Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!

O'Bannon v NCAA ~ and JC Athletics

Posted: 08/13/2014 9:21 AM

O'Bannon v NCAA ~ and JC Athletics 

On August 8th, Judge Claudia Wilken published a very precise ruling on the matter of what intercollegiate associations can regulate as to funds athletes may receive. Her main focus ended up being on incidental expenses associated with student life; her ruling now permits student-athletes to generate compensable activity for those.

Her ruling is 99 pages, but is very well written, and worth reading:!Invesit...ANNONRULING.pdf

Nowhere do the Judge or the parties extend this beyond NCAA, but it seems apparent this extension would be granted to future plaintiffs beyond the NCAA --this is a Federal Court ruling, after all.

And since one major topic of interest in JC Football is housing out-of-district student-athletes, I recommend we all understand what the O'Bannon case actually says.

I think this is especially important in how any changes in current practices will affect parity among contending teams. This should not end up being a reward for the elites and result in non-competitive conference football.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 08/13/2014 8:05 PM

Re: O'Bannon v NCAA ~ and JC Athletics 

So the formula will be based on the federal formula used to calulate "cost of attendance" for each university/college, and the spending stipend for athletes will be based on unmet need. For example, UCLA and USC have student budgets calculated at different amounts due to the higher tuition at SC . . . The unmet need will probably be about the same due to the formula guidelines used by the DOE . . . Also, the cost of attendance will vary from large city locations vs rural locations, but again, the unmet need will stay approximately the same . . . Now if a scholarship and financial aid package is under the total budget (cost of attendance), the remaining unmet need can be used for a spending stipend, this amount cannot exceed the total budget. For example, in 2014-15 the undergraduate budget at UCLA is $33,000 for on-campus living, and if the athletic scholarship, FA award, and any other resources add up to less than COA (say $29,500), then the wiggle room is $3,500 that could be used as a paid stipend to student-athletes . . .

The first chapter of this "student-athlete stipend" has yet to be written, but I'm sure as the story unfolds in years to come, there shall be some interesting stories and tales that will provide for some good reading . . .

Last edited 08/14/2014 7:23 AM by diablos06

Reply | Quote

Posted: 08/13/2014 10:03 PM

Re: O'Bannon v NCAA ~ and JC Athletics 

Your selection of examples and your analysis of their probable applications reflects careful reading of the judicial decision --I think what we need to project here is how any of this will translate to the very large number of programs whose schools really struggle with the annual $$ bottom line. The super schools with media money exist in a different reality.

If any of this comes to the JC level, I think the Judge's "incidental expenses" would come to mean that community college student athletes could pursue making legitimate ends meet in their own ways --but these players do not have the markets available to Ed O'Bannon. Schools with active alum groups will certainly help their players do this --but what about the majority of schools with very little alum and community support? It seems to me that if the O'Bannon decision had been on the books, everything in the Bakersfield sanction case would have been allowable. I wonder if the KCCD attorneys can attach the O'Bannon decision now?

Mostly what concerns me is how the entire roster of SCFA and NCFA programs can remain operable with some semblance of competitive on-field product.

Last edited 08/13/2014 10:05 PM by glenpark

Reply | Quote

Posted: 08/14/2014 9:47 AM

Re: O'Bannon v NCAA ~ and JC Athletics 

It definitely is an interesting subject Glen. That could create an advantage for the better supported teams.
Reply | Quote