WASHINGTON - The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday is set to consider the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s bid to maintain its limits on education-related compensation for student-athletes - restrictions that a lower court deemed an anticompetitive business practice.
Although the case does not involve direct payments to athletes, the broader question of player compensation has increasingly become a point of contention. College sports, including the “March Madness” basketball tournament currently taking place, bring in billions of dollars in revenue but players remain tied to what critics call a fiction of amateurism.
The case involves students who are players in the highest-level of college sports: NCAA Division I men’s and women’s basketball and those in the Football Bowl Subdivision. Football and basketball represent the major revenue-generating sports at the college level.
Since there is money to be made off the players' labor, seems like a fair question.
This is the first time I’ve rooted for Gatorade.
I’m just going to say this. My college paid the fucking pep band for every game. As they should. They were electric. If an athlete gets a sponsorship deal that is not negotiated by anyone at your school, it’s none of your business.
When women's sports bring in what male sports do - then equal compensation. Pay based on income of organization. Sounds fair!
여러나라의 폐단--소작-- 한국의 농지법의 소작은 금지---주원인--사회계층의 인권인듯? Bbf경제이론에서는 가능하지요 Bbf의 황금비율--러시아도 탐내는이론인듯--등재국용 한국은 발통가격은꼭내세요--좀더 떳떳하세요 깨끗한사람아 Bbf의 황금비율이 어울리지요 정품을 쓰세요
My encounter with miss Amelia markdonald actually changed my life and for that I’ll keep upgrading people for he's good job thanks once again AMELIMARKD