If you’re an attorney, the NCAA is kind of a dream client — awash with money, stubborn as hell, unwilling to compromise, etc. The result? Cha-ching!
In a separate response to questions from USA TODAY Sports, the NCAA said that its expenses for fiscal 2017 also included approximately $36 million for outside legal counsel. In 2016, according to the NCAA’s federal tax records, it had nearly $33.5 million in outside legal expenses.
From 2014 through 2017, the NCAA has totaled more than $108 million in outside legal fees. That amount does not include the $42.3 million in attorney’s fees and costs U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken awarded in March 2016 to lawyers representing the plaintiffs in the Ed O’Bannon antitrust case. The NCAA has appealed that decision to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which heard oral arguments on the matter three weeks ago.
$150 million… goodness. That could fund a helluva lot of scholarships, methinks.
Of course that’s not how the NCAA thinks. At least not with regard to how to spend savings. But the savings themselves? I’ve got to think even Emmert’s a little appalled about how much the organization is spending on legal assistance. Maybe that would explain outsourcing enforcement work to a shop that doesn’t charge clients for its work.
Get The Picture 
Gritty. Must all be going to the truck show.
Sent from my iPhone
LikeLike
Really, NCAA? Methinks you protest too much.
LikeLike
Kind of like the old saying, most people work for 3 months out of a year just to cover income taxes. I guess the NCAA holds March madness to cover legal fees, then they keep the rest for their salaries.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’ll do it for half the price as long as I’m also expected to keep losing.
LikeLike
You beat me to it. 🤣🤣🤣🤣 First thing I thought was “I could have gotten bad results for a lot less.”
LikeLike
A lawyer’s dream, that happy confluence of principles and MONEY!
LikeLike
Paying lawyers may be cheaper than paying players.
LikeLike
Lawyers will not allow that to stand!
LikeLike
only in the short term, but the NCAA is only concerned about covering the contracts of the current employees.
LikeLike
It’s not because we aren’t TRYING to be more expensive.
LikeLike
damn a job for me in my retirement. Am I a lawyer? NO, but I will take the money.
LikeLike
I’m not an a attorney, hell, I didn’t even stay at a Holiday Inn Express, but if the NCAA uses the Claremont Journal of Law and Public Policy argument, aren’t they admitting they are illegally restricting trade, vis-a-vis their “homeowners association rules” ?
LikeLike
That article linked to contains a great many logical fallacies and makes little to no sense.
For example, the author asserts that ” absent the NCAA’s rules governing athlete compensation, there would be no “crime” upon the schools.” This logic includes the implicit concession that there was, in fact, a crime upon the schools. The argument that “if things were different they would not be the same” is fine as far as it goes but you have to wrestle with how things are.
Nevertheless, the author seems to think that “That the FBI and U.S. Attorney’s Office have nonetheless spearheaded this case is troubling on several fronts.” This is a non-sequitur. The author concedes a crime has been committed and then asserts that the FBI investigation of the crime is troubling because the author doesn’t like the NCAA.
The the author then asserts “the government has essentially criminalized a private association’s bylaws.” This is simply untrue and the first two paragraphs in the article make clear that this is not what happened. The crime was not the violation of NCAA bylaw- the crime was providing inducements(bribes) to coaches and to student athletes in a way that, once revealed, harmed a public institution (the university).
The author shrugs this off not by explaining that a crime wasn’t committed but by explaining that the NCAA and Universities “through their collectively agreed-upon bylaws, strip college athletes of their economic rights.” Again, this is a non-sequitur. Just because the NCAA and Universities are bad (stipulated!) that does not mean it is impossible for them to be victims of an illegal scheme.
LikeLike
Ha! You told on yourself Senator! You are trolling the base with vitriolic propaganda to pay the players so you can accrue fees! I’ll see myself out…..
#sarcasmfont#amidoingitright?
LikeLike