Case

The chief example that I have chosen to illustrate the mistreatment of players and the overall corruption in the NCAA, is the court case of Ed O'Bannon v. NCAA.  In this case Ed O'Bannon, a former basketball player at UCLA, noticed while playing a video game that a player with his likeness was featured in the game without his consent.  The payer had the same position, body type, skin tone, jersey number, and the same dominant hand as O'Bannon.  After realizing this, O'Bannon decided to file a lawsuit against the NCAA claiming that they were in violation with the Sherman Antitrust Act.  The Sherman Antitrust Act, the first federal antitrust law, authorized federal action against any "combination in the form of trusts or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade."  O'Bannon's goal was that the court would rule that the NCAA cannot prohibit players ability to receive compensation from broadcasts and video games in which they are featured or their likeness is.  They hope that they can prove that the NCAA violated antitrust laws by conspiring with its partners to block college players from receiving compensation for being featured in games and broadcasts.  The NCAA on the other hand did not think they were in violation of these antitrust laws and argued, "that the appeal of college sports lies in amateurism and that if its amateur rules are compromised its future will be jeopardized. Lawyers will contend that N.C.A.A. rules protect competitive balance among schools and conferences and also allow colleges to provide a great deal more scholarships."  The NCAA time and time again has been falling back on this idea of amateurism as to why athletes do not deserve compensation.  They are claiming that they are protecting these athletes under the amateur system but this is only helping them further exploit athletes.  On August 8, 2014 a verdict was reached in which the court found that the NCAA's practice of barring payment to players was in violation of antitrust laws.  Schools would now be allowed to offer full cost-of-attendance scholarships to athletes, covering cost-of-living expenses that were not currently part of NCAA scholarships.  Also it ruled that schools be permitted to place up to $5,000 into a trust for each player per year of eligibility.  This result has been a major step forward for players, the court finally deciding that the NCAA has been exploiting their players for years.  Some argue that the $5,000 given to players after they have already left the university will do little to help them and that this ruling was a step in the right direction but not the final solution to the problem.  "Richard Southall, director of the University of South Carolina's College Sports Research Institute, said the ruling could at least serve as an invitation for athletes to "come to the adult table.""  He stated that after the ruling was made he received a large number of texts from players stating that the decision convinced them that they "actually can stand up" to the NCAA.  A change needs to come from within the NCAA and it is up to players and former players to make sure that this degree of exploitation does not persist.  O'Bannon said in a statement released after the court ruling, ''I just wanted to right a wrong.  It is only fair that your own name, image and likeness belong to you, regardless of your definition of amateurism.''  This case really sheds light on how athletes are being financially exploited by the NCAA and finally the courts are agreeing with them.  This idea of amateurism is what the NCAA is holding onto so tight and in order to progress the system, this title must no longer be given to college athletes.

Works Cited:
Eder, Steve, and Ben Strauss. "Understanding Ed O’Bannon’s Suit Against the N.C.A.A." The New York Times. The New York Times, 09 June 2014. Web. 26 Apr. 2015. <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/10/sports/ncaabasketball/understanding-ed-obannons-suit-against-the-ncaa.html?_r=0>. 

New, Jake. "Antitrust Loss for NCAA." Federal Judge: NCAA Violates Antitrust Law. Inside Higher Ed, 11 Aug. 2014. Web. 20 Apr. 2015. <https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/08/11/federal-judge-ncaa-violates-antitrust-law>. 

"Sherman Antitrust Act." Sherman Antitrust Act. Unite States History, n.d. Web. 25 Apr. 2015. <http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h760.html>.