Case of Sale vs NCAA - Essay Example

? SALE VS NCAA Sale Vs. NCAA Introduction The aim of this paper is to argue the case of Sale Versus NCAA. NCAA has laid outregulations for every player to observe while in college. As per NCAA rule, that states “an amateur player is ineligible to NCAA revenue benefits”. Such benefits include revenue generated through player pictures and video’s placed on NCAA website. However, Sale should familiarize himself with NCAA rules, this way he will understand his limit to player benefits. NCAA is the governing body that governs regulations of Amateur Players since the state government does not intervene on Amateur player affairs. In order to claim his benefits, Sale should work hard to progress from an amateur level to professional level. As such Sale would take advantage of his pictures, jerseys, videos and other promotional items that would generate him individual revenue. Briefly, NCAA is a none-profit organization that generates its revenues from television contracts, game events and so forth. Research shows that, NCAA primary source of revenue is television contracts. For example, in fiscal year 2006 – 2007, television and marketing revenue accounted for approximately 81.9 percent of the NCAA’s total revenue. This statement indicates that NCAA receives a lot of money from revenue generated from selling of player’s pictures, jerseys and other promotional items. Though making a lot of profit, players are not shareholders or beneficially. NCAA incurs its expenses through its operation activities that include staff wages, events organization just to mention but a few. NCAA has set forth rules for protecting its revenue. However, this paper presents a case where an Amateur player “Johnny F. Sale” demands a share of the revenue generated from his pictures, jerseys that contain his name, videos and so forth. According to NCAA rules, Sale being an amateur does not qualify to enjoy any share or revenue generated by NCAA. Such privileges are for professional players. NCAA rule state that for a player to qualify to professional level, he needs to do two of the following: (1) Try playing for a professional team and one is responsible for his expenses. Contrary, for expenses in a period of up to 48 hours, one can receive a reimbursement. (2) One may also look for a job at a hockey school. The wages for teaching are not a violation of NCAA rules. The two rules simply mean a student is not a beneficiary of the revenue generated from promotional items bearing his name, picture or video clip. Sale felt that he had the potential to benefiting from revenue generated from the selling of his name, pictures and video clips on NCAA website despite being a student. As a result of restrictive NCAA law, the organization has faced numerous cases in court for not complying with a player grievance. Summary of Facts In fact, NCAA benefits from the players’ names, pictures, videos clips and other promotional items. On the other hand, players do not benefit, and NCAA has put in place rules that restrain the players from benefiting until they attain professional status. This clearly shows a violation of their right to earn a living from their sporting activities while still under training. As a result, Sale would like to sell his own pictures, name, video clips and likeness. However, as per the existing rules, should he choose to do so, he will be violating NCAA rules hence becomes ineligible to compete in intercollegiate athletics. His long-term focus is to continue playing under amateur level. Moreover, he was intending to benefit from pictures of his own and other promotional items that concern him. Sports being in the business industry like any other business should earn the participants income from the activities they carry out while in that industry. Therefore, there are Sports law set forth to provide policies for players, sponsors and training institutions. Policies that concern players are in three categories namely; amateur, professional and international sports policies. There is no clear distinction between amateur and professional player (Davis, 2000). At amateur level, students benefit from scholarships and other forms of compensation. Sale was not exception. Sale was limited to the two compensation plans only because he was an amateur he do not fit the compensation that would benefit him. Most players in Murray State University feel that they deserve benefits from their pictures, video clips and names. On the other hand, NCAA feels that students should enjoy scholarships and other expense compensations because they participate in games as an avocation, but not a form of earning revenue. After they qualify to professional level, their benefits expand to monetary compensation hence taking their participation as vocational. NCAA rules allowed college athletes to enjoy entertainment endorsements, modeling and media activities in order to support their professional careers. Statement of Law Research indicates that NCAA through its promulgated standards governing athlete recruitment, eligibility and academic performance, in most cases courts refuses to address issues concerning NCAA by ruling cases in its favor. Sale demand would be in vain considering that courts would never rule against the plaintiff. There are numerous cases whereas NCAA received favor in courts. These cases prove that players might not get justice on their grievances despite their efforts. Illustratively, NCAA law states that an Amateur player cannot receive any payment or cannot benefit from the revenue generated from NCAA website. In simple terms NCAA rules that an Amateur player can only benefit from incentives he gets after playing and winning an amateur game. In such an event, the player gets a pay. Additionally, he also gets other compensations such as training and development compensations. In this regard, Sale was not participating in competitions outside the ones stipulated in the law. As long as NCAA governs Amateur athletic activities, Sale was not eligible to such benefits. On the other hand, research indicates that more than 50 percent of amateur players are government sponsored students. This implies that they do not benefit from revenue that NCAA generates from promotional items such as pictures and jerseys (Wong, 2010). Further more; NCAA law insists that a player can only receive payments for playing a game. This implies that economic powers were only on the hands of NCAA rather than on individual incentives. As mentioned earlier, NCAA faced numerous antitrust challenges up to date, but the courts when ruling out the cases, does not find any violation of the antitrust law. For example, in College Athletic Placement Service case versus NCAA, the court ruled out that NCAA amendment of the student’s eligibility act was in favor of students. The court further clarified that the act was consistent with NCAA objectives to preserving amateurism in sports (Stangel, 2000). Another good example of eligibility case is the dispute case concerning Jeremy Bloom eligibility to play college football. Jeremy appealed the trial of the court order that denied his request for a preliminary injunction against defendant, National Collegiate Athletic Association and the University of Colorado (CU). Bloom was a high school football player and track star. Before he enrolled at CU, he participated in various Olympics and professional World Cup skiing events emerging World Cup champion in freestyle moguls. During these events, Bloom appeared on MTV frequently. After Olympics, he was offered entertainment opportunities. He was also involved in commercial activities such as an endorsement of ski equipments. After consideration, Bloom felt that his endorsement and entertainment activities perhaps might interfere with his eligibility as per NCAA intercollegiate football rules. In this regard, Bloom requested CU to present his grievances for the waiver of NCAA rule restriction. Further he wanted the court to interpret NCAA rules concerning media student-athlete that were restricting his media activities. Due to this issue at hand, Bloom discontinued his endorsement and media activities. However, Bloom actions against the NCAA were for declaratory and injunctive relief. He argued that his support and media activities were necessary to support his professional skiing career. Another case whereby the NCAA faced antitrust challenges is on Hennessey. The court found that NCAA bylaw, which put a limitation on a school coaching staff, had sufficient impact on interstate commerce to fall within the act. However, the court ruled that the bylaw’s fundamental objective was to preserve and foster competition in intercollegiate athletics and that it was thus permissible under the rule of reason and was not a violation of the act (Wong, 2010). Perhaps the above rules should be revised in favor of the player and other concerned entities. As a result, players would become beneficially of the profits gained through their activities in sports industries. On the other hand, the two cases present a state where the courts are unwilling to interfere with the actions of the NCAA despite their unreasonable application of the rules. Precisely, Sale feels that antitrust law that courts uses when making judgment concerning NCAA does not offer legitimate ruling. Law Application Consistent with the cases provided above, I feel that courts ruling in matters pertaining NCAA are incompatible with the individual interests of the student. Judges seem to ignore students rights to any profits gained through their participation on games (Kaburakis, Pierce, Fleming, Clavio, Lawrence & Dziuba, 2009). Most of them believe that student’s activities are no less than a vocational. Arguably, Sale had a right to claim a share of the profits as long as NCAA was trading in her name, pictures and any other form of advertisement that concerned him. Consequently, NCAA should be aware of the significance of shaping and motivating upcoming athletes. Essentially, the heavy responsibility falls upon the judicial institutions whereby, they should exercise justice at no cost by granting proper judgment and proper law interpretation. Being third-party beneficiaries, athletes/players were entitled to receiving remuneration despite their category. Bloom wanted the NCAA to permit him engage in and receive remuneration in spite of being an amateur player. As applied to the fact of his case, the NCAA’s restrictions on endorsements and media appearances were arbitrary and their restrictions were improper. For these reasons, Bloom wanted the court to declare that NCAA restrictions were inappropriate and that the NCAA and CU be enjoined from applying them to his media activities. Unfortunately, after the trial court determined that, although Bloom was a third party beneficially of NCAA bylaws, he was not entitled to preliminary injunctive relief. Bloom was not satisfied with the court ruling something that made him appeal the case again. My position on this study is that, Sale deserved to benefit from his pictures, his name and any other form of revenue generated through his character. Consequently, this would have the long-term benefit to him and also the NCAA. Money is a motivator. As a result, if Sale is motivated while still at Amateur level, he would show exemplary results in his sport activities hence would draw audience attention by liking his character. Directly, NCAA would double its profits through increased promotional items sales. When an upcoming athlete is deprived of his privileges, chances are that interest in sports is lost and might decide to quit (Masteralexis, Barr & Hums, 2011). Apparently, NCAA should focus on the welfare of the sportsman in order to motivate them to continue progressing to professional level. Student’s decision to continue participating vocationally in sports depends on the motivation he gets from his sponsors and other concerned agencies. In fact, spirited teenagers become superstars in sports if motivated while still enrolled. Therefore, NCAA should ensure that regulations set forth cater for the interest of the player. This way, it will also enjoy increased profits from the events it sponsors for the players would be performing to their best considering that they will get a share of the profits generated from collected revenues. In assessing sports law, courts should ensure proper implementation of the antitrust law and should not allow any amendments initiated by sports agencies and other groups. Research indicates that NCAA initiated amendments of the sports law in order to favor its interest rather than those of the player. For the already amended act, the court should see to it that, it is revised to safeguard the interests of the beneficiary. This protective measures must cater for the three groups of players, which include; amateurs, professional and international players. Conclusion In conclusion, in an attempt to resolve NCAA issues and sport laws that affect players, courts should give more weight to the practical implementation of the act without favoring NCAA. It should offer equal justice focused on interests of both the player and the organization. As a result, all players will experience legitimacy and a purpose for engaging in activities that would be of high significance to them and the entire sports entity. References Davis, T. (2000). What is sports law. Marq. Sports L. Rev., 11, 211. Kaburakis, A., Pierce, D., Fleming, O., Clavio, G., Lawrence, H., & Dziuba, D. (2009). NCAA student-athletes’ rights of publicity, EA Sports, and the video-game industry. The Keller forecast. Entertainment and Sports Lawyer, 27(2). Masteralexis, L., Barr, C., & Hums, M. (Eds.). (2011). Principles and practice of sport management. Jones & Bartlett Publishers. Stangel, K. (2000). Protecting Universities' Economic Interests: Holding Student-Athletes and Coaches Accountable for Willful Violation of NCAA Rules. Marq. Sports L. Rev., 11, 137. Wong, G. M. (2010). Essentials of sports law. ABC-CLIO. Read More