Antitrust and Trade Regulation Commons^™

Changing The Game: The Emergence Of Nil Contracts In Collegiate Athletics And The Continued Efficacy Of Title Ix, Leeden Rukstalis

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

On June 30, 2021, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (“NCAA”) suspended a 115-year prohibition on college athletes’ ability to profit from the use of their names, images, and likenesses (“NIL”). Historically, NCAA eligibility was determined by an athlete’s amateur status. Student athletes forewent compensation to preserve a line between professional and college sports. Today, the NCAA’s novel NIL policy recognizes an athlete’s right to publicity and allows them to share in the billions of dollars it generates every year. According to estimates, college athletes earned $917 million in the first year of NIL activity. By 2023, the NIL market is …

Blood, Sweat, Tears: A Re-Examination Of The Exploitation Of College Athletes, Keely Grey Fresh

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

2021 Louise Halper Award Winner for Best Student Note

The unrest revolving around compensation for college athletes is not a new concept. However, public attitudes are shifting. With spirited arguments on both sides, and the recent Supreme Court decision of National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Alston regarding antitrust exemptions, the issue has been placed in a spotlight. This Note examines the buildup of discontentment through the history of the NCAA and amateurism, specifically how the term “student-athlete” became coined. It will then move to litigation efforts by athletes in an attempt to gain employment status, and an alternative route of …

Assessing Amateurism In College Sports, Casey E. Faucon

Washington and Lee Law Review

College sports generate approximately $8 billion each year for the National C[artel] Athletic Association and its member institutions. Most of this revenue flows from lucrative television broadcasting deals, which often incorporate the right to commercialize and sell the names, images, and likenesses of college athletes. Under its current revenue scheme, student-athletes—85 percent of whom live below the poverty line—receive a share of zero. For over a century, we’ve justified this exploitative distribution scheme under a cloak of student-athlete “amateurism.” Antitrust challenges to the NCAA’s amateurism rules clash with the assumption that “amateurism” is a revered tradition and an important tenet …

No Penalty On The Play: Why The Bowl Championship Series Stays In-Bounds Of The Sherman Act, M. Todd Carroll

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Interference On Both Sides: The Case Against The Nfl-Nflpa Contract, Robert A. Mccormick

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Two Minute Warning: The Time To Settle The Nfl Free Agency Dispute Is Now, Walter J. Godlewski, Iii

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.