College athletes have recently won legal and policy battles and are more likely than ever to gain rights long denied as part of the National Collegiate Athletic Association's (NCAA) so-called “amateurism” model. It is approaching. But with every step forward, the NCAA warns us that the game we love will surely be destroyed.
Claims that the end of sports is near are not new. In my research, I refer to this as the “sports apocalypse” debate, which has a long history of success in defeating or undermining athletes' claims for more equality, equity, and inclusion. there is.
of latest iteration The impact of the NCAA's sports apocalypse threatens to end America's Olympic dominance if the athletes who are the source of income are allowed to get a share of the millions of dollars generated by their labor. The argument is that sports such as swimming and track and field are supported by the revenue generated by soccer and men's basketball. It has been argued that since approximately 75 to 80 percent of Olympic athletes come from college programs, allowing some of that revenue to be diverted to the athletes who earn it would kill Olympic sports. The CEO of the United States Olympic and Paralympic Committee joined the chorus of doom, saying he was “deeply disgusted” by what was happening in college sports.
Most revenue-generating sports programs don't actually pay for it yourselfIt is surprising that concerns about destroying the Olympic pipeline are never raised when coaches are signing contracts, especially in other sports. multi-million dollar deals or claim Acquisition price is tens of millions of dollars. Rather, the threat of sports apocalypse only arises when athletes demand greater rights.
The sports apocalypse debate goes back at least a century. At the time, Major League Baseball argued to the Supreme Court that applying antitrust laws to the league would ruin the game. For decades, MLB has received special legal and policy treatment through the sport's negative impact, but it has been the players who have suffered. The league used its monopoly power to lower player salaries while keeping revenues strong.
Similarly, when Congress enacted Title IX in the 1970s, prohibiting discrimination against girls and women in educational sports, the NCAA argued that the law would destroy collegiate athletics. The sports debacle over Title IX continued into the 2000s and had notable effects.women and girls still don't enjoy it A measure of complete equality as required by law. But more than 50 years of Title IX did not end college sports.
But the failure to realize the sports apocalypse hasn't diminished its usefulness. For decades, the NCAA has argued in court that its “amateurism” model (which includes no compensation beyond a minimum scholarship and no right to sports-related endorsements or other income) for athletes. Defined by its limitations, it has argued that it is of vital importance to the sporting world. The existence of a university athletics association.As a result, the NCAA has built a multibillion-dollar industry, a 2019 congressional investigation concluded. It benefited everyone except the players.
Predictions of doom for the NCAA haven't stopped, and in fact have become especially pronounced over the past three years. In 2021, the NCAA argued to the Supreme Court in an antitrust lawsuit brought by athletes that applying the law to college sports would destroy the entire company. The court ruled unanimously in the players' favor, and three years later, college sports are more popular than ever.
The NCAA has also brought sports apocalypse arguments to state legislatures to block policies that would give athletes the right to earn endorsement income by selling their name, image, and likeness (NIL) to third parties. They argued that such NIL rights particularly threaten women's rights. Sports. When states rejected these doomsday predictions and enacted NIL laws, the NCAA brought sports' negative consequences to Congress. Although Congress took no action, recent March Madness tournaments show that college sports are very active for both men and women.
Sports regulators regularly bring up the threat of sports apocalypse when athletes demand greater rights and protections. The predicted harm never materializes. However, this does not mean that the argument is baseless.
Efforts to empower athletes certainly threaten sports. Or, more specifically, they threaten traditional economic and power arrangements that privilege those who govern sports, often at the expense of the athletes who make the games possible. But the transcendent activity of sport does not depend on these arrangements for its enduring beauty, excitement, and appeal. So courts and policymakers shouldn't be daunted the next time the NCAA raises concerns about the demise of sports. Faced with the threat of a sports apocalypse, they should instead respond by saying, “Let's do it.”
Dionne Kohler (dkoller@ubalt.edu) is a professor of law and director of the Center on Sports and Law at the University of Baltimore School of Law.
