Lawsuit regarding Scholarship Limits

[MDM4AU 336]

Walk-on suit against scholarship limits can proceed

SEATTLE -- A federal judge has cleared for trial a lawsuit challenging NCAA scholarship limits filed on behalf of football walk-on players who are shut out of financial rewards.

U.S. District Judge John Coughenour ruled Wednesday that the lawsuit filed on behalf of a former Division I-A player should go to trial, rejecting an NCAA motion to dismiss the case. The association argued that as a noncommercial operation, it is not subject to antitrust laws.

Coughenour found the plaintiffs had made a case that the NCAA has monopoly power over college football, and that they should have the opportunity to demonstrate that this monopoly caused antitrust injury.

NCAA officials in Indianapolis did not immediate return a call for comment.

The complaint filed by Andy Carroll, a University of Washington player who lettered from 1997-99, contends the NCAA scholarship limits exploit walk-on players who make up nearly a third of Division I-A college football rosters.

"The NCAA's artificial limit on the number of football scholarships is classic cartel behavior," the lawsuit says. "The NCAA and its member institutions control big-time college football. The NCAA uses that control to maximize revenues and minimize costs."

The lawsuit seeks an end to the NCAA limit on Division I-A scholarships, plus damages for football walk-ons who were harmed by the policy.

Until 1977, schools were allowed to offer as many scholarships as they saw fit, a rule that resulted in routine stockpiling of top players by top schools. The number of scholarships was set at 95 from 1977-91; at 92 in 1992; and 88 in 1993. It has been at 85 since 1994.

The complaint says this reduces expenses and maximizes profitability at the expense of student athletes and in violation of antitrust laws. It says the limit affects poorer students, who may not be able to attend a Division I-A school without scholarships available for walk-ons.

Proponents say the scholarship reductions have made it easier for smaller colleges to compete against traditional heavyweights, and for all colleges to comply with federal Title IX gender-equity rules that require the same number of scholarships for men and women.

Carroll earned a position on the UW football roster for the 1996-2000 seasons, playing wide receiver and a special teams position before graduating in 2000. Though many smaller schools recruited him, Carroll chose the University of Washington because of its Division I-A status.

"When I began my football career at UW, I was also led to believe that if I played hard and played during the regular season in games, I had a shot at a scholarship," he said when the lawsuit was filed in May. "After my junior year when I had been playing in games I asked about a scholarship and I was told none were available due to the scholarship restrictions."

Carroll confirms that there were no promises.

"But there is the indication that if you get on the field and produce for the program, you have the potential to earn a scholarship. You feel you've earned it and when you go to ask for it, you're told they don't have it."

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2163654

[AUloggerhead 2,253]

"The NCAA's artificial limit on the number of football scholarships is classic cartel behavior," the lawsuit says. "The NCAA and its member institutions control big-time college football. The NCAA uses that control to maximize revenues and minimize costs."

The lawsuit seeks an end to the NCAA limit on Division I-A scholarships, plus damages for football walk-ons who were harmed by the policy.

Good luck proving that -- as if "maximizing revenues & minimizing costs" is something that should be purposely avoided. The NCAA does "control" college football but they are an administrative entity. The scholarship limits were put in place to control the runaway spending by its member instituions and not to increase revenue to the NCAA. This is a joke of a lawsuit. The intent of the limits were to bring parity to the sport of Div 1-A college football. Any impartial observor would have to agree with the result. The days of a team like uat buying players and stocking up with 125 players, or even of placing them on baseball or track scholoarships are over. This guy's complaint should be against the UW who played him for 3 years and didn't award him a scholarship for his efforts.

[MDM4AU 336]

Maybe if he had been a better player, they would have awarded him a scholly. Why don't you just sue the other players for being better. :huh:

[rolltoomer 0]

The NCAA is only doing what the member institutions tell it to do. Membership in the NCAA is voluntary.

I don't see this case going anywhere. And I hope the hell it doesn't.