The Supreme Court empowers student-athletes, challenging the NCAA’s long-standing model
By: Anshika Chadda
The Supreme Court’s unanimous decision on June 21, 2021, in NCAA vs Alston marked a dramatic change in the world of collegiate athletics, opposing long standing restrictions on compensation for NCAA athletes. The ruling deemed the NCAA’s limitations on education-related benefits as violations of antitrust laws, dismantling barriers that had long prevented student-athletes from receiving necessary compensation for their contributions to the school. This decision not only challenges the NCAA’s traditional model of amateurism, but also paves the way to increased financial and educational opportunities for student-athletes, setting a precedent for broader discussions on fair compensation in college athletics.
The Supreme Court’s decision in NCAA v Alston has significant implications for the future of college athletics. This decision will not only give student-athletes access to education-related benefits such as scholarships for graduate programs, college books, laptops, and other resources, but it also sets an overall precedent for how collegiate athletes are treated by the NCAA. The traditional NCAA model relied on the amateur status of athletes to justify limited compensation despite the billions of dollars generated by collegiate sports.
The ripple effects of NCAA v Alston extend beyond immediate benefits to the athletes. It has also allowed student-athletes to advocate for name, image, and likeliness (NIL) rights, permitting them to utilize all their benefits as a “money-making” entity, including gaining profit from sponsorships, endorsements, and personal branding opportunities. In the first year alone, college athletes have earned an estimated $917 million from NIL agreements. This financial empowerment has led to a significant increase in the number of high-earning college athletes; as of 2024, thirty-four student-athletes have secured deals exceeding $1 million, a notable rise from just ten in the previous year. This shift transforms the platform of college athletics, allowing athletes to leverage their talents while pursuing an education. Moreover, this decision disrupts the long-standing narrative that student-athletes should participate in college sports purely for the love of the game, dismissing the financial realities that they might face. Many athletes come from underprivileged backgrounds and have been forced to choose between education and their economic well-being. A National College Players Association study found that 86% of college athletes live below the federal poverty line. This financial strain often forces athletes to sacrifice a potential career to pursue education which is a much safer financial route. This new ruling ensures that athletes no longer have to make this impossible choice between athletics and the cushion of a college degree.
Some critics argue that this change could disrupt the competitive balance in college sports, with wealthier programs having the potential to attract top talent by offering significantly more money. However, advocates emphasize that the decision ensures that athletes are no longer exploited by the NCAA’s expired model of amateurism, and this is a more equitable system that recognizes the labor of athletes and their contributions to the colleges.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court’s ruling goes beyond its legal implications – it is a seismic adjustment in the foundation of collegiate athletics. By tearing down the NCAA’s previous restrictions, the Court has not only redefined what is fair in college sports but has also begun a new era where student-athletes can reclaim their agency and share in the wealth they generate. This is not simply about fairness, this is about accountability. Institutions are now being challenged to rethink how they value and reward their athletes, paving the way for long-overdue reforms. This is no longer a game controlled by outdated power structures that do not reflect the ambition and drive of athletes: it is a revolution that empowers athletes to shape their futures, challenge the status quo, and demand compensation they have been long denied. The NCAA may have once held the playbook, but this recent decision ensures that the players now call the shots.
Sources:
- https://www.si.com/nfl/2021/06/29/business-of-football-supreme-court-unanimous-ruling
- https://capitolhistory.org/capitol-history-blog/paving-a-new-future-for-the-ncaa-in-congress/
- https://www.aspeninstitute.org/blog-posts/history-behind-debate-paying-ncaa-athletes/
- https://unafraidshow.com/2021/06/22/united-states-supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-college-athletes/
- https://www.stinson.com/newsroom-publications-student-athlete-compensation-in-the-aftermath-of-us-supreme-courts-alston-decision
- https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-512_gfbh.pdf?utm_source
- https://www.google.com/url?q=https://iconsource.com/blog/highest-paid-college-athletes/?utm_source&sa=D&source=docs&ust=1739409801077548&usg=AOvVaw1gH1tTQa2sQ7gGNQATvICR
- https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-number-of-millionaire-college-athletes-has-tripled-here-are-the-top-10-earners-this-year-a1f406fb?utm_source
- https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/31193360/ap-survey-ads-concerned-nil-skew-competitive-balance?utm_source
Leave a Reply