Back to court, defending its amateurism rules

The NCAA will be back in court Tuesday in California, defending its amateurism rules against plaintiffs who say capping compensation at the value of a scholarship violates federal antitrust law.

The claim against the NCAA and the 11 conferences that have participated at the highest level of college football was originally brought by former West Virginia football player Shawne Alston and later merged with other similar lawsuits, including a notable case brought by former Clemson football player Martin Jenkins.

Plaintiffs say the NCAA illegally restricts schools from compensating football and basketball players beyond what is traditionally covered by a scholarship. That includes tuition, room and board and books, plus a cost of attendance stipend to cover incidentals such as travel. The plaintiffs want

compensation to be determined conference-by-conference in the hopes of creating a free market.

“The court has already ruled in our favor that the caps on compensation are anti-competitive and are a restrain on trade,” said Steve Berman, a Seattlebased lawyer who is one of the lead attorneys for the plaintiffs. “Normally, firms with market power can’t agree to set prices. In this case the price being payments to athletes. Now it’s the NCAA’s burden at this trial to show that the restraint is justified by some pro-competitive justification.”

The NCAA counters that altering amateurism rules would lead to pay-for-play, fundamentally damaging college sports and harming academic integration of athletes.