So the Supreme Court is currently hearing arguments in Alston vs the NCAA. Essentially it's arguing that the NCAA is violating antitrust laws by restricting education-related compensation. It's a HUGE step in getting players the ability to make money on name, image and likeness and really change the NCAA. Now, the NCAA seems to have brought in a heavy hitter for a lawyer. Read some of those quotes and tell me you don't picture this guy
Now I have no idea how the Supreme Court will rule here because it's the Supreme Court and there are always loopholes, but this is showing on a VERY big scale just how dumb the NCAA is. We have name, image and likeness bills popping up everywhere and that should be legal. We need the NCAA to change. Again, no one is saying for schools to pay players more. It's just letting them make money on name, image and likeness. I simply don't understand why people are against that. The most common argument I hear is that 'it'll alter recruiting.' Uhh, how? Alabama is going to get the best football recruits? Kentucky and Duke will land top basketball recruits? That'd be a crazy world.
Gotta admit this argument is hilarious:
I always said when I was tailgaiting outside Commonwealth Stadium that I loved seeing the unpaid guys go to work. It was reason number 1 why I loved college football. Outside Giants Stadium? Just not the same seeing those paid athletes play. It's why I love college sports in general. The text chain with the fellas always starts on gameday with thanking God these kids aren't compensated or able to be compensated more than a scholarship.
See, this is where I'm worried about the Supreme Court ruling for the NCAA though:
What's next? Clarence Thomas is going to say Tennessee is still a power? Nebraska football hasn't been relevant since Eric Crouch was running around back there.
Here's the background on this case (h/t CBS):
This is the first time in nine decades that the nation's top court will hear a case involving the NCAA. At the heart of the matter is whether there should be a cap on educational benefits athletes are allowed to receive, such as computers, science equipment and musical instruments.
Attorney Jeffrey Kessler, the plaintiff's attorney, told CBS News' Jan Crawford that "what the players are hoping for is that the Supreme Court will reaffirm that the NCAA is subject to the same antitrust laws that apply to every other business in this country."
The case is just a small part of a bigger battle. College athletes, often on sports scholarships, are not eligible to receive financial compensation. But those same rules do not apply to students on a music or art scholarship, who are allowed to accept outside payment for their work.
Along with NIL, here's ultimately the same problem I have with the NCAA:
Everything is completely outdated. The rules were written for decades ago. Things change, it's time for the NCAA to change as well. There's more money coming into college sports than ever. TV deals are larger than ever. Again, I don't think schools should have to pay athletes because of Title IX and it would cut sports. Just let them make money on NIL. It's the perfect middle ground. It's truly an open market based on personal value like anything else in the world. Just let it happen. We're all still going to watch and cheer for the same laundry that we do every year.