O'Bannon vs. NCAA Trial

Mavric

Mavric

Yoda
Staff member
Trial starts tomorrow. Very good Q&A about the trial via CBS Sports

What's the Ed O'Bannon trial about? Licensing money, largely broadcast TV dollars. A group of 20 former and current football and men's basketball players, led by ex-UCLA basketball star Ed O'Bannon, want an injunction to end the NCAA's rules preventing players from being paid for use of their names, images or likenesses. They claim the NCAA's restrictions violate antitrust law.

This case focuses on live broadcasts, rebroadcasts, highlight clips and video games. The O'Bannon plaintiffs lost their attempt to seek $3.2 billion in damages from 2005-06 through 2010-11 and have said they're dropping individual claims against the NCAA. That narrows this trial to whether the NCAA is illegally restricting athletes from being paid for their names, images and likenesses.

What's at stake for the NCAA? The ever-evolving definition of amateurism (or, as it's being called now, the collegiate model). A win for O'Bannon would open the door to athletes being paid for use of their names, images and likenesses. Universities around the country will be paying attention. Also, this case could impact other lawsuits against the NCAA, including the next big NCAA suit: Prominent sports attorney Jeffrey Kessler's case seeking a free market for college athletes to be paid beyond their scholarship. Every piece of evidence and every statement provide future material for the next wave of cases.

Who's going to decide the case? U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken will oversee the bench trial in the Northern District of California. Initially, the case was scheduled to be two trials (one bench, one jury), but a related lawsuit against the NCAA over video games was delayed to March 2015. The O'Bannon trial will last up to three weeks and run each day from 8:30 a.m.-1:30 p.m. PT. Bench trials move faster than jury trials.

Wilken has said she hopes to have a written verdict before any class notice is sent out from the Electronic Arts settlement over video games. The EA class notice is currently scheduled to be issued on Sept. 3. Wilken told the sides she wants them to file written closing arguments as soon as three days after the trial ends. Get used to Wilken's name, if you're not already. She was named the presiding judge over several lawsuits against the NCAA and its conferences related to scholarships, including Kessler's suit.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
“I was there to play basketball,” O'Bannon said in the courtroom (via SI.com). “Schoolwork wasn’t much of a priority for me," while adding he spent 40-45 hours a week on basketball and only 12 hours a week on schoolwork.


''I was an athlete masquerading as a student,'' O'Bannon also said. (via the AP.) ''I was there strictly to play basketball. I did basically the minimum to make sure I kept my eligibility academically so I could continue to play.''

The number of hours college athletes spend focusing on sports was a central issue to the National Labor Relations Board regional office's ruling in favor of Northwestern players to be able to form a union.

Much of the NCAA's focus in maintaining the status quo for college athletes (and especially the bowl system) has been under the guise of academics. O'Bannon said that while playing in the NCAA Tournament one season, he was forced to take finals while on the road in a hotel room.
Click to expand...
Yahoo

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So, I have to ask, is it the athlete's goal to destroy amateur athletics at the collegiate level?

Because it sure seems like that's the case.

The quote above that Marvic posted doesn't make me feel too sorry for this guy. He basically is crying in his milk because he had to "masquerade as a student" while playing basketball. Ahhhh....booo hoooo.....Hey...if you are good enough, you are free to go to the NBA draft and start making millions right out of HS. Wait...you weren't good enough? So.....just maybe the school was giving you something of value in training you to play basketball better? Wow...what a novel concept.

Or...here is another novel idea. GET A FRIGGEN FREE EDUCATION!!!!!!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
One of the most powerful men in college athletics was expounding on part of his vision for reform. Jim Delany spoke, as he has in other forums, of returning balance to the lives of college athletes, setting them free for extracurricular activities, internships and the ability to spend a semester studying abroad.


"For example," the Big Ten commissioner said Friday, "when the basketball season is over, we probably ought to just put a lock on the gym. If (the players) want to play they should just go to a playground and go play, but they don't need to be with our coaches for a month or three weeks. … I'd like to see us carve out areas, because I don't think the (current time demands) allow for enough of those types of experiences."

Delany had taken the stand to help defend the NCAA. This was direct examination. He was under oath saying exactly what he believed.

But in that moment and so many others Friday, the plaintiffs in the Ed O'Bannon case saw his testimony as extremely helpful.

"He provided all the information that we wanted to bring out in cross-examination (in the direct examination)," said Bill Isaacson, one of the plaintiffs' attorneys, " ... so it was our witness."
Click to expand...
USA Today

 
Last edited by a moderator:
During his testimony this week in the landmark antitrust suit against the NCAA, Delany said that if players were paid, his conference likely would cease to exist and the Rose Bowl probably would not be played.


Wonderful. Just wonderful.

What's more, Delany said the idea of paying players goes against the entire college experience and he couldn't see league members agreeing to it. If some did, he said, they likely would be kicked out of the conference because the move would create an imbalance among schools that could not be resolved.

The commish doesn't mince words.
Click to expand...
LJS

 
When Wilken says she is interested in "less-restrictive alternatives," she is telling both sides that she feels that the NCAA is a cartel, that its restriction on pay for athletes is a violation of antitrust law, and that there must be a less-restrictive alternative of doing business.

Last week, the judge questioned NCAA president Mark Emmert about the possibility of a trust fund for athletes that would pay them for the use of their names, images and likenesses after they graduated. Although Emmert rejected the idea quickly and conclusively, the idea would easily qualify as a less-restrictive alternative.

Her suggestion to the lawyers that they discuss such alternatives in their arguments and in their briefs shows clearly that she is willing to consider making the changes that the O'Bannon players seek. If she continues to move in the direction that she signaled on Friday, she will issue an injunction that will bar the NCAA from restricting payments to college athletes.
Click to expand...

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/11125524/ncaa-setup-baffles-ed-obannon-antitrust-trial-judge

 
Berman estimated that more than 100,000 athletes are now eligible to seek compensation
Click to expand...
Let me think now ..... $60M settlement divided by 100,000 equals $600 minus IRS hounds and lawyers cut. Rich !!! Pyrite brick a.k.a fool's gold.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
One radio guy said that if the students are employees of the university - they should pay taxes on said benefits - including the "free cost of attendance". $90,000 @ 25% tax rate = more money than the athlete has now.

 
huKSer said:
One radio guy said that if the students are employees of the university - they should pay taxes on said benefits - including the "free cost of attendance". $90,000 @ 25% tax rate = more money than the athlete has now.
Click to expand...
Please explain "free cost of attendance".
default_dunno.gif


 
Hooked on Huskers said:
huKSer said:
One radio guy said that if the students are employees of the university - they should pay taxes on said benefits - including the "free cost of attendance". $90,000 @ 25% tax rate = more money than the athlete has now.
Click to expand...
Please explain "free cost of attendance".
default_dunno.gif
Click to expand...
OK, it should be "cost of attendance" - room, training table, tuition, training room, tutors, laundry money (which in the SEC has a different meaning)

 
OK....can someone explain this to me?


Samuel McKewon ‏@swmckewonOWH 5m
If you've ever seen what's around UCLA.. RT @John_Infante: LSU’s off-campus room and board allowance is $15,264 per year. UCLA’s is $14,571.
Click to expand...
I'm assuming these figures are what the players get on top of everything else if they live off campus.

So, let's say they live in an apartment for $650 per month. Is this a fair amount for rent now in Lincoln? Let's say there are two players that go together to rent a two bedroom apartment. That would be $325 per month in rent. Let's throw another $100 each for utilities. That's $425 per month for a place to live.

Lincoln is a very similar city to Baton Rouge. So, let's say Nebraska's allowance is $15,000. (anyone know what it really is?) 15,000/12 = 1,250. 1,250 - 425 = $825 per month.

That's $825 each above and beyond every other benefit as a player to live off of. Now, 9 of those months they get a spread of food that would make any other college student weep at the training table.

These players are acting like they are starving?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top