IBJNews

High-stakes NCAA amateurism trial gets under way

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Former National Collegiate Athletic Association players seeking to share in $800 million in annual broadcast revenue are challenging their amateur status in a trial seen as potentially leading to teen athletes with agents, fewer teams and lawsuits by marching bands.

Ed O’Bannon, who was the Most Outstanding Player of the 1995 Final Four while playing basketball at the University of California at Los Angeles, took the stand in a trial that started Monday in Oakland, Calif.

The outcome will determine whether the Indianapolis-based NCAA has to negotiate with players seeking to be paid for appearing in televised games without forfeiting scholarships covering tuition and expenses.

O’Bannon said UCLA games he played in were televised locally, regionally and nationally, and playing basketball was his priority—not academics.

“There were classes that I wanted to take, but our practice schedule, our travel schedule, just wouldn’t allow it,” he testified.

The NCAA said Monday it settled a related lawsuit by players who sued over use of their likenesses and images in Electronic Arts Inc. video games. The $20 million accord resolves claims that depicting players in the products without permission or compensation violated their rights to control and license their identity. The NCAA also resolved a related lawsuit against EA, the organization said on its web site.

O’Bannon’s lawyers say they want to break up what they call a price-fixing conspiracy among the NCAA and member schools that reap the proceeds from televised college basketball and football games and cut athletes out of the profit. College athletics is as commercialized as professional sports, with billions of dollars going to the NCAA, universities, coaches and facilities—everywhere but into players’ pockets, they argue.

“Whereas the NCAA defends its policies in the name of amateurism and level playing fields, they actually are a device to divert money,” Michael Lehman, an attorney for the ex-athletes, said in a court filing, quoting former NCAA director Walter Byers. The NCAA’s approach to amateurism “is based on outdated romantic notions,” Lehman wrote.

O’Bannon is featured in DVDs about UCLA games and the 1995 basketball championships offered for sale by the NCAA, according to his complaint. He’s suing on behalf of a class of current and former players seeking to negotiate licensing deals for use of their images.

The NCAA claims O’Bannon’s lawsuit is baseless because its amateur model is legal and serves players and schools. It also benefits fans, who attract advertisers that pay big money to NCAA broadcasting partners and who have said in surveys that they oppose compensating athletes. Paying players would pit schools against each other to attract top talent, and cause some to stop fielding teams and fans to tune out in droves, the NCAA argues.

“It is known as the O’Bannon trial, but we could just as well call it the amateurism trial,” said Michael McCann, a University of New Hampshire law professor.

O’Bannon, 41, now sells cars in Las Vegas after playing two years with the National Basketball Association’s New Jersey Nets and also in Europe. He’s seeking a court order declaring that NCAA rules and practices violate federal antitrust laws because they block competition in the open market for schools to get the best athletes and among broadcasters for the right to use the players’ names and images. Under NCAA regulations, athletes can be stripped of their scholarships and barred from playing if they accept payment.

U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken, a Stanford University graduate and former federal public defender nominated to the bench in 1993 by President Bill Clinton, will decide the case without a jury in a trial expected to last three weeks.

Her order could stop short of saying how the NCAA should remedy the situation, opening the door for player organizations such as the Former College Athletes Association to work with teams to bargain for group licenses, McCann said. Star players could hire agents depending on how Wilken crafts her order.

“My guess is that it would be a very small percent of athletes who would get their own deals,” he said.

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

The trial comes at a time when the NCAA is facing attempts by current and former college athletes to secure compensation, better medical benefits, control over their images and labor protections.

“The plaintiffs’ lawyers are attempting to twist legitimate concerns about the current system—issues that the NCAA and its member institutions are actively addressing—into a rationale for turning student-athletes into employees,” NCAA legal director Donald Remy said in an email. “It is a short- sighted goal that would severely diminish academic and athletic opportunities for student-athletes—99 percent of whom will never turn pro.”

A National Labor Relations Board regional director in Chicago ruled in March that football players at Northwestern University in Evanston, Ill., were employees, making them eligible to unionize. Northwestern scholarship football players voted on whether to form a union. Those ballots have been sealed while the NLRB reviews the March decision.

That proceeding can’t be discussed at the O’Bannon trial because it isn’t relevant to the case, Wilken said.

The trial outcome will reverberate across the broadcasting industry, according to lawyers for companies including Turner Broadcasting System Inc. and CBS Corp., which signed a $10.8 billion contract with the NCAA in 2010 to present Division I men’s basketball championships through 2024.

If O’Bannnon wins, legal chaos would ensue, with halftime performers, marching band members, cheerleaders and even Little League players who appear at televised games running to court, the broadcasters said in a court filing.

“Any athlete of any age whose image appeared on television might claim a right to similar compensation and even assert analogous antitrust violations by the governing sporting authority,” they said.

The NCAA failed to convince Wilken that free-speech rights bar athletes from seeking TV licensing revenue on the grounds that the games are public events that aren’t commercial in nature.

That ruling in April followed several others that have benefited the plaintiffs.

“Her rulings have generally favored O’Bannon,” McCann said. “I think O’Bannon appears to have an advantage.”

McCann, who writes about sports and law for SI.com, said he expects an appeal to be filed by whoever loses.

Lawyers for the NCAA may call its president, Mark Emmert, Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany and university athletic directors to testify that alumni donations will dwindle as fans walk away from college sports, according to court filings.

“Fans support Michigan because they love that young students coming out of high school arrive at Michigan, work hard, and are largely successful getting college degrees,” University of Michigan President Mary Sue Coleman said in a court filing. “Paying these students-athletes would change the students-athletes in the eyes of the fans and, in my experience, would negatively impact fan interest in Michigan sports.”

O’Bannon’s case, filed in 2009, was combined with a related case brought by former Arizona State University quarterback Sam Keller, who sued the NCAA and Electronic Arts Inc. on behalf of athletes whose likeness were used in video games without permission or compensation.

EA’s NCAA football games didn’t use the players’ names, though they depicted individual players by their height, weight and other identifying features. The company settled the lawsuit for $40 million and canceled the football video games.

Legal issues left Electronic Arts “in a difficult position, one that challenges our ability to deliver an authentic sports experience,” according to a statement in September by Cam Weber, the company’s general manager of American Football.

A separate jury trial is scheduled for March over athletes’ claims against the NCAA that they are owed damages because their privacy rights were violated by the use of their images in video games, broadcasts and other media.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Those were the days...
    I tend to agree with Lee. Let's take all the TV money out of the equation. Return college sports to the way they used to be - if you want to see them, you must attend in person. Maybe some people might go out and get some exercise... Maybe gambling will diminish... Maybe the advertising for booze and other vices will appear less often on TV... Maybe, just maybe, we could reverse the downward spiral occurring to the morality of America... Whoa! I am getting ahead (or is it behind) of myself. Please return amateur sports back to the way they were when I was a kid in the 70's. Let the professional amateurs stay in the Soviet Block countries and China and keep our kids free from commercialism as long as we can. Stress the importance of team and not the "me me me" attitude of today. I did say my name was the Wistful Thinker :-)
  • Yeah Right
    Lee, the NCAA and all parties involved will do that as soon as they figure out how to put the toothpaste back in the tube. They are soooooo far down the road that your pipe dream is just that, trying to put the toothpaste back in the tube.
  • put a trust fund in effect
    Come on, many of these players risk their health and their potential to maybe make it to the pros. If colleges and the NCAA do not insure them that if they are injured on the court and guarantee them some form of financial incentive, why stay in college sports if they have chances of going into professional sports. In other words, if the NCAA and colleges are not willing to pony up some financial guarantees, then if the student athlete is offered a professional contract, as soon as this happens, abandon the team. Perhaps the coaches and coaching staff should be amateurs as well, no pay, just for the fun and competition. Reduce a coaches pay from millions to lets say 50,000 dollars a year and lets see how dedicated they are to the sport. Also, remove all endorsementsfrom corporations, sponsorships, etc. In essence, return it to the way it was 30 years ago, no TV contracts, no endorsements, just plain competition without any money changing hands. Eliminate the money making machine for cable, tv, games, etc. and the problem is solved. If they truly believe it is amateur then remove all the money from the equation, make it pure sports and no profit gains.

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. Of what value is selling alcoholic beverages to State Fair patrons when there are many families with children attending. Is this the message we want to give children attending and participating in the Fair, another venue with alooholic consumption onsite. Is this to promote beer and wine production in the state which are great for the breweries and wineries, but where does this end up 10-15 years from now, lots more drinkers for the alcoholic contents. If these drinks are so important, why not remove the alcohol content and the flavor and drink itself similar to soft drinks would be the novelty, not the alcoholic content and its affects on the drinker. There is no social or material benefit from drinking alcoholic beverages, mostly people want to get slightly or highly drunk.

  2. I did;nt know anyone in Indiana could count- WHY did they NOT SAY just HOW this would be enforced? Because it WON;T! NOW- with that said- BIG BROTHER is ALIVE in this Article-why take any comment if it won't appease YOU PEOPLE- that's NOT American- with EVERYTHING you indicated is NOT said-I can see WHY it say's o Comments- YOU are COMMIES- BIG BROTHER and most likely- voted for Obama!

  3. In Europe there are schools for hairdressing but you don't get a license afterwards but you are required to assist in turkey and Italy its 7 years in japan it's 10 years England 2 so these people who assist know how to do hair their not just anybody and if your an owner and you hire someone with no experience then ur an idiot I've known stylist from different countries with no license but they are professional clean and safe they have no license but they have experience a license doesn't mean anything look at all the bad hairdressers in the world that have fried peoples hair okay but they have a license doesn't make them a professional at their job I think they should get rid of it because stateboard robs stylist and owners and they fine you for the dumbest f***ing things oh ur license isn't displayed 100$ oh ur wearing open toe shoes fine, oh there's ONE HAIR IN UR BRUSH that's a fine it's like really? So I think they need to go or ease up on their regulations because their too strict

  4. Exciting times in Carmel.

  5. Twenty years ago when we moved to Indy I was a stay at home mom and knew not very many people.WIBC was my family and friends for the most part. It was informative, civil, and humerous with Dave the KING. Terri, Jeff, Stever, Big Joe, Matt, Pat and Crumie. I loved them all, and they seemed to love each other. I didn't mind Greg Garrison, but I was not a Rush fan. NOW I can't stand Chicks and all their giggly opinions. Tony Katz is to abrasive that early in the morning(or really any time). I will tune in on Saturday morning for the usual fun and priceless information from Pat and Crumie, mornings it will be 90.1

ADVERTISEMENT