Breaking: scotus rules against ncaa
NEW: In a victory for college athletes, SCOTUS unanimously invalidates a portion of the NCAA's "amateurism" rules. The court says the NCAA can no longer bar colleges from providing athletes with education-related benefits such as free laptops or paid post-graduate internships.
— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 21, 2021
I'm disappointed SCOTUS didn't ban the NCAA, order that its headquarters be burned to the ground, and provide for the salting of the land around the HQ.
ETA: Oh, I see Kavanaugh expressed a similar thought, basically begging somebody to kill the NCAA's other rules on compensation.
So can athletes finally put cream cheese on their bagels without penalty?
brills.
Lets pump the brakes. Are they a Pac12 or Big Ten team? If so no. UNC Miami Kansas anyone with a pulse in the Sec? Sure no worries.
Well you could always put cream cheese on your bagels, the school just can’t provide it for you
Only the ones in FBS or Div I basketball.
(was about to post a snarky SCOTUS take but refrained.)
In his writing the court’s opinion, Gorsuch recalled Fielding Yost.” I didn’t realize the transfer portal dated that far back.
The absence of academic residency requirements gave rise to “‘tramp athletes’” who “roamed the country making cameo athletic appearances, moving on whenever and wherever the money was better.” F. Dealy, Win at Any Cost 71 (1990). One famous example was a law student at West Virginia University—Fielding H. Yost— “who, in 1896, transferred to Lafayette as a freshman just in time to lead his new teammates to victory against its arch-rival, Penn.”, moving on whenever and wherever the money was better.” F. Dealy, Win at Any Cost 71 (1990). One famous example was a law student at West Virginia University—Fielding H. Yost— “who, in 1896, transferred to Lafayette as a freshman just in time to lead his new teammates to victory against its arch-rival, Penn.”
The SCOTUS opinion makes clear that the student-athletes' lawyers F'ed up by not pressing forward with an overall repeal of the NCAA's compensation restrictions. A big missed opportunity (if you agree with their case).
Without wandering too far down the SCOTUS rabbit hole for this blog (hopefully), I'm just gonna say that I'm kinda surprised that they ruled that way.
I think that the NCAA has managed to do something quite rare these days, which is to more-or-less unite Americans. Unfortunately for the NCAA, I think we are united in hating the NCAA.
Agreed. The NCAA is the new USSR.
I don't see a difference between the old USSR and whatever it is they have today.
When you hate who I hate whatever you do, no matter how egregious, is forgivable. That statement is meant to be bipartisan.
Former Soviet states have their own teams and don't have to add their medals to Russia's?
Name's different.
The USSR was a legit world power and worthy adversary. Russia GDP is smaller than Italy’s and they don’t even have a serviceable aircraft carrier. Sad.
Except that Russia inherited a permanent seat at the UN Security council, and nuclear triad and over 6,000 nuclear weapons
The seat should've gone to Estonia instead.
Who has hotter women, Italy or Russia?
Chuck Todd and the NCAA do the near impossible.
There is no theory of Constitutional interpretation that would have resulted in an NCAA win. "We're special" isn't a legal theory.
That hasn't really stopped the court from similar oddball rulings.
seems the chief has made a conscious effort to consolidate support into 9-0 rulings whenever possible.
Unanimous! That’s how you know you’re completely in the wrong lmao
Devastating.
Disagree with them in no other place businesses can get away with not compensating their employees fair wages.
See postgraduate medical education aka residency. Free labor for hospitals.
I recently learned that the architect of the modern residency program was addicted to both cocaine and painkillers when he constructed the approach.
my son with $$$ med school debt agrees with you.
Girl Scouts.
So let's take a look at this. College athletes not getting fair compensation. Medical residents not getting fair wages, often at big collegiate research hospitals. College teaching assistants and adjunct professors with preposterously low pay.
What is the common denominator?
You could also include "Big Colleges, including public universities that receive state tax dollars, that have billions of dollars in endowments" but maybe that makes it too obvious.
What is the common denominator?
Low pay???
Colleges. Elitist institutions with tenured professors making cushy six figure salaries for teaching a few classes and having grad students do their research.
You know, Colleges. Elitist institutions with bloated, overpaid administrations while exploiting teaching assistants and adjunct professors.
Most hospitals in the US aren’t university centers. Try again Ayn Rand
Ayn Rand? I'm sick of large institutions fucking over average people. How exactly does that make me an Ayn Rand disciple?
I've been a nurse for 20 years. Floor, ICU, Nurse Anesthetist. I've seen a lot of residents at work. The $20k some of them get is too much. Some it could definitely be more. As far as free labor goes, one of my instructors was appalled we didn't get paid in graduate school. She thought we made at least as much as the residents
Lol what?
God if only they had written the cooler-pooping tradition in Columbus into the annals of settled case law.
God if only they had written the cooler-pooping tradition in Columbus into the anals of settled case law.
FIFY
Amen
Exactly what we’ve been saying for almost 20 years, if not more.
The NCAA has to be the most archaic and worthless organization in the U.S. Terrific that Congress and SCOTUS are finally sticking their boots right up the NCAA's ass - these changes should have been made decades ago.
A great and devasting line:
"agreeing not to pay their workers a fair market rate on the theory that their product is defined by not paying their workers a fair market rate."
This case can be explained by a version of the “big pig” theory, which legendary UM law professor L. Hart Wright used to explain more than one tax decision. As NCAA schools earned more and more money, paid coaches huge salaries, expanded coaching staffs, added bureaucrats, and lavished all of them with the spoils of the athletes’ efforts, while telling the athletes they could be happy with essentially the same benefits their predecessors got in the 1940’s when money was scarce, they just looked too fat and greedy. Such conduct invites scrutiny, and usually results in negative consequences. It is somewhat amazing that the NCAA never realized that judgment day was inevitable.
I read the decision narrowly as applying, as far as football is concerned, only to Alabama and Notre Dame...
If I were an athlete, I would suggest I need to get to class in a Maserati.
You're being tongue in cheek, but I see no reason why providing a car wouldn't be considered acceptable under this ruling.
Yep, I was being absurd, but there is no *obvious* reason to me that nice versions of things that facilitate getting an education cannot be provided.