College Football Playoff expansion and NCAA men's basketball tournament rights reach annual total of $2.4 billion, with Iowa State's Caitlin Clark, the most marketable player in women's basketball history, driving the sport to unprecedented television viewership The push makes college sports look healthy, vibrant, and lucrative. That applies to everyone besides the participants.
Questions have arisen from university officials to legal scholars about whether athletes should receive a portion of their postseason earnings. These debates also spill over into athlete rights and employment situations, both of which are likely to be decided in federal court.
NCAA President Charlie Baker said in a short speech before Sunday's women's championship game, “I want to make some changes to how we support student-athletes in Division I.”
“We've done a lot to address this, but we're not going to get ahead of our members on something like that,” Baker said. “I'm sure that's something we'll talk about.”
But where does the membership stand on paying players? Judging by a recent panel discussion at the University of Iowa, legal scholars and experts are everywhere. Questions abound as lawsuits threaten to disrupt the current amateur model and the possibility of a college football Super League looms large. But officials agree that change is coming quickly.
“The avalanche has officially hit the NCAA,” said Dan Matheson, director of the Iowa Sports and Recreation Management Program and former NCAA executive vice president.
even deeper
Why is the NCAA proposing a new division? Explain the related legal battles
Legal challenges continue to mount for the NCAA after the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a 9-0 Alston decision in 2021 that allowed athletes to receive name, image and likeness (NIL) compensation. ing. The regional director of the National Labor Relations Board ruled earlier this year that Dartmouth's men's basketball players are employees. In the complaint filed with the NLRB and ongoing testimony, the National Collegiate Players Association considers USC athletes to be employees of the university, the Pac-12, and the NCAA. Additionally, past NIL rights class actions could cost the NCAA and its members more than $5 billion.
Employment is the final step in the blurred wall between amateur and professional status, as athletes are allowed to earn income from the NIL. This is the most difficult problem for most experts because no one can agree on the parameters. Is it just athletes in revenue-generating sports, or everyone? How does that affect Title IX? How much does each athlete earn? Can non-revenue sports survive?
Lawyers in the region are looking forward to engaging panel discussions and 2.0 hours of CLE time. Live stream options here: https://t.co/6iM16S9F7y pic.twitter.com/TZSgHoCUga
— Dan Matheson (@DanMatheson) March 27, 2024
Alicia Jessop, a sports management professor at Pepperdine and the school's NCAA faculty athletics representative, called for the NCAA to change course and recognize athletes as employees. Jessop, a member of the NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Oversight Committee and an attorney, said she was resistant and that talking about her collateral damage was “fear-mongering,” she argued.
“The NCAA continues to spend millions of dollars in lobbying dollars trying and failing to convince Congress to grant antitrust exemptions,” Jessop said. “Congress is just as likely to pass such a bill as Caitlin Clark is not the No. 1 overall pick in the WNBA Draft.”
Husch Blackwell law partner and former NCAA chief investigator Jason Montgomery disagreed.
“It's clear the NCAA is on the worst losing streak in sports since the Bills lost four Super Bowls. They're bad at litigating,” he said. “But the current established law in this country says college athletes are not employees. The Department of Labor says they are not employees. Federal courts have said they are employees. has never happened before.”
Universities are concerned that the status and compensation of employees could lead to the bankruptcy of athletic departments. Paying athletes could force some departments to eliminate many non-revenue sports that are the lifeblood of Olympic rosters. Of the 626 athletes on the 2020-21 U.S. Olympic team, 76 percent come from 171 different origins, said Libby Harmon, Nevius' general counsel who served as the NCAA's principal investigator for 10 years and as the University of Michigan's director of compliance. He said he was a current or former player. institution.
For Jessop, any attempt to curtail Olympic sports is an excuse. She cited figures from USA Today that show most Division I coaches' salaries will increase by an average of 15.3 percent in 2021, plus some scholarships, after many divisions were hit financially by the pandemic. It is said that the salary has increased and the salary has also increased. The Ohio State University School of Athletics spent more than $90.7 million on coaches and staff salaries and $23.8 million on athletic scholarships in fiscal year 2023, according to figures obtained by officials. The Athletic. Harmon brought up Texas A&M's $75 million acquisition of football coach Jimbo Fisher and said, “That could potentially give a Division I athletic department many times more money.”
“Don't think there's no money in the system,” Jessop said. “This will require a reallocation of funding. Top college coaches will take pay cuts and strength trainers will no longer receive their $1 million annual salary.”
even deeper
Some executives on the CFB Super League pitch see it as a way to save the sport.
Still, it would be naive to expect athletics departments not to continue investing in football and men's basketball, the only two sports that generate profits for most power conference schools. Montgomery argued that destroying the system, including employee status, could bring the whole thing down. For the past three years, athletes have had the opportunity to earn money from his NIL, a full scholarship to attend, and an annual educational stipend of approximately $6,000.
“College sports are more popular than ever,” Montgomery said. “Television in college sports is more popular than ever. Women's sports are at an all-time high. And NCAA member schools produce the most Olympians. So the landscape of college sports is in great shape. It's working. Let's change everything. It makes little business sense, and it makes little practical sense.”
Additionally, if athletes are considered employees, programs may hire and fire them strictly based on performance.
“What happens to the relationship when student-athletes become employees?” asked Josh Lenz, a sports and recreation professor at Arkansas State who previously worked in Baylor's Office of Compliance. “I think the relationship between the athletics department, coaches, and athletes will become more of an arm's length relationship, and more similar to a professional mode.
“There are great coaches out there, and there are great people out there who genuinely care about their athletes. That doesn't necessarily go away. But when an athlete knows they can have their scholarship taken away, the situation I think that will change.”
future
So, what will it be like in 5 or 10 years? Most experts believe that change will occur, including those who want to maintain the current system. But just how extreme is debatable.
“This domino is going to fall. It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when,” Jessop said. “Some universities will have widespread staffing.”
“I think it's going to be some kind of employment model or some other revenue sharing model. Either way, the athletes are going to be fully compensated over the next five years,” Harmon said. “What that will look like remains to be seen.”
“I vehemently disagree that we should change our world-envied model of success and move to an employment-based model,” Montgomery said. “We can come up with different distributions, and there are certainly areas in the university model that need improvement. But I think there will still be litigation over the next five years.”
Some believe schools and conferences direct revenue to athletes. Lenz said he knows of many competition administrators who want to negotiate with players right now.
“The NCAA may try to kick them out, but someone will take a very progressive step and do it themselves,” Lenz said.
Many, if not most, athletic departments are preparing for the next step and hope to close as soon as possible.In an interview with The Athletic“Not a day goes by that we don't talk about what the future holds for college athletics,'' Iowa State Athletic Director Beth Goetz said. This includes the discussion surrounding the Super Football League that was reported last week. The Athletic, where one organization would control college football through unions and collective bargaining. That would alleviate the persistent antitrust problems the NCAA faces.
“We all want what's best for college athletics and college sports. If you're really trying to figure it out, you can put limits on the ideas that come out and it's always going to be I don’t know if it makes sense,” Goetz said of football super players. alliance. “We don't know yet if this is something we should really pursue. But there may be some parts that actually lead to solutions. … I think they're good conversation starters.”
(Photo: Steph Chambers/Getty Images)
