you might find this paper of some interest. It sheds some light on the NCAA and where its anti-trust immunity has been challenged, and where it might hold. The Allston decision was very narrow, and did not address schools paying players, or that there was not legal avenue to stop a wild west model.
By the way here are a couple hypos that could become very real:
By the way here are a couple hypos that could become very real:
- 5* Player is offered an NIL deal for their alleged value by a crowd funded collective business. Behind the scene this was really inducing recruitment and pay for play - both of which on the surface violate NCAA rules.
- Player shows up and takes summer courses - gets all Fs - so under current rules the player is not eligible and actually is on probation at school. Does the player have legal recourse against the NCAA or school?
- Player shows up and while academically eligible turns out to be not that good. Not going to be a starter not seeing the field. Does the player have a cause of legal action against the coaching staff, the school or the NCAA?
- Player shows up and gets into a Title IX incident along with the other players. The NCAA declares player is not eligible and the school is sanctioned (ala Penn State). Does the player have a legal cause of action to seek a remedy in this situation?
