A US appeals court may not have revolutionized college sport on Wednesday but there was a small victory for the movement to pay student athletes when it upheld a ruling that the NCAA violated antitrust laws by not allowing players to be compensated for the use of their images.
But the 9th circuit court of appeals did not fully endorse the idea of paying athletes directly by rejecting the lower court’s recommendation that football and basketball players receive $5,000 from their schools in deferred compensation.
The news is a mixed blessing for those who would like to see athletes paid. The 72-page ruling said that while many of the NCAA’s rules are designed to support a fair competitive playing field for its schools and keep from driving athletes from the rest of the student body, they are not exempt from anti-trust exemption. But in denying the deferred $5,000 the court did not give athletes an immediate reward.
In the case, named for former UCLA star basketball player Ed O’Bannon, players successfully argued that the NCAA could not sell their likenesses to video game companies without paying them for their use. The NCAA had maintained that doing so would damage the amateur status of its athletes.
College athletes, many of whom come from poor backgrounds, have complained that schools exploit their talent by making tens of millions of dollars through television contacts, tickets sales and marketing deals while not paying them more than the cost of a scholarship and room and board. They have been especially bothered by seeing replicas of their jerseys sold for more than $100 and seeing themselves in video games while not receiving royalties themselves.
In Wednesday’s ruling, the appeals court said the NCAA’s rules were “not exempt from antitrust scrutiny”. The court said the NCAA’s rules had significant anti-competitive effects by essentially fixing a price for the cost of attendance. It also said the lower court had identified a proper technique for compensation by allowing schools to pay athletes the difference between their grant-in-aid and cost of a full scholarship.
The five major college conferences have already agreed to pay the difference between grants and full scholarships, which can be worth several thousands of dollars a year.
