Ncaa Business Law : Ncaa Law

“College Athletes for Hire, The Evolution and Legacy of the NCAA’s Amateur Myth” written by Allen L. Sack and Ellen J. Staurowsky. In their book, the authors enlighten the reader on such issues as athletic scholarships, professionalism in college sports, and favoritism for athletes as well as many more important legal, and ethical issues that we as a country need to address. In this paper I will not do a standard book report by simply regurgitating the information I read in their book.

Since the inception of high profile intercollegiate athletics, there has been a debate regarding the place of athletics within the structure of higher education. Within the last few decades, this debate has intensified as intercollegiate athletics has transformed into a multi-billion dollar industry that shifted the way athletic departments operate. College athletic departments have been able to generate millions of dollars in revenue through corporate partnerships, television contracts, alumni and donor support, and ticket sales (Toma, 2003). Specifically, this athletic revenue is primarily generated by football and basketball programs. College athletics has entered the “show business phase as football and basketball have evolved into commercial entertainment products (Duderstadt, p.69).” As the commercialization of collegiate athletics continue grow, the concept of student-athlete amateurism has become increasingly strained as there has been a push for providing student-athletes, specifically in football and basketball, additional compensation for their play.

Intercollegiate sports have been around since the 1850s to promote athletes to play for the love of the game and not for income. Recently, two different decisions have endangered this tradition: the decision by the National Labor Relations Board to recognize the Northwestern University football team as employees of the university and a federal judge’s decision regarding payment to football and men’s basketball players. Both decisions favor the idea of paying NCAA athletes because their games generate massive income; from ticket sales, merchandising, and TV and marketing contracts, that benefit the university, but not the athletes themselves (Majerol). Nonetheless, NCAA athletes should not be paid because of the problems that would arise from

Torts are classified as civil wrongs that are caused by a parties intentional or unintentional harm. Tort law is design to compensate the innocent party or force the guilty party to start or stop doing something.

The NCAA used to make a college football video games by school's athletes, however, they evaded to pay royalties to athletes by not disclose the name of athletes. It is not fair for the football players that NCAA took away their money. The author believes that the solution is to negotiate with the NCAA, even if, NCAA not allowed players to unionize, players still should negotiate to get enough scholarships. And he said that students need to benefit from their names and portraits, and athletes should be allowed to sign agency agreements with advertising agencies to make money with their image. An Associate Professor of Law at the Zicklin School of Business－Marc Edelman agreed with LaBlue’s opinion. In the article “Should College Athletes Be Allowed to unionize?” reported by the wall street journal states that Edelman argues players are employees and should to certain their rights. He summed up the benefits that unions can bring to athletes, and through unionization the control rights of the college sports can back to hands of students. For example, athletes have been lacking of insurance and disability benefits in matches during long time, however, the union can help these athletes improve their health care insurance and pensions. Before the athlete is punished, union can protected them by holding a hearing. The author stated, “At some colleges, men's basketball players are required to miss upward 20% of their spring-semester class days for athletic purposes,” many student athletes are deprived of the right of choose their own life, the University will replace them to decide class, study plan and schedules. many student athletes are deprived of the right of choose their own life, the University will replace them to decide class, study plan and schedules. Union can give them the freedom to

Now some of these players are felling exploited for their talents and believe they should be compensated. “More than 25,000 former NCAA Division 1 football and men's basketball players have filed for status as members of two class-action lawsuits settled by EA Sports, the NCAA and its affiliated licensing company” (Holder B.8). The players felt their names and likenesses had been used illegally and in mid-July a California judge agreed with them. The sixty million dollar lawsuit was decided in favor of the players. Due to the large number of claims submitted the maximum payout will be less than seventy two hundred dollars, most will see substantially

(Solomon 1) In the NCAA there are many laws that prevent the athletes from doing certain things. These laws are called the “Laws of Amateurism”. In general, amateurism requirements do not allow salary for participating in athletics, or prize money above actual or necessary expenses (NCAA Center). However Judge Claudia Wilken partially granted class action status in a lawsuit concerning the use of college athletes' names and likenesses. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken ruled the plaintiffs, including former and current Division I men's basketball players and Football Bowl Subdivision players, will be allowed to challenge the NCAA's current restrictions on what athletes might receive in exchange for playing sports. The ruling sets up the prospect of a fundamental change in scholarship rules and the concept of amateurism (Berkowitz 3). This would help athletes to be able to fight for the compensated pay.

During the summer of 2013 one of the biggest outrages in all sports, not just the collegiate division, was the story of Texas A&M’s golden boy Johnny Manziel. At the beginning of the football season Manziel shocked fans around the country with his remarkable abilities; abilities that would later make him the youngest Heisman winner at the time. However, a couple of months later no one would be talking about his talent or his Heisman, but the allegations surrounded around Manziel selling his signature on eBay for money. The NCAA strictly bans collegiate athletes to benefit in any way when it comes to their name and the revenue that comes with it. This shined light on one of the major controversies in college sports; the dispute of whether it is right to allow student athletes to benefit off their names. The NCAA ought to allow collegiate athletes the ability to profit off the use of their name because by allowing players to receive revenues it would ease the negative effects of playing collegiate sports for the student athletes.

The actions of the NCAA and their treatment of student-athletes has long been a major issue. The world of college sports is a multi-billion dollar enterprise built on the backs of its unpaid amateur “student- athletes”. The evolution of sponsorship and media rights deals are worth fortunes, for which the players receive nothing, except for their degree.

Abstract:  Collegiate athletes participating in the two revenue sports (football, men's basketball) sacrifice their time, education, and risk physical harm for their respected programs. The players are controlled by a governing body (NCAA) that dictates when they can show up to work, and when they cannot show up for work. They are restricted from making any substantial financial gains outside of their sports arena. These athletes receive no compensation for their efforts, while others prosper from their abilities. The athletes participating in the two revenue sports of college athletics, football and men's basketball should be compensated for their time, dedication, and work put forth in their respected sports.

Imagine sitting down in the comforts of your home, relaxing on the couch, and eating your favorite junk food while playing your favorite video game. What if you 're actually playing as yourself on the newest NCAA football or basketball game. Wouldn 't that be awesome? Believe it or not it didn 't seem that awesome when Ed O 'Bannon, a former UCLA power forward, had a realization. O 'Bannon wondered why he wasn 't getting any compensation for being on the video game who had duplicated his image onto the game. As time went on and more athletes, past and present, were added as plaintiffs the case started to evolve. Not only did the case involve the NCAA video games, but the NCAA brand as a whole. Colleges make a fortune off athletes who in turn play in hopes of a professional career; however, even though athletes who play in college are granted a scholarship many struggle to pay for things such as laundry or food. Although the court ruled that NCAA violated it 's anti-trust laws in making the video games, the court still ruled in favor of amateurism in sports after the appeal of granting $5,000 payments to athletes. So the question still remains, should college athletes be paid to play? I propose that college athletes get a percentage of the profit directly from the Colleges based upon how much the specific sport profits within the Association.

The legal section of the paper will discuss the NCAA bylaws that prohibit college athletes from receiving benefits above and beyond what is indicated as part of the scholarship agreement. It also entails of the consequences if such bylaws are violated. In addition, the definition and purpose of the National Letter of Intent (NLI) will be discussed. Since the selling of rights is what brings in the most revenue

Over the past years, There have been so many cases about collegiate athletes being suspended or losing their eligibility to play. When student athletes lose their eligibility they`re forced to stop playing the sport they love the most, even worse they also lose their scholarship. Athletes are getting in trouble for receiving money or some type of gift from boosters. By accepting these type of payment, The athletes violate the NCAA rules. (“Accepting these gifts makes both the athlete and the college look bad. Florida State is investigating Jameis Winston’s connection to James Spence Authentication, the company that was linked to suspended Georgia running back Todd Gurley. It’s reportedly certified 500-plus autographs from Gurley and more than 2,000 from Winston, and we’re all waiting for the proof that they got paid to do so.”) These are few of many athletes that violated the NCAA rules. So the question is should collegiate athletes be paid? In this paper I will show different views on reasons why athletes should be paid and why athletes should receive compensation. I will also show the effects on what paying collegiate athletes can cause.

I have been following the argument of whether student-athletes should be paid. Currently, many collegiate athletes feel that they are not properly compensated for their efforts and money generated. The NCAA is clinging to the notion of amateurism and what it means to the state and competitiveness of the game. With the ever-increasing money flow and a heightening amount of scandals and lawsuits the NCAA has reached a point where they need to pay the players or exterminate all impurities and reach pure amateurism across the board. I plan to expand on the rights of collegiate athletes and those forfeited when they become a “student athlete”. Then I will look to see whether the loss of rights is justified and whether the term “student-athlete”

The issue at stake in this particular paper is the situation of college athletes and the treatment they receive from the NCAA. The NCAA is currently financially and academically exploiting college athletes at very young age. The NCAA generates billions of dollars though the hard work of the student athletes, and the athletes are given no monetary compensation. The NCAA also expects college athletes to fully participate in academics, but with the rigor of the athletic