Antitrust — student-athlete scholarships

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Civil

Antitrust — student-athlete scholarships

NCAA regulations capping the number of scholarships given per team and prohibiting multi-year scholarships do not violate the Sherman Act.

“Unfortunately for plaintiffs, nothing resembling a discussion of a relevant market for student-athlete labor can be found in the amended complaint. Indeed, the word labor is wholly absent. Plaintiffs claim that they ‘allege[d] that there was “no practical alternative” available for students wishing to pursue an education in exchange for their playing ability,’ but the paragraph that they cite to in their amended complaint explains the lack of ‘practical alternatives’ for colleges wanting to field teams outside of the NCAA’s framework, not the lack of ‘practical alternatives’ for student-athletes. Plaintiffs appear to have made the strategic decision to forgo identifying a specific relevant market. Whatever the reasons for that strategic decision, they cannot now offer post hoc arguments attempting to illuminate a buried market allegation. We therefore affirm the district court’s dismissal of plaintiffs’ claims.”

Affirmed.

11-3066 Agnew v. NCAA

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Magnus-Stinson, J., Flaum, J.