Tucson, Arizona 2021-06-21 21:01:39 –
Tucson, Arizona — In the Supreme Court, college athletes won a big win instead of the field on Monday.
It was a matter of compensation for student athletes. One judge suggested that the court could further expand the rights of the player.
Jake Smith was a kicker at the University of Arizona and remained in the sports world as an agent for professional athletes. He has been actively engaged in the fight to give college players a fair reward for the talent they bring to the school they play.
“I think today is a great day for college athletes, and most importantly, for athletes who have a foundation.”
The Supreme Court ruled that college sports is effectively an industry that violates antitrust law by unreasonably curbing the amount paid to workers. The court ruled that the NCAA must allow students to indemnify their students beyond the exercise scholarships currently offered by the university, as long as the indemnification is still relevant to scholars.
This enables compensation such as paid internships and school-related equipment such as computers.
Judge Brett Kavanaugh agreed, but went a step further, effectively inviting a new proceeding to consider paying the player. The NCAA sticks to the idea that student athletes are amateurs, but he states:
Jake Smith said: It’s a re-amateur and doesn’t really apply to court. “
In response to this ruling, Dave Heeke, the University of Arizona’s athletic director, said: It provides us with the opportunity to determine what the appropriate educational interests are in supporting their progress towards graduation. “
But Jake Smith can foresee a court ruling in favor of the broader issues he fought, such as paying college students, when his or her performance makes their image a powerful marketing tool. I will.
“I know there were people on our team who knew that our own program was okay, but the rule is that we actually eat, for example because we’re sending money home. Because I couldn’t afford to do it or live comfortably .. So the opportunity this offers to you is that you know that the future to come will be quite remarkable and quite wonderful. I know.”
The ruling is the first time in more than 30 years that the Supreme Court has focused on university sports governance.
In 1985, the court upheld a ruling between the NCAA and the University of Oklahoma Board of Directors.
The Supreme Court said the NCAA violated antitrust law by limiting the number of times individual schools could appear on television.
According to ESPN, the ruling led to increased media rights revenues and reformed the top tier of college sports.
Meanwhile, the NCAA sought assistance from Congress to develop federal law to consider how college athletes would be compensated for the use of names, images, portraits, or NILs.
Here in Arizona, NIL state law will come into force on July 23.
Arizona law protects college athletes from being denied scholarships or sports eligibility if they receive NIL-based rewards.
No provisions-requires athletes to disclose approval agreements.
College athletes score—in the Supreme Court Source link College athletes score—in the Supreme Court