IBJNews

Expert testifies NCAA scholarship caps hurt competition

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The National Collegiate Athletic Association stifles competition among schools for players by capping scholarships, a Stanford University professor said Tuesday at a trial in which athletes are seeking a cut of the billions of dollars generated by college sports.

Roger Noll, an economics professor testifying as an expert witness for Ed O’Bannon, a former college basketball player and lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, continued his testimony from Monday that the Indianapolis-based NCAA is a cartel that blocks competition. Students should be able to market themselves to schools and broadcasters, he said.

O’Bannon is suing to stop the NCAA from preventing student players from seeking payments when their games are televised. Under NCAA regulations that treat athletes as amateurs, they can be stripped of their scholarships and barred from playing if they accept payment.

The NCAA had $912 million in total revenue last year, including $838 million from television, championships and marketing rights fees, according to its financial statement.

U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken in Oakland, Calif., will decide the case without a jury in a trial scheduled to last three weeks.

Group licenses

If student athletes could license their names and identities, many would choose to let universities negotiate group licenses on behalf of their teams, Noll said. The schools would then offer stipends based on the proceeds from those licenses, and use those payments as bargaining chips to attract the best talent, Noll said.

The NCAA restrains such competition by controlling the amount and value of scholarships and barring students from marketing their images, he said.

“It’s that list of restrictions that prevents competition in the market for student athletes,” said Noll, who was paid $800 an hour for his work on the case.

Under questioning by Rohit Singla, an attorney for the NCAA, Noll acknowledged that no major league athletes anywhere in the world are paid for the use of their names, likeness and images, known as NILs, in team games that are televised live. Professional athletes get a share of broadcast revenue as part of their pay negotiated through collective bargaining agreements, he said.

‘No experts’

“The plaintiffs have no experts that suggest that there are NIL rights for athletes in broadcasts,” Singla said.

“I don’t know,” Noll responded. “It’s not a concern of mine what the legal rights are.”

If O’Bannon wins the case, a student athlete could be offered a scholarship and a $50,000 payment from a group license for broadcasts, Singla said.

“The next day another college would come and say we will give you $65,000” to recruit the student “regardless of whether there are any such things as NIL rights,” Singla said.

“It has nothing to do with whether there are any NIL rights,” Noll said. “Nothing hinges on that.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Can your dog sign a marriage license or personally state that he wishes to join you in a legal union? If not then no, you cannot marry him. When you teach him to read, write, and speak a discernible language, then maybe you'll have a reasonable argument. Thanks for playing!

  2. Look no further than Mike Rowe, the former host of dirty jobs, who was also a classically trained singer.

  3. Current law states income taxes are paid to the county of residence not county of income source. The most likely scenario would be some alteration of the income tax distribution formula so money earned in Marion co. would go to Marion Co by residents of other counties would partially be distributed to Marion co. as opposed to now where the entirety is held by the resident's county.

  4. This is more same-old, same-old from a new generation of non-progressive 'progressives and fear mongers. One only needs to look at the economic havoc being experienced in California to understand the effect of drought on economies and people's lives. The same mindset in California turned a blind eye to the growth of population and water needs in California, defeating proposal after proposal to build reservoirs, improve water storage and delivery infrastructure...and the price now being paid for putting the demands of a raucous minority ahead of the needs of many. Some people never, never learn..

  5. I wonder if I can marry him too? Considering we are both males, wouldn't that be a same sex marriage as well? If they don't honor it, I'll scream discrimination just like all these people have....

ADVERTISEMENT