that would later make him the youngest Heisman winner at the time. However, a couple of months later no one would be talking about his talent or his Heisman, but the allegations surrounded around Manziel selling his signature on eBay for money. The NCAA strictly bans collegiate athletes to benefit in any way when it comes to their name and the revenue that comes with it. This shined light on one of the major controversies in college sports; the dispute of whether it is right to allow student athletes to benefit off their names. The NCAA ought to allow collegiate athletes the ability to profit off the use of their name because by allowing players to receive revenues it would ease the negative effects of playing collegiate sports for the student athletes.
Over the past years, There have been so many cases about collegiate athletes being suspended or losing their eligibility to play. When student athletes lose their eligibility they`re forced to stop playing the sport they love the most, even worse they also lose their scholarship. Athletes are getting in trouble for receiving money or some type of gift from boosters. By accepting these type of payment, The athletes violate the NCAA rules. (“Accepting these gifts makes both the athlete and the college look bad. Florida State is investigating Jameis Winston’s connection to James Spence Authentication, the company that was linked to suspended Georgia running back Todd Gurley. It’s reportedly certified 500-plus autographs from Gurley and more than 2,000 from Winston, and we’re all waiting for the proof that they got paid to do so.”) These are few of many athletes that violated the NCAA rules. So the question is should collegiate athletes be paid? In this paper I will show different views on reasons why athletes should be paid and why athletes should receive compensation. I will also show the effects on what paying collegiate athletes can cause.
The legal section of the paper will discuss the NCAA bylaws that prohibit college athletes from receiving benefits above and beyond what is indicated as part of the scholarship agreement. It also entails of the consequences if such bylaws are violated. In addition, the definition and purpose of the National Letter of Intent (NLI) will be discussed. Since the selling of rights is what brings in the most revenue
Ed O’Bannon, a previous UCLA basketball player filed a case looking to sue the NCAA for licensing players without consent. The NCAA marks their players as amateurs, therefore, they do not allow paying players. However after the ruling, the NCAA was found to be violating antitrust laws, which could potentially change the model of the system (Maese). Judge Claudia Wilken ruled an injunction that schools in the NCAA would be allowed to provide players a trust fund in order to compensate players for using their names in broadcasting, merchandise or imaging. In 2016, this trust fund will allow universities to conduct bidding wars for future recruits (Strauss, Tracy). This of course, would be able to be capped at a certain mark and would not be payable until after the departure of a student athlete’s time at a college or the end of their eligibility (Berkowitz) This court case could potentially change the way college sports are run.
The issue at stake in this particular paper is the situation of college athletes and the treatment they receive from the NCAA. The NCAA is currently financially and academically exploiting college athletes at very young age. The NCAA generates billions of dollars though the hard work of the student athletes, and the athletes are given no monetary compensation. The NCAA also expects college athletes to fully participate in academics, but with the rigor of the athletic
Imagine sitting down in the comforts of your home, relaxing on the couch, and eating your favorite junk food while playing your favorite video game. What if you 're actually playing as yourself on the newest NCAA football or basketball game. Wouldn 't that be awesome? Believe it or not it didn 't seem that awesome when Ed O 'Bannon, a former UCLA power forward, had a realization. O 'Bannon wondered why he wasn 't getting any compensation for being on the video game who had duplicated his image onto the game. As time went on and more athletes, past and present, were added as plaintiffs the case started to evolve. Not only did the case involve the NCAA video games, but the NCAA brand as a whole. Colleges make a fortune off athletes who in turn play in hopes of a professional career; however, even though athletes who play in college are granted a scholarship many struggle to pay for things such as laundry or food. Although the court ruled that NCAA violated it 's anti-trust laws in making the video games, the court still ruled in favor of amateurism in sports after the appeal of granting $5,000 payments to athletes. So the question still remains, should college athletes be paid to play? I propose that college athletes get a percentage of the profit directly from the Colleges based upon how much the specific sport profits within the Association.
Collegiate athletics has experienced rapid financial gain over the last twenty years. With that known, student-athletes have demanded a larger piece of the pie due to the fact that without the athletes no one would be making any of this money. At the point this suit was filed in 2009 the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) had refused to adopt policies that would allow for players to be compensated.
Tort law is a type of law that is designed to offer remedies to civil wrongs. Unlike contractual damages that occur, where responsibility is predetermined, tort law is designed for someone who is legally injured to be able to recover damages from the person who is deemed legally responsible, or liable for such injuries. Tort law is broken down into three main categories, negligence, strict liability, and intentional tort. In negligence tort one is accused of causing damages through their carelessness. After accusation of negligence the plaintiff must be able to show that the defendant had duty of care, and that a breach of duty had occurred that caused the damages. Strict liability is a
As sports become even more complex and diverse, within a society that has become even more litigious and risk averse, the involvement of the law and lawyers in sports is likely to become ever more prevalent. Segments of sports law are already highly regulated, including such things as player contracts, salary caps, collective bargaining agreements, ticket revocability issues, liability issues, merchandising and advertising issues. Identifying a specific area of the law is a necessity to understand all these components.