•  
  •  
 

Abstract

For decades, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and its member universities claimed they could limit compensation for collegiate athletes because amateurism made college sports different from other professional sports leagues. However, college athletics changed immediately following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Alston v. National Collegiate Athletic Association. In that case, the Court held that certain compensation restrictions from the NCAA violated antitrust laws. After this ruling, college athletes became eligible to license their name, image, and likeness (NIL) in exchange for compensation. This long overdue right for college athletes resulted in disjointed state laws and a helpless NCAA urging Congress to provide a uniform standard. The proposed federal legislation that followed was inadequate to protect the interest of collegiate athletes and never received the necessary bipartisan support to advance past the initial discussion in Congress. Without intervention from the federal legislature, the NCAA faces mounting litigation from current and former collegiate athletes for violating antitrust laws with its compensation restrictions. While the NCAA could continue to wait on Congress, recognizing collegiate athletes as employees and engaging in collect bargaining presents the best route to equitably regulate college athletics. This approach gives college athletes a voice in any regulations regarding NIL licensing and revenue sharing. Collective bargaining would provide stability for all parties during a tumultuous period for college athletics.

First Page

1199

Download

Share

COinS