The Current State of the NCAA

Last week, the largest and most influential ruling since NCAA vs. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma was handed down from federal court. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken found in favor of former UCLA basketball star Ed O'Bannon, lead complainant, who sued the NCAA over claims of antitrust law violation.

Ed O'Bannon vs. NCAA

For years, the NCAA has restricted the compensation that a college athlete could receive to their scholarship, room and board, books, and other fees associated with their athletic and academic pursuits at the school. As the commercial enterprise that is collegiate athletics has continued to expand, many have questioned why that restriction has stayed stagnant and not shifted with the exploding landscape.

When O'Bannon and his 19 co-complainants filed this lawsuit, they were not searching for a big payday; they wanted change. There is no reason that in our capitalist society and economy should a person be denied the opportunity to make money on their self. This ruling states that the NCAA, conferences, and schools will no longer be able to conspire to block athletes from getting a share of the revenues that their likenesses and images create on TV, in video games, and in other media.

You can read Judge Wilkins' full 99-page decision here.

The beauty of this decision is that not only is a precedent setter for future lawsuits, it proves that the millions spent by the NCAA on lobbying couldn't help them in this situation, but it also is a bit of a win for both sides. Judge Wilkins decision does not allow athletes to receive a check for the use of their likeness in school. It instead sets up a trust fund to pay them after they leave their institution and college athletics. This is important for the pro-NCAA crowd as detractors talk about how the extra money in the pockets of immature college athletes would lead to nothing good, so this method will satiate that concern.

It is unclear what else will/could/should come after this decision, but it is safe to say that there will be plenty of appeals (the NCAA has already announced that they will appeal Wilkins' ruling that they were in violation of antitrust law), new policies, and hopefully happier and more fulfilled student-athletes.

Personal Opinion

As a person interested in working in college athletics, I can understand why, from a personal perspective, why administrators would want to restrict the pay to athletes. The money that would be going towards their salaries, raises, new job positions, and fancier offices will be cut in order to fund these athlete trusts. But as a capitalistic thinker and sport purist, I don't think it is fair to sit by and allow those physically earning the revenues to go uncompensated. It is time that the gap is filled and athletes become more able to support themselves, their family, and their career by removing any financial barriers from their way.