Ed O'Bannon v. NCAA

[CaribouJim]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-football/news/20130619/ncaa-ed-obannon-hearing-primer/?sct=hp_wr_a1&eref=sihp

This will be very interesting to follow. One possible outcome:

Wilken grants certification If Wilken certifies O'Bannon's class, O'Bannon would have to provide notice, through websites and in publications, to the tens of thousands of current and former Division I men's basketball and football players. They would receive instructions on how to opt out of the litigation and thus preserve their legal rights; if they don't opt out, they would be presumed members of the class. Most would not opt out, meaning thousands of people would be suing the NCAA and seeking damages.
At that point, the NCAA's litigation strategy would likely turn to aggressively seeking a settlement with O'Bannon. The NCAA would want to avoid a trial -- currently scheduled for June 2014 -- that, if the NCAA loses, could lead to it paying billions of dollars in damages to current and former athletes. The idea of a settlement where the NCAA pays into a fund administered by a third-party would gain traction. Fast.

[TheSultan]

Here is a good summary of the case:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/20/sports/high-stakes-games-critical-step-for-suit-seeking-payment-for-college-athletes.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0&hp

[DCwarrior]

I'm a bit torn on this issue as I do believe high major BB and FB players are being exploited by the NCAA and their schools to a certain degree and probably deserve a stipend or be allowed to profit off their name recognition (and yes I realize a scholarship can be worth over $100K). However, if the NCAA were to lose this case badly, it would probably mean the end to scholarships for all non-revenue generating sports (except as to fund an equal number of female scholarships to be in compliance with Title IX). If schools are forced to split TV and licensing revenue with men's hoops and football players, there isn't going to be enough money left over for schools to fund Lacrosse, Golf, Track, Tennis,...

[Goose85]

Very slippery slope.
Can you give a stipend to football / men's basketball without doing the same for all athletes?
Do walk-ons get the stipend too (think of all the walk-ons that get playing time / have started for the Badger football team)?
At what point would a stipend mean the players are being paid, thus they become employees of the university?
Who pays the players, the NCAA / the school / video game companies?

[TheSultan]

Very slippery slope.
Can you give a stipend to football / men's basketball without doing the same for all athletes?
Do walk-ons get the stipend too (think of all the walk-ons that get playing time / have started for the Badger football team)?
At what point would a stipend mean the players are being paid, thus they become employees of the university?
Who pays the players, the NCAA / the school / video game companies?


Just tack on extra money to the value of the scholarship. Have it cover the total cost of attendance and not just the direct costs. Or you can even add on more...a taxable portion like a graduate assistantship. (Which would require some benefits (like FICA and Medicare) and worker's compensation coverage.)

[DCwarrior]

The lawsuit seems to be related only to men's BB and FB. Tacking on a few thousand dollars to each player's scholarship won't remedy what this lawsuit is about. The O'Bannan lawsuit is going after the big dollars. If the O'Bannan case receives class action status and wins their court case against the NCAA, the players and former players are going to receive a portion of the TV, Internet, Video Game, and Jersey sales (anything with their likeness on it). The players would basically become a psuedo-union ala professional leagues where the players receive a percentage of all revenue.

[TheSultan]

The lawsuit seems to be related only to men's BB and FB. Tacking on a few thousand dollars to each player's scholarship won't remedy what this lawsuit is about. The O'Bannan lawsuit is going after the big dollars. If the O'Bannan case receives class action status and wins their court case against the NCAA, the players and former players are going to receive a portion of the TV, Internet, Video Game, and Jersey sales (anything with their likeness on it). The players would basically become a psuedo-union ala professional leagues where the players receive a percentage of all revenue.


Good point.

[GOMU1104]

How about allowing athletes to use their likeness to profit...allow Jamil Wilson to get a percentage of #0 jersey sales?

[Nukem2]

How is this all any different than the Olympics for which the participants (amateur or professional ) do not share in any of the media or ancillary rights/fees/profits/whatever...? I suspect Olympians sign some disclosure form to the effect that they will not be directly compensated. Certainly those Olympians ( other than "amateurs" ) can enrich themselves with indirect endorsements, etc. But, they do not share directly.

[CaribouJim]

I can't get over that Ed O'Bannon was the star on the '95 team - seems like it was yesterday - geez.

[unclejohn]

Add me to the list of people who are divided on this one. I do find the prospect of basketball players and football players driving around campus in their fancy cars while the NCAA sanctions some female athlete for washing hers on campus disturbing. Of course, this happens now, but it is officially illegal and it doesn't happen everywhere. The prospect of throwing open the doors and effectively making college players pro athletes is not something I think would be good. It would reduce college athletics to the big-time football schools with everybody else playing on the D-3 level. OTOH, I can certainly see O'Bannon's argument that the NCAA is making money selling his image years after he left school, and he gets nothing out of it. If I were in his position, I'd be pretty unhappy about that.

I recall a few years ago when a friend of mine was working on a PhD at a MAC university, so he hung around with lots of professors. He told me that so few players actually make it in the pros that the rules should prohibit them from playing in the NBA until they were of the age to graduate from college. He suggested that they could play minor-league ball for, oh, say $20.000 a year or something. This was at the time Tracy McGrady tried and failed to get into DePaul, and went straight to the NBA instead. My very bright friend really figured that this would be good for the kids coming out of high school who were never going to play in the NBA. It really didn't occur to him that this would be illegal for a whole raft of reasons, or that what he was suggesting, and what lots of schools like about the current situation, is that it allows them to make lots and lots of money off the uncompensated labor of young men, at the cost to some of the athletes of great sums of money and the loss of a portion of their most productive years. When the NCAA starts talking about protecting the interests of athletes, I always get a little suspicious.