I got to ski for free whenever I wanted. Seemed like a good deal to me. But maybe I was getting screwed by the man?

back in time(ie what is the year day that people can file a claim) if athlete's need to get some money? a swimmer is in the suit? no offense to swimming but you didn't get into swimming in college to make money.

This is from an On3 email newsletter that I get: =============================== It's impossible to overstate how radically the outcome of the blockbuster House v. NCAA antitrust case could reshape the entire college athletics enterprise. Friday night's ruling by U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken to grant class-action status for the remaining three damages classes ups the ante exponentially. The NCAA and power conferences could be ordered to pay some $4.2 billion in damages to former and current athletes. "A loss would financially cripple the NCAA and eliminate any rule-making authority it still has on athlete compensation," Mit Winter, a college sports attorney for Kennyhertz Perry, said. "This is why the NCAA has been pushing [Congress] hard for an antitrust exemption." Damages are now in play for thousands of athletes, not merely the three plaintiffs: former Arizona State swimmer Grant House, former Illinois football player Tymir Oliver and TCU basketball player Sedona Prince. Both sides in the case have engaged in settlement talks – and Wilken's Friday night bombshell likely will increase the urgency for the NCAA to try to settle. But, at this point, what is the plaintiffs' motivation to settle? For perspective, the 2020 Covid-driven cancellation of the NCAA tournament devastated college sports financially. The loss of more than $600 million in revenue prompted one high-ranking college sports official to tell me, "We literally cannot afford to go through anything like that again. It can't happen." Now $4.2 billion could be at stake. Wilken's ruling carries enormous implications but was not unexpected. She is the same judge who ruled against the NCAA in O'Bannon and Alston at the trial court level. Clearly, she is not averse to ruling that NCAA compensation rules violate antitrust law. Thousands of athletes could possibly receive NIL backpay as well as a slice of TV broadcast revenue, something most college leaders have aggressively tried to prevent as the value of TV rights contracts has grown considerably. And NIL rule changes could take hold that would permit schools and conferences to pay NIL dollars to athletes for any reason, including athletic performance. Wilken wrote in her ruling that she found "ample support for [the] plaintiffs' assumption that student-athletes NIL in broadcasts have value, and that their value is at least ten percent of the revenues of defendants' broadcasting contracts." "This is the case that could end the NCAA — or at least the NCAA in its current form," Winter said. "I'd look for some schools to now more seriously consider leaving the NCAA to be part of creating a new organization that operates under a model that complies with antitrust and employment/labor law." – Eric Prisbell

let the parties on all sides experience what it would be like with a D-III operation or no operation at all. Edit: Sorry Will. I know this position torpedoes your livelihood. I am just growing tired of the entire mess. ** Edited by 2hhoop3 at 11/7/2023, 10:04:09 PM

Coaches that I have been talking to the last couple of weeks. So I think there could easily be more of a separation between Academic and Athletic Scholarship students. It already exist, but there may be more a divide in the future on how they are treated.

especially at wealthier schools. I doubt many are truly on "academic scholarship," but people seem to use that phrase for anything that's not athletics money.

And many excellent students don't have academic scholarships. Many athletes aren't excellent students too. I've had the good ones and the bad ones in my classes. I've worked on financial aid too. It certainly varies from state to state and school to school. At VT, I can guarantee that very few athletes have academic scholarships. I worked quite directly with academic scholarships. Very few students in general have them at VT. In a state like GA with the Hope scholarship, many likely do...athletes and non.

of the private schools are the ones that give Academic Scholarships for Athletes. My point is where can they go if they start paying football and basketball players in college? One thing is to make all non-revenue athletic scholarships Academic Scholarships like they do for D3 and the Ivies. It “may” protect them from having to pay them like the revenue sports seemed to be headed. “If” they do that it will take a massive fund raising team like they have at the D3’s, Ivies and Ivy like schools. What do you think they will do if they start paying D1 football and basketball players as employees? Where will they get the money for non-revenue student athletes, in your opinion? ** Edited by Stech at 11/9/2023, 8:57:08 AM

It's just a bridge too far for academic institutions to hire athletes. I really can't imagine how it would shake out if things turned to an athlete-employee model. It would be a gigantic mess (also part of why I don't think it will happen...it's just a nightmare to operationalize) And, again...maybe semantics, but I think most of what you're calling "academic scholarships" is really need-based institutional aid.

like NIL was never going to happen, I think it eventually happens. I am not alone with this opinion, there are many think that way, like it or not, IMHO the courts will demand it. On the scholarships, I won't give you the sport to protect my anonymity, but these student athletes families have plenty of money and cannot get financial need based aid. I am telling you this information comes straight from college coaches, they get academic money based on their grades and SAT's. One of my children's teams in High School, 24 out of 25 made the honor roll, and several had SAT scores in the 1500's. One missed 1 question on the SAT 1 and SAT 2. I can tell you having dealt with College Coaches for decades with non-revenue athletes, the first question out of their mouth for the athlete, is what is your GPA and it needs to be in the 4.0 range for them to continue the discussion. The kids are often in shock because they think they won't be measured against the regular student applicants, but that is what happens with non-revenue sports way more than it doesn't happen. Maybe a couple of superstars on the team were cut a break, but that is the overwhelming minority situation in each class.

they can demand that athletes performing in a particular way be treated as employees....they can't demand that universities have that brand of athlete Your experience with non-rev student athletes is quite different from mine; Stars are cut breaks with regularity, Stars get admission when they'd not have had a chance otherwise. Certainly a coach loves a recruit who can be offered merit-based academic aid, but it's not the norm or standard. ** Edited by Pylons at 11/10/2023, 12:02:36 PM

As far as the courts not being able to demand they be treated as employees with compensation and benefits, my answer was your previous answer, we will see. Many thought NIL being brought into the courts and eventually the Supreme Court for a unanimous decision was impossible too.

... drop intercollegiate sports.Schools can't be forced to have sports teams.

revenue producing sports/athletes on Athletic Scholarships. Then they could put non-revenue athletes on Academic and need based scholarships/grants. Many D1 athletes already receive Academic and need based scholarships and grants. In fact that’s what all of the D3 athletes get that qualify, consequently they have an established model to follow.

Have athletes. They can require a school to treat them a certain way if they're there, but the school can choose to not have them. Universities don't have to play sports.

Financial need scholarships for non-revenue athletes. Thus possibly avoiding paying them as employees (compensation and benefits). “If “ the courts say you have to treat revenue producing Athletes as employees, they could possibly avoid treating them all that way if non-revenue sports are not on athletic scholarships The D3’s and Ivies etc. don’t have Athletic scholarships, so the model is already there. By the way, I am okay with what we have, but many people think revenue athletes will be turned into employees. My concern is continuing the non-revenue sports if the football and basketball money earned, goes to pay the players.

"but we gave them academic money" matters. You're an employee with an athletic scholarship and not without it?

because if the courts turn them all into employees and give all athletes employee status with compensation and benefits, there just isn’t enough there to do it IMHO. You’ve stated you don’t think it will happen, and if that’s right, there is no problem. However, I am a planner who always tries to have a Plan B. The differentiation is from Athletic Scholarships, and Academic/Need based Scholarships, could be the line drawn on making them employees.

How does "we gave him money that wasn't based on athletics" change the evaluation?'' "oh, we thought you were an employee, but now that we know you're smart..." really?

It would be damages for being prevented from pursuing NIL compensation, not "backpay." The people in this class never had NIL contracts that didn't pay out.

** Edited by Truthahn at 11/6/2023, 1:51:21 PM

...the current conference structure and contracts will be thrown out paving the way for a more formal "semi-pro" arrangement?

are playing for the joy of their sports.

No offense to swimmers, but swimming is solidly in the non-revenue category.

So the swimmer wants part of the money earned by the football team. That's nice of them. If all athletes have to considered employees, then look for all swimmers to be dropped.

In my opinion, no collegiate athlete "deserves" to be paid simply because they are participating in a sport. If athletes are pushing to be treated as employees, then they will have to accept the economics that go along with that; i.e. - compensation is tied to the value one brings to the "company".

Does that mean high schools should be paying there athletes? Do we pay the average Joe for doing a hobby? Where does it end?