05-06-2022, 06:10 PM
I agree that the NCAA blew it. The case they lost in the US Supreme Court involved indirect educational expenses (for example money for a computer or graduate school), and the NCAA acted as if granting it would result in the end of amateurism. O’Bannon v. NCAA wouldn’t have happened had the NCAA not ripped off O’Bannon’s likeness for a video game and prohibited him from getting a penny from it. You can imagine a different scenario where they say that NIL money goes into a fund that athletes can draw from post graduation, and agrees to a modest sum for educational expenses and these things never get to the Supreme Court.
Be that as it may, it is always dangerous to extrapolate from one ruling to another and we should not assume that because the Supreme Court ruled against the NCAA on a few narrow issues that it would automatically open the floodgates. Kavenough maybe (his concurrence suggested as much), but I am sure 5 justices could twist themselves into arguing that refusing to give an inch is restraint of trade but that refusing to let the boosters take a mile is not.
BC
Be that as it may, it is always dangerous to extrapolate from one ruling to another and we should not assume that because the Supreme Court ruled against the NCAA on a few narrow issues that it would automatically open the floodgates. Kavenough maybe (his concurrence suggested as much), but I am sure 5 justices could twist themselves into arguing that refusing to give an inch is restraint of trade but that refusing to let the boosters take a mile is not.
BC