It has been the subject of heated debate for years. The so-called “student-athletes” in big-time college sports — FBS football and men’s Division I basketball — bring in billions of dollars a year for their universities and the NCAA but are entitled to nothing in return other than a scholarship that most agree does not even cover the full cost of attending school.
But a new lawsuit claims that the NCAA rules against player compensation violate the antitrust laws as an agreement among universities to fix the prices paid to college athletes.Their goal is to change the system so that big-time college athletes are free to secure the best possible terms of their college enrollment. After all, college sports these days is big business and why shouldn’t the kids who make it all happen, often sacrificing their bodies (and education) in the process, have the ability to share in the spoils.
Defenders of the current system, however, argue the ban is necessary to preserve the amateur nature of college sports and preserve the overriding educational mission of the NCAA and its member universities. Once that system is broken, they claim, college sports will never be the same. Nor will the governing ideal that these players are students first and athletes second.
So where do you stand on the issue: do scholarships do the trick, or should big-time college athletes share in the multi-billion dollar pie?
Please let us know why in the comment section below.
* * *If you would like more information or would like to speak to a member of Constantine Cannon’s whistleblower lawyer team, please click here.