The NCAA just has a knack for finding itself in court. I think it may because it is an academic organization composed of college presidents who, for the most part, have never been outside of academia and as a result don't always think through the practical ramifications of the policies that they decide to put into place. A good example of that is the cause of this latest piece of litigation: the one year scholarship rule. Currently, all athletic scholarships are one year, renewable scholarships, which are renewable solely at the discretion of the university. The NCAA has in place a provision prohibiting a member school from granting a scholarship for a period that exceeds one year.
Joseph Agnew, a former Rice University football player has filed suit in the US District Court for the Northern District of California seeking to overturn the NCAA's rule on one year scholarship limits as well as the NCAA's limits on total number of scholarships that a school may extend in any given sport. In addition, Agnew claims that the limits constitute an unfair price-fixing scheme under federal anti-trust laws. The plaintiff's attorneys seek certification as a class spo representing all athletes whose scholarships were not renewed.
This is one more legal action for the embattled NCAA which paid out more than $84 million in legal fees last year. The group is battling Congress over its tax exempt status and it faces a class action suit from former students concerning over the appropriation of the players' likenesses. On top of litigation, its members face rising costs from the arms race that has been sweeping Division I athletics as well as the costs associated with Title IX compliance and coping with the Great Recession, all of which combined to result in numerous schools having to go the route taken by Cal, Berkeley, which recently announced it was dropping five varsity sports.
Joseph Agnew, a former Rice University football player has filed suit in the US District Court for the Northern District of California seeking to overturn the NCAA's rule on one year scholarship limits as well as the NCAA's limits on total number of scholarships that a school may extend in any given sport. In addition, Agnew claims that the limits constitute an unfair price-fixing scheme under federal anti-trust laws. The plaintiff's attorneys seek certification as a class spo representing all athletes whose scholarships were not renewed.
This is one more legal action for the embattled NCAA which paid out more than $84 million in legal fees last year. The group is battling Congress over its tax exempt status and it faces a class action suit from former students concerning over the appropriation of the players' likenesses. On top of litigation, its members face rising costs from the arms race that has been sweeping Division I athletics as well as the costs associated with Title IX compliance and coping with the Great Recession, all of which combined to result in numerous schools having to go the route taken by Cal, Berkeley, which recently announced it was dropping five varsity sports.
