Now on FishDuck.com: O’Bannon Decision is the Beginning of the End for the NCAA
My latest post for FishDuck.com is up, and you can read it here.
In this one, I dive into some of the legalities surrounding the NCAA’s case, and why Mark Emmert and co. have already lost the foothold in the battle over the term “student-athlete.”
“Once the issue of money turns into an issue of wages, then the public (and, more importantly, the court system) will begin to see athletes not as students playing an extra-curricular activity in which the schools themselves have no responsibility, but as employees who are generating revenue for said schools, and who can draw workers’ compensation in case of injuries incurred while playing sports.”
One commenter below the story raised a legitimate fear, that by paying athletes the cost of attendance will rise because schools will be in a bidding war for the top players in the country. However, the O’Bannon decision suggested that a cap on compensation would be possible, and probably the most practical. It’s hard to imagine the leaders of the five power conferences putting a model in place that forces everyone to outspend one another.
The power conferences could seek some form of anti-trust exemption that has worked so well in other sports, thus allowing a form of salary cap, whether it would be a max per player or per school. It just doesn’t make sense that the schools would agree to bid against each other all day long. Nobody wants college football to follow Major League Baseball’s example, with a luxury tax instead of a true salary cap.
Want more from Life After Football including free playbooks, exclusive content, and more?
Click here to sign up as an Insider and get access to all kinds of great coaching materials. It’s completely free and always will be.