The NCAA has filed a motion for summary judgment in the student-athlete likeness case, urging the court to dismiss the plaintiffs’ case. The NCAA bases its argument on the contention that the plaintiffs “failed to identify any evidence that the NCAA’s rules violate the antitrust laws, and their demand for revenues from live broadcast licensing is preempted by the First Amendment right to televise newsworthy events.”
Claiming it’s has presented evidence sufficient to dismiss the case, the NCAA maintains that its rules “are pro-competitive under the antitrust laws, because they are necessary to create the unique experience of Division I collegiate athletics.”
As a part of this filing, the NCAA has included testimony from several leaders within its membership, including university presidents, athletic directors and expert witnesses. Each representative “details how professionalizing a few current student-athletes would be to the detriment of all other student-athletes, as well as the fans and university communities. The main points of these statements include:
The college athletics model is essential to the integration of education and athletics;
The college athletics model supports the schools’ ability to offer women’s sports and non-revenue-generating men’s sports;
The majority of college athletics programs are not profitable, and the majority of all NCAA revenues are distributed back to schools in support of student-athletes and their athletic and educational resources;
The collegiate model maintains a competitive balance among schools and across conferences; and
NCAA rules are procompetitive, supporting increased output of football and men’s basketball games, as well as scholarships and viewers.
“After litigating this case for years, the facts are in and clear,” said Donald Remy, the NCAA’s chief legal officer. “The evidence shows that the current collegiate model of athletics is a major reason why NCAA sports are popular, and thus provide the athletic and educational experience that so many student-athletes seek out. The NCAA’s rules do not force athletes who wish to be professionals to enroll in school. Instead, the plaintiffs seek to professionalize a few college athletes, which would lead to a reduction in athletic and educational opportunities for the vast majority of male and female student-athletes who pursue Division I, II and III athletics. The collegiate model of athletics is essential in reinforcing the integration of education and athletics and allows our colleges and universities to offer a wide array of non-revenue-generating men’s and women’s sports.”
