Tag:NCAA
The ACC’s Anti-Competition Contracts: Why Schools Continue to Fight the Conference’s Exit Regulations
In December 2023, Florida State University’s Board of Trustees filed suit against the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC) challenging the ACC’s grant of rights and “draconian” exit penalties. About three months later in March 2024, Clemson University filed a complaint against the conference challenging those same exit penalties and grant of rights issues. In response, the ACC filed legal challenges against both schools, arguing they agreed to the contract terms and were not allowed to leave the conference or challenge those agreements. Courts will have to look to the ACC’s grant of rights agreement, Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code, and State antitrust laws in determining who will succeed in this lawsuit. Several other schools have gotten around their conference’s grant of rights agreements in the Big 10, and Pac-12. However, unlike those conferences’ grants of rights agreements expiring in 2024 and 2025, the ACC’s agreement lasts until June 2036. Regardless, it is going to be difficult for these schools to succeed in challenging the agreements in court.
Congress Needs to Pass a Nationwide NIL Law
Matthew Sluka, starting quarterback for the then-undefeated University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV) football team, elected to use his redshirt designation and sit out for the rest of the 2024-25 football season, claiming that he was not paid the entirety of the $100,000 NIL deal he was recruited on. Sluka is now the first player to sit out in-season because of NIL disputes. However, it is very likely he will not be the last. Sluka claims that he was promised the $100,000 by the offensive coordinator. The school and team dispute the claims by Sluka, saying they had never promised him any money and the $3,000 he had received was for honoring a separate NIL engagement that summer. UNLV is claiming that Sluka and his representation’s financial demands to keep playing are against NCAA rules and Nevada state law. NCAA rules and Nevada law stipulate that a player cannot receive NIL just to play for or attend a school, there must be quid pro quo, (sign autographs, meet and greets, etc.) in order to profit from their name, image or likeness. Regardless of the underlying truth, Sluka’s situation has highlighted exactly why the NCAA cannot regulate NIL anymore.
Does College Athletics Need a New Regulatory Body?
In 2021, the Supreme Court decided N.C.A.A. v Alston. This struck down the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s (NCAA) previous prohibition on collegiate athletes earning money on their own Name Image and Likeness (NIL). There is now debate as to what the regulations around NIL should be and who should be making them. The NCAA is currently under fire for their lack of regulations on Name Image and Likeness (NIL) deals for collegiate athletes. Historically, outside of a scholarship, an athlete could receive no compensation for their athletic ability or participation in collegiate athletics.Patrick Chomczyk, a previous editor, wrote a blog in Sept. of 2021, after the Supreme Court Decision of N.C.A.A. v. Alston. He predicted that the NCAA would implement its own rules that comply with the Supreme Court ruling and Federal legislation could follow. In the wake of Alston, the NCAA has only instituted a few rules, all centered around keeping the concept of amateurism alive. Amateurism is the current model of college sports where student athletes are not to receive compensation for their athletic activities. This concept has been repeatedly challenged in recent years.
How Removing Cannabinoids from the NCAA Banned Substances List Benefits the Organization and the Players
As marijuana use has been legalized in some capacity in a majority of states, there remains a notable population who is still banned from its use: student athletes. However, recent recommendations to the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) means that change could be on the horizon for collegiate athletes. Earlier this summer, the NCAA Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports (CSMAS) signaled its support for removing cannabis from the banned substance list and drug-testing protocols for student athletes. On September 22, 2023 the committee officially recommended that all three NCAA divisional bodies adopt legislation to remove cannabinoids from the banned drug classes. The recommendation was based upon the conclusion at the Summit on Cannabinoids in College Athletics hosted by the NCAA last December. They concluded that cannabinoids are not considered to be performance-enhancing, and the current policy was found to be ineffective at prohibiting use, and better implemented by individual schools.
Protecting the Sport or Protecting the Person: Why NIL Deals for College Athletes Need Federal Regulation
Mayhem has ensued in the world of college sports since July 1, 2021, when college athletes could first benefit from their name, image, and likeness (NIL) based on an interim policy passed by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). Chaos emerged after a number of states adopted policies regarding athlete’s name, image, and likeness. This forced the NCAA to pass a policy allowing such deals across the board, while stating in their release that the organization would continue to work with Congress to create a solution on the national level. However, two years later, no such solution has come to fruition, and in that time, states that have a large investment in the success of their college sports have been able to create or edit their legislation to benefit the performance of their teams.
NCAA Name, Image and Likeness Legislation Raises Concerns
On June 29, 2021, Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker signed a bill into law that allows collegiate student-athletes to hire agents and sign endorsement deals effective as of July 1, 2021. This bill puts Illinois among a number of states which have begun to pass legislation allowing student-athletes to receive payment for the use of their name, image, and likeness (“NIL”). While these laws open opportunities for student-athletes, they also present several potential challenges to the NCAA, the governing body for collegiate athletics in the United States, and its member institutions barring any Congressional assistance.
Altering Injuries: Loss of Scholarship to Long-Term Consequences
Athletic scholarships pave the way for student-athletes to attend the schools of their dreams, yet serious injuries can turn their dreams into nightmares, regardless of whether the injuries have immediate or future effects. In the relentless pursuit of illustrious professional league contracts and national championships, athletes may fail to get properly evaluated or be less inclined to accept being sidelined for what they perceive as minor, short-term injuries. The unwary athlete may find themselves losing their scholarship and suffering life-long consequences as a result. While the NCAA was established in 1906 for the purpose of protecting athletes from a trend of injuries and death in college football, the governing body has seemingly veered off course of prioritizing student-athlete welfare.
Supreme Court to Make a Decision Regarding the NCAA’s Monopoly in Collegiate Athletics
The Supreme Court began hearing oral arguments in the matter of National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Alston, et al. on March 31st, 2021. After decades of controversy regarding what restrictions the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) should be allowed to place on their member universities to compensate their collegiate athletes, many antitrust experts hope that the Supreme Court’s decision will give a final decision on if the NCAA’s current regulations are a violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act and if they are, are they still justified by the NCAA’s goals.
Can the Playing Field be Level? Transgender Athletes’ Participation in Sports
To ensure safety and the best experience for athletes to excel in sports, eligibility to play on certain teams and at varying levels of competition has long depended on individuals’ biological factors, the primary factor being sex. This established practice of separating sport participation by two categories, male and female based upon the sex assigned at birth is being reexamined, particularly as it relates to individuals who were born male, now identify as female, and desire to compete in women’s sport. The federal government, state governments, and sport governing bodies are addressing the matters presented by athletes who transition genders, with opposition by both sides of the issues seemingly being the only commonality.
Spotlight on College Athlete Health and Safety Amid Covid-19 Pandemic
As Covid-19 restrictions begin to ease, sports leagues are tasked with implementing safety measures in an urgent and effective manner. Despite the rush for normalcy amid trying times, mitigating further spread and risks associated with the ongoing pandemic are at the forefront of these efforts. The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) is among the first organizations attempting to resume operations while facing significant health and safety considerations.