The NCAA has a lot on its plate today.
The Ed O’Bannon class-action antitrust lawsuit against the NCAA reaches another milestone Tuesday, when the sides engage in oral argument before a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.
It’s part of a busy day on the court — and in the courts — for the NCAA. The association will be starting its Division I men’s basketball tournament in Dayton, Ohio, and participating in oral argument in the appeal of another significant legal case: The state of New Jersey’s bid to legalize sports betting there.
There’s probably a metaphor in there about the current state of collegiate athletics, but I don’t have the energy to fish it out.
That being said, there’s bound to be a little something today that’ll give the 9th Circuit panel hearing the NCAA’s appeal a chuckle.
In disagreeing with Wilken’s ruling that would allow some payments for players, the NCAA wrote, “The court’s alternative would blur the line between amateur college sports and their professional counterparts and thereby deprive athletes of a genuine choice between the two endeavors.”
“That sentence bears re-reading,” lawyers for the Shawne Alston cost-of-attendance plaintiffs wrote in a friend-of-the-court brief. “In (the NCAA’s) view, it is the athletes that are going to be harmed because of the district court’s ruling. That contention likely does not pass the laugh-test, let alone provide a bulwark against antitrust liability.”
College athletes, of course, could “refuse the ‘minor’ payment at issue should they find it unpalatable (as unlikely as that may be),” the Alston plaintiffs wrote. Why college athletes, if given a choice, would turn down money is a head scratcher…
That must be why the NCAA wants the NBA to raise its age limit to 20, to give kids a genuine-r choice.
I’m guessing this is something about which Stacey Osburn has no comment.
*************************************************************************
UPDATE: Since this was mentioned in the comments, feel free to watch.
It’s amazing what they can say with a straight face.
LikeLike
Did you see John Oliver’s takedown of the NCAA Tournament and O’Bannon trial last night? Emmere
LikeLike
(*d’oh!) Emmett did not come off well, as is to be expected. Also – # soybeanwind
LikeLike
Granted, it was low hanging fruit for Oliver, but a pretty good evisceration nonetheless. Love the video game ad at the end. I would of also loved to see Colbert “take the side” of Emmert.
LikeLike
I just hope all this litigation does not interfere with getting the Augusta National course ready for the Masters. Don’t these people understand how crucial mowing the greens is to the national atmosphere?
LikeLike
Scorp, you are embarrassing yourself here. There are many things to scoff at in our world today, startling/really stupid things occurring every day in full view, laying out against something to be put on the mantle and admired is puzzling.
While I am tired with O’Bannon at this point, I am intrigued with the suit against NJ on sports betting. If sports betting is already legal in Nevada and most of the world outside the other 49 states, how is NJ significant in this? This does not even take into account the billions bet on sports illegally, or all the states that allow horse and dog betting. Standing in front of an attempt to legitimize, and tax, an activity that will occur regardless of your opinion or blessing is no different than Prohibition. It happens already, has been forever, and will be available to all, legally or illegally. It is like sending your kids to the drug dealer for marijuana instead of regulating it and selling it like you do beer, wine, and liquor. Why pass up the additional tax revenue and make people go to someone who makes a living breaking the law? Sports betting is best done in a legit environment, let NJ have it and hope it spreads.
LikeLike
Thanks for your thoughts Mac, always good to get another view. You must have a considerably larger mantle than do I. 🙂
LikeLike
Now at KFC Drive-Thrus in Colorado: medicinal greens.
Now excuse me while I go call my broker.
LikeLike
I’ve been wracking my brains trying to figure out the exact nature of the “choice” the NCAA finds so sacred, and I’ve narrowed it down to two possible permutations:
The choice between a) receiving direct financial compensation for busting their asses on the field on a daily basis or b) giving away that labor for free.
The choice between a) retaining their amateur status or b) joining the NFL, taking advantage of that league’s long-established affinity for granting opportunities to players with no college experience whatsoever.
Kind of reminds me of the Dred Scott case, in which the majority despaired over African-Americans being deprived of the choice between a) living out their entire lives working for no pay and b) being hunted for sport. Obviously that situation is just a wee bit more dire than what we’re discussing w/r/t O’Bannon; I’m just trying to say that perhaps none of these so-called “dilemmas” are quite as sacred as they’ve been portrayed.
But then I’m not a layer, so.
LikeLike
Oh, I bet you are a layer. 😉
LikeLike
Well, I don’t like to brag, but . . . at any rate, I’m clearly not a typist.
LikeLike
#SOYBEANWIND
LikeLike
The Oliver piece is so good.
LikeLike