Nana’s rule prohibiting student-athletes from being compensated for the use of their names, images and likenesses violated federal antitrust laws (Johnson). A former basketball star at UCLA, De Abandon and several other current and former student-athletes brought the case up in 2009. Specifically, the athletes challenged the Nana’s rule that prevents Division men’s basketball and football athletes from receiving a share of the income that the NCAA and its schools earn from licensing agreements to use the athletes’ names, images, and likenesses in video games, telecasts, and other footage.
The athletes argued that the Nana’s rules violated the Sherman Antitrust Act as an unreasonable restraint of trade (Johnson). The Sherman Antitrust Act states that is a landmark federal statute in the history of United States antitrust law (or “competition law”) passed by Congress in 1890. Believe Division 1 athletes should get paid for their performance during the year because division 1 schools produce over 10 million dollars a year and athletes at division 1 schools are treated like employees. All television revenue, ticket and jersey sales, likeness promotions and other so races of income go to the
NCAA the schools, the coaches, the event staffs and everyone else involved in the business, except for the athletes creating the value. The NCAA currently produces nearly $11 Billion in annual revenue from college sports, more than the estimated total league revenues of both the National Basketball Association and the National Hockey League. The NCAA basketball tournaments, or “March Madness,” have become a huge business. As Forbes’ Chris Smith wrote, CBS and Turner Broadcasting make more than $1 billion off the games, “thanks in part to a $700,000 ad rate for a 30-second spot ring the Final Four”(Debate Club).
Athletic conferences receive millions of dollars in payouts from the NCAA when their teams advance deep into the tournament. Ditto for the coaches of the final squads standing. The NCAA, as a whole, makes $6 billion annually. But the players themselves don’t see any of that money, even as they risk career-ending injuries every time that they step onto the court, field or rink. Four out of Seven men from the debate club argued yes, college athletes should get paid and without the athletes, there would be no athletics or money.
Debate Club) While, the NCAA claims college athletes are just students, the Nana’s own tournament schedules require college athletes to miss classes for nationally televised games that bring in revenue. Currently, the NCAA Division I football championship is played on a Monday night. Last year, the national football championship game required Florida State football players to miss the first day of spring classes. Meanwhile, the annual NCAA men’s basketball tournament affects more than six days of classes (truly “Madness” if the players aren’t “employees”).
Kerchief) College players work hard and risk a lot for a sport that they receive nearly nothing for. Some players have been seriously injured during their sport and some have even died. A lot of athletes have worked their entire lives to get to the collegiate level so they can achieve success at their university and make it to the pros, but if they get injured or get diagnosed with an illness, all of that hard work goes down the drain. When the NCAA was first founded in 1 905, the opposition to paying student-athletes was akin to the opposition to paying coaches. But, coaches today get paid, and generously too.
So why would coaches be able to get paid when truly they do nothing to bring the money to the school, but recruit the “money makers” or athletes to come to the school to win games for them and ultimately make money for them. Many coaches such as Nick Saba, or Steve Spunkier to name a couple have offered to pay the players an annual salary directly from their own pocket. This would not only be a way to finally give compensation to student athletes but it would be an alternative for the NCAA so this dispute an be resolve and they would not have to spend any money in the process. Kookier) Many can argue that, what part of that year-to-year scholarship value of more than $40,000, medical benefits, along with the long-term value of not being in debt re-paying school loans isn’t a perfectly acceptable living wage? (Shannon ) The NCAA and its member schools are making huge money off the efforts of the athletes which is improper, yes, but the athletes are free to reject that system, to skip college and to make money as much money as they can at one of any number of jobs available to those without a college agree. Debate Club) However, the athletes work hard, train hard, and are being used for their day-to-day, god given talent. It is very hard for all but even the most motivated athlete to take advantage of that “free” education, especially if he’s missing midweek classes because of Thursday away games, not writing his papers and too busy practicing, lifting, playing, attending meetings to study. What this boils down to is that a lot of athletes are simply getting cheated out of the chance for an education while guys like you are saying they are getting n education for free (Ellipse).