Supreme Court rules 9-0 against NCAA regarding college athletes

[Cheerful]

"Nowhere else in America can businesses get away with 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," Kavanaugh wrote. "And under ordinary principles of antitrust law, it is not evident why college sports should be any different. The NCAA is not above the law."

[spork]

"Nowhere else in America can businesses get away with 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," Kavanaugh wrote. "And under ordinary principles of antitrust law, it is not evident why college sports should be any different. The NCAA is not above the law."

Finally. The NCAA and D1 universities are rent-seeking organizations that treat "student-athletes" as bonded labor.

[Parasaurolophus]

Good!

[dismalist]

While the decision is narrowly tailored to barring limits on educational benefits that can be given athletes, many states have already passed laws to necessarily allow pay to athletes.

Kavanaugh's concurring opinion is riotous: https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/06/21/supreme-court-rules-against-ncaa-in-landmark-antitrust-case/

Aside from removing an injustice, the decision and state laws will make college athletics more expensive and less widespread. :-)

[Ruralguy]

I have the feeling that this is going to bring on some unintended consequences.

[spork]

I have the feeling that this is going to bring on some unintended consequences.

I'm hoping it causes the costs of D1 athletic programs to spiral even further out of control, to the extent that universities are forced to choose between bankruptcy and leaving D1.

[dismalist]

I have the feeling that this is going to bring on some unintended consequences.

I'm hoping it causes the costs of D1 athletic programs to spiral even further out of control, to the extent that universities are forced to choose between bankruptcy and leaving D1.

Yo!

[Durchlässigkeitsbeiwert]

I'm hoping it causes the costs of D1 athletic programs to spiral even further out of control, to the extent that universities are forced to choose between bankruptcy and leaving D1.

Merely ending the charade of athletic programs "earning" money for their universities should be enough.

I wonder if escalating amenities for players (at least in the richest programs) would make other students less willing to subsidise this through all kinds of athletic fees.

[dismalist]

I'm hoping it causes the costs of D1 athletic programs to spiral even further out of control, to the extent that universities are forced to choose between bankruptcy and leaving D1.

Merely ending the charade of athletic programs "earning" money for their universities should be enough.

I wonder if escalating amenities for players (at least in the richest programs) would make other students less willing to subsidise this through all kinds of athletic fees.

Yes.

[Hibush]

I have the feeling that this is going to bring on some unintended consequences.

It will definitely increase the divide between wealth schools and less wealthy, the divide between high-revenue sports and other sports, and between telegenic top athletes and other athletes. It is not clear whether that is the intent of the plaintiffs, but those who know where their bread is buttered see where there is more butter.

[dismalist]

I have the feeling that this is going to bring on some unintended consequences.

It will definitely increase the divide between wealth schools and less wealthy, the divide between high-revenue sports and other sports, and between telegenic top athletes and other athletes. It is not clear whether that is the intent of the plaintiffs, but those who know where their bread is buttered see where there is more butter.

And the poorer, black students get more cash. The wealthy schools would have to pay more. More equality! Wonderful!

[apl68]

Remarkable (and kind of nice) to see the Supreme Court issue a unanimous opinion on ANYTHING!

[Durchlässigkeitsbeiwert]

I have the feeling that this is going to bring on some unintended consequences.

And the poorer, black students get more cash. The wealthy schools would have to pay more. More equality! Wonderful!

One negative unintended consequence may be that, having a pay-out closer at sight, more students from poorer backgrounds may try their luck as "walk-ons" (concept introduced to me by the certain Netflix show) with ruinous consequences for their financial well-being and, possibly, their entire life trajectory

[marshwiggle]

I have the feeling that this is going to bring on some unintended consequences.

And the poorer, black students get more cash. The wealthy schools would have to pay more. More equality! Wonderful!

One negative unintended consequence may be that, having a pay-out closer at sight, more students from poorer backgrounds may try their luck as "walk-ons" (concept introduced to me by the certain Netflix show) with ruinous consequences for their financial well-being and, possibly, their entire life trajectory

Is that really any different than the students who go into massive debt to attend "elite" institutions, or people who self-fund (a.k.a. go into debt) for graduate programs thinking it will be the golden ticket?

[Durchlässigkeitsbeiwert]

Is that really any different than the students who go into massive debt to attend "elite" institutions, or people who self-fund (a.k.a. go into debt) for graduate programs thinking it will be the golden ticket?

No, but similarity between "debt-financed walk-on" and "debt-financed phd" does not make either practice  more acceptable.