mfosterftw
1/8/2008, 11:09 AM
From The Chronicle of Higher Education, this morning... JC gets quoted
The National Collegiate Athletic Association is close to settling a huge antitrust lawsuit that could lead colleges to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars more every year to their athletes.
The class-action case, scheduled to go to trial this month in federal court in California, accuses the NCAA of creating a hardship for college athletes by capping the amount of scholarship aid they may receive. Full athletics awards at Division I colleges include tuition, fees, books, and room and board. The suit asserts that athletes often must pay $2,500 or more annually out of their own pockets for basic expenses not covered by their athletics scholarships.
Stephen E. Morrissey, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, who include four former Division I football and men's basketball players, said in an interview on Monday that he expected the case to be settled within a few weeks. In a written statement, the NCAA said it had "sought to resolve this issue in a way that is consistent with our amateurism values and that would benefit student-athletes."
The NCAA initially defended the cap, saying that member institutions set limits on athletics aid to ensure competitive equity. But the association would risk losing big if the case went to trial, several lawyers said.
"There's a growing sense that athletes aren't treated as well as they should be, given how much money college sports brings in," said Michael McCann, an assistant professor of law at the Mississippi College School of Law. "If the NCAA went to trial and lost, it could have been a disaster."
According to some calculations, if a judge had ruled the NCAA acted illegally in capping scholarships, it could have been on the hook for more than $100-million.
The class, as defined by the lawsuit, includes Division I football and men's basketball players. But several athletics officials and legal experts believe a settlement would affect all Division I athletes in perpetuity, not just current players in the top revenue-producing sports.
A settlement would allow institutions to spend more money on players' out-of-pocket expenses, such as health insurance and personal travel. Athletics departments would probably not be required to pay the additional aid.
If they did, however, the money could add up fast. Paying all 85 scholarship football players an extra $2,500 a year would cost more than $200,000. Spending that much on 400 athletes would cost an additional $1-million.
Adding such big expenses worries some athletics officials, who say it could lead to cutbacks in programs.
"It may be too premature to speculate ... but I can see this as a precursor for reduction of varsity sports and limiting participation opportunities on certain campuses," Joseph R. Castiglione, athletic director at the University of Oklahoma, said in an e-mail message.
Raising the limit on athletics aid could also lead to further competitive imbalances in college sports, other officials said.
"It would be difficult to keep pace with a change like this," said Darin Spease, senior associate athletic director at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, a Division I-AAA program. "The small group of 'profitable' schools, and those that choose to dig deeper into deficit spending, could add yet another attractive component to their offer that would further widen the gulf that exists from a recruiting perspective."
It is possible, however, that the NCAA could allocate more money for athletes without requiring institutions to incur further costs. One possibility: The NCAA could allow more athletes to tap into funds it has set aside for players with special financial needs.
The National Collegiate Athletic Association is close to settling a huge antitrust lawsuit that could lead colleges to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars more every year to their athletes.
The class-action case, scheduled to go to trial this month in federal court in California, accuses the NCAA of creating a hardship for college athletes by capping the amount of scholarship aid they may receive. Full athletics awards at Division I colleges include tuition, fees, books, and room and board. The suit asserts that athletes often must pay $2,500 or more annually out of their own pockets for basic expenses not covered by their athletics scholarships.
Stephen E. Morrissey, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, who include four former Division I football and men's basketball players, said in an interview on Monday that he expected the case to be settled within a few weeks. In a written statement, the NCAA said it had "sought to resolve this issue in a way that is consistent with our amateurism values and that would benefit student-athletes."
The NCAA initially defended the cap, saying that member institutions set limits on athletics aid to ensure competitive equity. But the association would risk losing big if the case went to trial, several lawyers said.
"There's a growing sense that athletes aren't treated as well as they should be, given how much money college sports brings in," said Michael McCann, an assistant professor of law at the Mississippi College School of Law. "If the NCAA went to trial and lost, it could have been a disaster."
According to some calculations, if a judge had ruled the NCAA acted illegally in capping scholarships, it could have been on the hook for more than $100-million.
The class, as defined by the lawsuit, includes Division I football and men's basketball players. But several athletics officials and legal experts believe a settlement would affect all Division I athletes in perpetuity, not just current players in the top revenue-producing sports.
A settlement would allow institutions to spend more money on players' out-of-pocket expenses, such as health insurance and personal travel. Athletics departments would probably not be required to pay the additional aid.
If they did, however, the money could add up fast. Paying all 85 scholarship football players an extra $2,500 a year would cost more than $200,000. Spending that much on 400 athletes would cost an additional $1-million.
Adding such big expenses worries some athletics officials, who say it could lead to cutbacks in programs.
"It may be too premature to speculate ... but I can see this as a precursor for reduction of varsity sports and limiting participation opportunities on certain campuses," Joseph R. Castiglione, athletic director at the University of Oklahoma, said in an e-mail message.
Raising the limit on athletics aid could also lead to further competitive imbalances in college sports, other officials said.
"It would be difficult to keep pace with a change like this," said Darin Spease, senior associate athletic director at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, a Division I-AAA program. "The small group of 'profitable' schools, and those that choose to dig deeper into deficit spending, could add yet another attractive component to their offer that would further widen the gulf that exists from a recruiting perspective."
It is possible, however, that the NCAA could allocate more money for athletes without requiring institutions to incur further costs. One possibility: The NCAA could allow more athletes to tap into funds it has set aside for players with special financial needs.