In recent discussions, NCAA President Charlie Baker addressed the ongoing debate surrounding Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) deals and the Protect College Sports Act. His comments came during an interview on ‘The Sunday Briefing’ where he reacted to reports about college athletes purchasing expensive homes. This follows a significant bipartisan Senate vote of 74-24.
Additionally, Baker responded to Boston’s Logan Airport holding auditions for a new announcer. Meanwhile, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine issued an executive order allowing state colleges to decide if athletes from the high school Class of 2022 could have a fifth year of eligibility. This move directly challenges an NCAA rule that denies additional eligibility to those athletes.
Governor DeWine emphasized fairness, indicating that Ohio students should have the same opportunities as those in other states. Under this order, eligible athletes may compete, even if they have already completed four seasons, despite NCAA’s restrictions.
When the rules change, fairness has to remain part of the equation. We want Ohio’s student-athletes to have the same opportunity as student-athletes in other states.
Ryan Downton, representing athletes involved in a key eligibility case in Ohio, expressed gratitude for the governor’s action, hoping the NCAA would reconsider its stance on denying a fifth year to the 2022 class.
The NCAA, however, opposed DeWine’s action. A memo from Baker stated that DeWine’s move contradicted established NCAA eligibility rules and called for Congress to pass the Protect College Sports Act, which seeks to regulate how colleges compensate athletes and what they can legally contest.
This is precisely why Congress must pass the PCSA as soon as possible.
Baker noted that the NCAA membership had unanimously supported the age-based eligibility rule. The Ohio Court of Appeals and multiple appellate courts also sided with the NCAA, stressing the need for consistent eligibility rules nationwide.
Ohio’s Division I programs, including Ohio State and Cincinnati, have not responded to the executive order. The order mirrors California’s earlier legislation permitting NIL payments, which led to widespread adoption across other states.
Ongoing court challenges to the NCAA eligibility rule center on claims that it unfairly penalizes the 2022 class. The players argue that the rule denies income opportunities from NIL deals and shared revenues. A lower court initially granted athletes from the 2022 class an extra year, but an appeals court blocked this decision. A full hearing in the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver is pending.
The case under review questions the market definition for player eligibility and potential harm, a crucial element to succeeding in an antitrust lawsuit. An NCAA victory could set a precedent but would not necessarily conclude legal challenges. Notably, similar legal disputes continue in state courts, with one in Louisiana allowing LSU to consider players recently involved in NFL training camps following a ruling.
More legal contention might emerge if the Ohio executive order leads to further lawsuits. Recent judgments have favored the NCAA in Kentucky, Ohio, and Arizona.
Leave a Reply