The Major League Baseball Players Association (MLBPA) had long been regarded as the best player union in all of the major professional sports. Whether you want to talk about fully guaranteed contracts, the absence of a salary cap, or salary arbitration, the MLBPA does an exceptional job of protecting professional baseball players at the highest level. However, there are hundreds of minor leaguers in each of the 30 MLB organizations who haven’t received that same level of protection with a Collective Bargaining Agreement specifically designed for them. Any baseball fan knows full and well life in the minor leagues is not the most glamorous. Small towns, long bus rides, and less-than-stellar hotel rooms are all a part of the Minor League Baseball experience. With that being said, there is a fine line between creating acceptable working conditions and those that quite frankly suck, and there have certainly been examples of that line being crossed over the past few years. First (and most importantly), the pay in the low levels of the minor leagues has been less than minimum wage levels, especially considering it only covers the duration of the six-month season and not the entire calendar year. In addition to the pay, we’ve heard about meager living conditions, less than passable pre and postgame meals, and numerous other issues that make playing professional baseball a burden that many simply aren’t willing to take on in order to chase their dreams. What really stood out to me and others that followed the issue is why certain MLB teams wouldn’t invest in their future. Minor Leaguers after all are the next generation of talent that will find themselves playing in the big leagues in the future, so why would you not work to the best of your ability to maximize their development? Certainly, sleeping on a lawn chair, eating fast food every day, and working off-season jobs don’t lend to that at all. Well, it looks like MLB owners and the league finally recognized that it was time for this reality to change. Finally, after efforts from organizations like Advocates for Minor Leaguers, the MLBPA, and media backlash, MLB and MLBPA have an agreement on a collective bargaining agreement for minor league players. As part of the agreement, minor league players will receive a significant pay raise across the board as detailed in the table below In addition to pay, minor leaguers will see improvements in living conditions, a formal grievance procedure with access to neutral arbitrators, and only six years of team control instead of seven. According to The Athletic, the salary increases took effect as soon as the deal was ratified, and players are to receive retroactive pay for four weeks of this year’s spring training. These new initiatives are expected to cost MLB an additional $90 million in total. It’s worth noting that the only downside for minor leaguers is that there could be a reduction in the number of players in MLB organizations over time, but this was a no-brainer for MiLB players to accept given the benefits that will be available for those who are in fact able to remain on rosters. Whether it was the handling of the Astros sign stealing scandal, the return from COVID-19, or the lockout and CBA negotiations prior to last season, Rob Manfred and MLB have taken on considerable criticism from the media and fans over the past couple of years. But here recently, you have to give the commissioner’s office credit. No games were lost last year to the lockout, the new rules have brought a level of excitement the game desperately needed, and this historic CBA for minor leaguers are all great developments for the present and future of our national pastime. Hopefully, this agreement allows players who in the past may have given up on their dream due to the lack of pay or subpar living conditions to continue chasing the goal of becoming a big-league ballplayer. It’s a huge step forward for the game of baseball. Brendan can be found on Twitter @_bbell5

Good news, basketball fans. The NBA and the Players Association have agreed to terms on a new collective bargaining agreement, laying the groundwork for league operations for the next seven years. The agreement comes several months before the 2023/2024 season is set to start, eliminating the possibility of a lockout that last occurred in 2011. The NBA CBA is a lengthy document that takes a certain level of legal acumen mixed with basketball obsession to fully comprehend. It often takes front offices months to get fully up to speed on the rules in which their league operates. With that being said, let’s breakdown a few of the most notable provisions in the new CBA without making our heads spin: Revenue Sharing The NBA operates in a revenue-sharing system between the owners and the players, each taking nearly 50% of the basketball-related income.[1] When the leagues make more money, the players sign contracts worth higher figures — a rising tide lifts all ships. The 50/50 split didn’t change in the latest CBA; however, the players secured a big victory in increasing the overall basketball-related income pie. Historically, the NBA’s licensing revenue was excluded from basketball-related income with the money generated exclusively going to the owners. The players bargained to have that figure included, $160M for the 2023/2024 season, for which the players will be entitled to $80M. That money will attribute to higher salaries for players. Salary Cap Apron The NBA is a “soft” salary cap league, which allows teams to spend above the salary cap figure under special circumstances. Teams are penalized in various ways for spending over the cap, including having to pay a special tax for every dollar spent over a certain threshold. The NBA also implements a luxury tax line, which is set above the cap figure, and forces teams that cross it to reimburse the cheaper teams that spend below. But for rich teams looking to compete for a championship, these penalties can feel like a drop in the bucket. The 2022/2023 salary cap figure was $123M, with the Golden State Warriors spending nearly $200M and taking on a host of monetary penalties. The new CBA looks to address this spending disparity between the haves and the have-nots. Salary caps are set to promote competition between small market teams with modest evaluations and teams in booming territories such as Los Angles, New York City, and Silicon Valley, who have deep pockets to spend in pursuit of a championship. Up until the latest CBA, the disincentives for crossing certain salary cap thresholds were purely financial. As evidenced by the Warriors, certain teams are willing to swallow the extra financial burden if it means granting them a better roster to compete for a title. Under the new CBA, crossing certain spending thresholds will not only leave a hole in the owner’s wallet but will also hinder team building. Teams that cross an apron set around $17.5M above the luxury tax line will be restricted from utilizing two important roster-building tools: the buyout market and the mid-level exception. Without getting too deep into the NBA front office weeds, these tools are routinely used by GMs of teams over the cap to still add talent in the offseason and during the season. Crossing this apron also stifles a team’s trade abilities. A team above the apron is no longer allowed to send cash out in trades or bring in more salary via trade than they send out. The clearcut best strategy for roster management is no longer an owner writing a blank check. GMs will have to be strategic around crossing this salary cap apron at risk of limiting their roster management toolkit. This salary cap apron could be viewed as a further attempt by the league to even the playing field. However, critics will say that this suppresses team spending, something that should be encouraged for the benefit of the players. Let’s check in with Draymond Green to see what he thinks: Minimum Games Played Requirement for Awards If we picture the NBA as a giant ballroom, there happens to be a large elephant standing in the corner that nobody wants to make eye contact with. Over the past few seasons, local television ratings are down.[2] One of the explanations for the drop in ratings is “load management”, the phrase that was coined in the last decade to refer to the decision by a player and his team to sit out games for rest purposes unrelated to a specific injury. The rise in load management has caused star players wearing street clothes to become routine. The NBA attempted to address this issue by building an incentive into the new CBA for players to play in more games. To qualify for individual awards, including MVP, All-NBA, and All-Defense, players now must play in 65 of the 82 regular season games. These awards may seem superficial, but under separate provisions within the CBA, winning these awards qualifies players for certain max salary contracts they would otherwise be ineligible for. Through these mechanisms, the NBA is telling its players the simple but crucial message: if you want to earn the most money, you must play. Last year, four of the fifteen All-NBA spots were filled by players who suited up under the 65-game threshold. This year may be more, with stars such as Steph Curry, LeBron James, Kevin Durant, Kawhi Leonard, Paul George, Anthony Davis, Damian Lillard, Giannis Antetokounpo, Devin Booker, and Ja Morant all set to come in below 65 games played.[3] In-Season Tournament Another aspect of the new CBA that places an emphasis on regular season games is the in-season tournament. A lot of information is still yet to be made public on what exactly the tournament will look like, but this doesn’t come as much surprise as the NBA has been flirting with the idea of this tournament for years. The league has one major hurdle when it comes to an in-season tournament — getting everyone to care. Fans must be invested for this idea to work. Players must treat this seriously and have an enticing reward for pushing to win. Without the entire NBA ecosystem buying in, this midseason tournament becomes regular-season games packaged in a different format. Now, back to Draymond Green for his thoughts: The Draft – One and Done Stays In recent years, there has been a lot of smoke in NBA circles about reworking the rules governing the NBA draft, including axing the “one-and-done” rule. This rule was negotiated as part of the 2005 CBA, forcing high school players to enter college for one season before jumping to the professional ranks. Originally, the owners fought for the one-and-done rule due to the risks and unpredictability of players leaping from a high-school cafeteria straight into the NBA. Now, the tides have turned. Owners would likely be in favor of younger players coming into the league and choosing to utilize the NBA’s version of a minor league, the G-League, instead of going to college. Better talent in the G-League equals more interest and money in the NBA. During this round of negotiations, the Players Association was likely fighting to keep the one-and-done rule in place. There are around 400 roster spots in the NBA. The Players Association represents current and former NBA players, negotiating for their interests. If the draft were to be opened up to high schoolers, they would fill some of the 400 roster spots while earning some of the basketball related-income referenced above. Potential newcomers are a threat to the active player’s bargaining unit. The new CBA keeping the one-and-done rule in place is a win for the players. More to Come Labor negotiations are the ultimate give-and-take exercise, as evidenced by the provisions laid out above. Certain aspects can be considered a win for the players, others for the owners. The official CBA has not been made public yet, so we will have a fuller picture when that happens. But the timeliness of the agreement shows that the players and owners were both willing to swallow interests to avoid a potential lockout. And for that, basketball fans can breathe a sigh of relief. Matt Netti is a 2021 graduate of Northeastern University School of Law. He currently works as an attorney fellow at the Office of the General Counsel for Northeastern University. You can follow him on Twitter and Instagram @MattNettiMN and find him on Linkedin at https://www.linkedin.com/in/matthew-netti/. You can find all his work at www.mattnetti.com [1] Larry Coon, NBA Salary Cap FAQ, Sports Business Classroom (last visited April 6, 2023) http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q15. [2] John Ourand, Warriors run up the RSN Score, Sports Business Journal (last visited April 6, 2023) https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Journal/Issues/2022/02/28/Upfront/Ratings-and-Research.aspx. [3] Sam Quinn, NBA CBA 101: Everything to know about new agreement, from salary cap to free agency and beyond, CBS Sports, (last visited April 6, 2023) https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/nba-cba-101-everything-to-know-about-new-agreement-from-salary-cap-to-free-agency-and-beyond/.

On Tuesday, ESPN’s Adam Schefter broke the news that Arizona Cardinals owner, Michael Bidwill, has been accused of cheating, discrimination, and harassment by a former Cardinals executive, Terry McDonough. The allegations came from an arbitration claim filed by McDonough on Tuesday to NFL Commissioner, Roger Goodell. Shortly after, Cardinals’ external public relations adviser, Jim McCarthy, fervently denied the allegations and called them “widely false, reckless, and an opportunistic ploy for financial gain.” The allegations set forth by McDonough relate to the pressure he and then Cardinals’ head coach, Steve Wilks, were allegedly under to use burner phones to communicate with the former team General Manager, Steve Keim, who recently plead guilty to extreme DUI in Arizona, stemming from a 2018 arrest. Keim was subsequently suspended by the team, fined $200,000, and required to attend counseling. During Keim’s five-week suspension, the team and team executives were not supposed to have contact with Keim, yet Bidwill required Wilkes and McDonough to communicate with him through burner phones, to which both refused. Bidwill then publicly reprimanded and openly criticized McDonough and said he was going to write him up. It's important to note that Bidiwll demoted McDonough in 2019. McDonough is essentially claiming retaliation by Bidwill in his complaints, alleging that the demotion was due to his refusal to be a part of the scheme in handling Steve Keim’s suspension. Steve Wilks sued the NFL in 2022 in a class action racial discrimination suit. It will be interesting to see how Bidwill and the team respond in the coming days and whether there is any truth to the allegations and if so how much. Bidwill is not the only Arizona professional sports owner to come under fire, as former Phoenix Suns and Phoenix Mercury owner, Robert Sarver, recently sold both franchises, almost forcibly, amid allegations of sexism, racism, and creating a hostile working environment. These allegations also come at a time when Washington Commanders owner, Dan Snyder, is in the process of selling the team after years of allegations, Congressional hearings, and public pressure. Will the allegations against Bidwill be enough to also force him to sell? Duncan can be found on Twitter @dunkuno

Recently I have been reading A Whole Different Ball Game by Marvin Miller, the father of the Major League Baseball Players Association (“MLBPA”). This memoir is an eye-opening perspective of the MLBPA’s inception. In the chapter titled “Card Wars,” Miller dives into the battle over major leaguers’ name, image, and likeness (“NIL”) rights between the MLBPA and Topps—the latter had an outright monopoly on the right to sell players’ names and pictures either alone or with confectionary products (trading cards). Topps later lost their monopoly in Fleer Corp. v. Topps Chewing Gum, Inc.,[1] but the reason behind the feud with the MLBPA was the standard form contract players signed with Topps for the usage of their NIL. The contract precluded players from granting the right to sell their NIL to any other entity, which did not expire until after five years in the majors—meaning a player could be under a perpetual contract with Topps if they never attained five years of MLB service.[2] More importantly for the players association, the contract also provided grossly inadequate compensation for the right to sell a player’s NIL. For signing the contract, players were given $5 and another $125 a year for each year played at the major league level, and Topps paid no royalties and provided no other benefits, all despite Topps’ annual revenue being in the millions.[3] Why do I bring this up? As I read this chapter, I could not stop thinking about the similarities the MLBPA was facing here in its early days of representing MLB ballplayers to what college athletes have to be concerned about now signing NIL deals. The key issues for all student-athletes are (1) receiving appropriate compensation for their services and the right for a business to profit off their NIL, and (2) most importantly, ensuring whatever rights are granted are limited in time, in scope, and to the services bargained for. Appropriate Compensation Determining the proper value a student-athlete brings to the table for a company seeking to profit from using their NIL is an extremely important step to an NIL deal. There are many things that go into calculating a student-athlete’s value for a particular NIL deal, but the general idea this article focuses on is making sure the payment system provided in the contract corresponds to whatever projected revenue the business will receive using the student-athletes' NIL. When Marvin Miller renegotiated the Topps contract, the result was a double in the yearly pay and royalties of eight percent on sales up to $4 million and ten percent on sales above. As compared to the original deal, this pay scheme was much more consistent with the value Topps was getting from the players. Therefore, when best-representing student-athletes interests, it is wise to spot the payment provision and ensure a proper valuation method has been used in determining the payment scheme. An understanding of how much the business will profit from the deal is necessary for this to happen. Limited Grant of Rights The crucial aspect of every NIL deal is understanding what limitations are attached to the granting of NIL rights. Rights need to be limited in time—be it the duration of the season, all years of NCAA eligibility, or just for as long as the services require. The reason rights need to be limited in time is so that there exists no perpetual right of the business to use a student-athlete’s NIL. The usage rights should only last as long as the student-athlete is compensated for services because this shorter term provides the greatest opportunity for the student-athlete to renegotiate the terms of the deal. For example, if a student-athlete signs a deal before their season and continues to have a stellar performance, his NIL value has now risen due to his increased popularity within the sport. A good representative may use those factors to renegotiate a deal with the same company but worth more than the first. A limitation in scope builds off a limit to the term, because the royalties a student-athlete receives, however, need to last in perpetuity, otherwise, the business will eventually make 100 percent profits once services expire (this is why some state NIL laws prohibit deals lasting longer than eligibility). This limitation also matters because the ownership and use of any property that is produced as a result of the services provided by the business, i.e., photos or signed memorabilia, must be outlined in the contract. Lastly, the rights need to be limited to the services provided by the student-athlete as indicated in the contract. A student-athlete does not want to run into a situation where they sign a deal that gives a business the uncontrolled right to use their NIL for any other reason, which would essentially bar that student-athlete from selling their NIL to anyone else because the first business has full authority over their NIL. This is the problem the players ran into with Topps. Forward Thinking It is interesting to see that the struggles student-athletes deal with in the NIL space are vividly similar to those of the major league baseball players in the 1960s. The MLBPA-Topps controversy sheds light on the most important features of NIL deals for college athletes—adequate compensation and structured granting of NIL rights. The MLBPA countered Topps with a group licensing program that has since grown into a multi-million-dollar market for major league players and soon, potentially for minor leaguers. Thus, as a final note that I do not intend to discuss, it is worth thinking about how a group licensing program would change the NIL market. Ideally, though, there would have to be some sort of student-athletes union for this to be effective. Jared Yaggie is a 2L at the University of Cincinnati College of Law. You can connect with him via LinkedIn or on Twitter @JaredYaggie. Sources: [1] 501 F.Supp. 485 (E.D. Pa. 1980). [2] Id. at 490. [3] Id. at 492.

For many attorneys and law students aspiring to utilize their legal degrees to work in the sports industry, an in-house position with a professional organization is considered the peak of an arduous climb to the top of the sports law world. Oftentimes, legal positions in some of the mainstream sports in America, namely football, basketball, and baseball, are typically those that are sought after by the sports enthusiasts in the legal world. Nevertheless, due to the exponential growth of its popularity and the constant expansion of its professional leagues, the path toward in-house positions in American soccer has never appeared more open for those aspiring to work within the beautiful game. As an incoming law student who ultimately hopes to attain an in-house counsel position within professional soccer, I wanted to learn from those who are currently in positions toward which I and several others passionate about the intersection of soccer and the law aspire. Accordingly, I decided to start a process that I wanted to document by way of Conduct Detrimental to share with all who are interested – an interview with a member of the legal counsel at every MLS club. From these interviews, I hope to be able to provide insight into the nature of legal counsel positions in professional soccer. And at the end of this process, I hope that we will all be more knowledgeable on what it requires to successfully convert our greatest passions into a dream occupation. For this interview, I was fortunate to speak with Peter Tringali – Senior Legal Counsel for the New York Red Bulls, Red Bull Arena, and the New York Red Bulls Academy. A graduate of Binghamton University and Brooklyn Law School, Mr. Tringali worked in private practice in New York until joining the Red Bulls in April 2019. The conversation I had with Mr. Tringali was incredibly informative, and it was an absolute joy to learn from him. The conversation represents Peter’s individual views and opinions and do not purport to reflect the views or opinions of Red Bull or Major League Soccer. With that said, here is the interview with New York Red Bulls Senior Legal Counsel, Peter Tringali: 1. BG: Tell us a bit about your story – what led your interest in working in-house within soccer to develop and the career steps you took that eventually placed you in your current position. PT: I always liked the idea of working in-house, even before I knew what it actually meant. I thought it would be fun to work for a brand or team where I could support on a variety of matters while providing strategic and business advice (in addition to legal advice) in an environment that is conducive to maintaining sometimes elusive “quality of life”. I never had a specific passion for soccer (though now I do!), but always knew working in sports or entertainment was kind of the dream. In law school I got an internship working in-house for a company that runs military-style obstacles courses/mud runs. For my 2L summer, I was fortunate enough to get a summer associate position in big law and was extended an offer for after graduation. Given the job offer, and my significant student loan debt, I focused less on finding my “dream job” coming out of law school and focused on just getting the most out of the opportunities that I had been presented with – in order to set me up for long term success. It’s a long and winding road. For me, this meant taking on as many different opportunities as I could get my hand on… taking on pro bono matters, helping out different practice groups, etc. When I moved firms, I joined a “pure” transactional practice group so I could learn what it took to negotiate and draft complex contracts and to efficiently run deals. 2. BG: What does a typical workday look like for you as Senior Legal Counsel at the New York Red Bulls? Is your position more of a consultancy role, or do you primarily serve as the club’s representative in all pertinent legal matters? PT: The cliché answer to this question is also the accurate one: every day is different. We’re responsible for advising the front office, the sporting department and the arena co with legal, risk and strategic advice. A majority of our work is transactional – drafting and negotiating contracts, however we are also responsible for risk and liability issues and disputes. With respect to specific legal doctrine, there is certainly an emphasis on corporate law matters, intellectual property, labor and employment law, FIFA rules and regulations, and data privacy and security law issues. 3. BG: I noticed from your LinkedIn profile that you also serve as Senior Legal Counsel for Red Bull Arena and the Academy program for the Red Bulls. What are some of the differences that you’ve found – if any - between your role for each of these areas of the franchise? PT: The work I do for RBA focuses on negotiating arena license/rental agreements, contracting with our service providers and vendors, advising on capex improvements, general risk management advice, any personal injury or property damage claims that may arise, and advising on arena policies and rules. In addition to hosting all of our first team MLS matches, we have partnered with the local NWSL women’s team to stage their matches, we host third-party national team or club friendlies, a variety of other sporting events (rugby, lacrosse, football), and even concerts. We also license use of the facility to film, tv, and commercial productions. With respect to the Academy, we have six teams beginning with U12. In addition to providing legal support on any vendor/service provider relationships, we also are responsible for implementing policies and practices regarding the health and safety of our athlete participants and what can more broadly be thought of as “SafeSport” compliance. Finally, we also advise the academy on MLS and FIFA rules and regulatory matters. 4. BG: If you could list 3 of the most important skills necessary to work as in-house counsel for an MLS club and provide a brief explanation for their importance, which skills would you choose? PT: Ability to effectively negotiate and draft contracts is imperative! Contract work represents more than 50% of my overall workload. In addition to that, I would say communication skills/inter-personal skills are key. Both in order to learn and understand the business’s needs, concerns, and priorities, but also to be able to analyze complex legal issues and communicate the key points in a concise manner. In the law firm setting as a junior attorney, your clients are the partners you work for and you are primarily communicating with other attorneys. Conversely, in-house counsel is required to communicate issues primarily to non-attorneys (at least internally). Working in-house provides counsel the opportunity to build relationships with a wide array of stakeholders, including business clients, ownership, league representatives, counter-parties, and government officials. Building relationships with each of these individuals ensures productive ways of working, trust/accountability, and goodwill. 5. BG: As a law student, did you know that you wanted to work in the sports industry? If so, how did you prepare yourself to accomplish this goal whilst in school? If not, what led you to decide to work in sports and, more specifically, for an MLS club? PT: As mentioned above, I always had an eye on sports and entertainment, but at the point I took a financial restructuring job in big law, I kind of thought the ship had sailed. I had one sports related internship in law school, I was also able to get some tangentially related sports industry experience working as a paralegal before law school, and in each of my two law firm jobs. I think the best thing you can do to prepare yourself for an in-house generalist role is to focus on transactional skills and develop a well-rounded set of experiences. I feel very fortunate to have this position, but I put in a lot of hard work to set myself up to capitalize on my good fortune. Self-education is another critical step. Nobody can prevent you from becoming an expert at legal issues impacting the sports industry, or from reading league collective bargaining agreements or publicly filed court documents. If you want to be a sports lawyer, then be a sports lawyer. The job opportunity will follow. Read everything you can get your hands on related to the industry, network and create relationships, and be ready to pounce when the opportunity comes along! Finally, if you’re still in law school, do whatever you can to get an externship/internship in the industries you want to work. It’ll help you build relationships, learn about the industry, and helps give your resume legitimacy/authenticity. 6. BG: What is the one critical piece of advice that you could offer from your experience to law students aspiring to work in-house not only in soccer but in sports as a whole? Additionally, what is one piece of advice that you could offer about the industry to law students that you wish you were given when you were in law school? PT: Law students in particular are terrified of being pigeon-holed… It’s such an overblown concern! I interned for government agencies and in the judicial system, practiced bankruptcy/restructuring law for 3 years, and then as a banking and finance lawyer for 3 years before joining Red Bull New York. Focus on gaining a breadth of experience. Try new things. Be humble and curious and don’t pretend you know more than you do. There is pressure to impress, but no seasoned attorney expects a first-year associate to be an expert. Junior associates impress by asking good questions, being eager to learn, working hard, displaying sharp attention to detail and good interpersonal skills. Getting to the level where you can be a successful in-house attorney, especially in demanding areas like sports or entertainment, takes time! A special thank you to Peter Tringali for his contributions to this article. He can be found on LinkedIn at Peter Tringali. Bryce Goodwyn is a 1L at Regent University School of Law. He currently works as a Dean’s Fellow completing research and administrative work. He also formed part of the recently established National Sports Legal and Business Society as the East Region Chair. He can be found on Twitter @BryceGoodwyn and on LinkedIn as Bryce Goodwyn.

The Ivy League is being accused of engaging in antitrust in order to eliminate competition within intra-conference athletic recruitment. A recent class action lawsuit has been filed by a current Brown University Basketball player, as well as Brown Basketball alumni. The plaintiffs allege that Brown University, Columbia University, Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Harvard University, the University of Pennsylvania, Princeton University, and Yale University have broken federal antitrust laws in order to cheat student-athletes out of scholarship money and decrease the schools’ total scholarship payments. In reality, this is not collusion or market manipulation. The Ivy League doesn’t have a monopoly on NCAA athletics. These athletes were not forced to go to the Ivy League. These students agreed, with full knowledge, that they would be paying for their education when they committed to Ivy League schools for sports. While the plaintiffs’ argument sounds juicy at first, when you think about it, it isn’t. While it is true Ivy League policy banning athletic scholarships does eliminate scholarship competition within Ivy League recruitment, these athletes had plenty of other choices. The Ivy League hardly has a monopoly over NCAA Division I sports. While it differs by sport, most major NCAA Division I sports have dozens of conferences for the athletes to choose from. These athletes were free to attend any other D1 school in any other D1 conference. In fact, many of these athletes were likely recruited by such other schools, yet they chose to attend these Ivy League schools to enhance their own individual pedigrees. Sources: https://www.highereddive.com/news/ivy-league-sued-ban-athletics-scholarships/644517/ https://www.wsj.com/articles/ivy-leagues-agreement-to-ban-athletic-scholarships-is-illegal-lawsui t-says-e1e7c29c https://ago.mo.gov/civil-division/consumer/antitrust-laws/what-are-the-antitrust-laws#:~:text=The %20Sherman%20Act%2C%20enacted%20by,bid%20rigging%20and%20tying%20agreements.

The world is moving at a ridiculously fast pace right now. Collegiate athletes are finally able to get compensated for their name, image, and likeness (NIL), shifting the definition of what is once met to be a student-athlete. NIL money has officially changed the game. We have already seen collegiate athletes almost make what would have seemed like crazy decisions just 5 years ago as a result of NIL money. CJ Stroud, Ohio State’s quarterback in 2022, is currently a consensus top 5 pick in the NFL draft, with rumors he may even be drafted first overall after the recent Chicago Bears and Carolina Panthers trade. However, he waited until the final day to declare for the NFL draft. This decision was a result of the possibility that booster-funded NIL collectives could offer a contract for Stroud to remain at Ohio State rather than declaring for the draft. These lucrative deals do not just come from NIL collectives but also from any company willing to pay the price. Companies like Beats by Dre and Fanatics have made deals with University of Southern California quarterback Caleb Williams leading to his net worth being estimated at 2.4 million dollars before he has even taken an NFL snap. For so long, social media influencers who were also collegiate athletes were not able to profit from this online success until after they graduated. Some, like former University of Central Florida kicker Donald De La Haye, even decided to forfeit their scholarships to instead profit from their social media. His channel, “Deestroying”, has since eclipsed 5 million subscribers, and it is safe to say De La Haye has profited immensely from this decision. Today, the combination of social media influencing and NIL deals has created a new age wild west. Olivia “Livvy” Dunne is a gymnast at Louisiana State University (LSU) who has become a social media sensation with over 7 million followers on TikTok. With the ability to profit off her NIL, she has been able to make brand deals while still remaining affiliated as a student-athlete with her school, unlike De La Haye before this NIL legislation. However, Dunne has recently faced backlash for a recent partnership with the company Caktus AI. Caktus AI is an educational artificial intelligence tool whose target demographic are students looking for help with school by receiving essays generated by the AI system. Students are able to refine this search in detail, leading to a very real possibility of the system being used for academic dishonesty. Following Dunne posting a TikTok about the company, LSU published a statement stating that, “using AI to produce work that a student then represents as one's own could result in a charge of academic misconduct, as outlined in the Code of Student Conduct.” While Dunne and Caktus AI were not specifically mentioned, it seems clear who the statement was aimed towards. Athletes are required to disclose contracts to a designated official at their school to ensure there are no conflicts with any contracts the school has with other companies or organizations. Time will only tell if schools will attempt to limit posts like Dunne’s that may go against certain values they have. Dustin Pokorny is a 1L student and representative of the Sports Law Society at the University of Southern California Gould School of Law in Los Angeles. He can be found on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/in/dustin-pokorny-301459172/.

Two student-athletes have filed suit against the Ivy League and its member universities, claiming they have engaged in price-fixing by not offering athletic scholarships or compensation while conducting business as for-profit organizations. Two basketball players from Brown university have filed a lawsuit in the Connecticut District Court challenging a 69-year-old joint ivy league agreement that forbids member schools from providing athletic scholarships or paying athletes for their performance. According to the lawsuit asking for class-action status, the agreement has direct anti-competitive implications, increasing the net price of education that Ivy League players pay and suppressing reimbursement for the athletic competition they provide to the schools. Tamenang Choh and Grace Kirk, the plaintiffs, assert that they were offered full-tuition athletic scholarships from at least one other division 1 school. However, Brown University only provided need-based financial aid, which did not fully help with the enrollment cost or strain of athletic performance. For more than 10,000 present and past Ivy League athletes dating back to 2019, the complaint asks for damages and the termination of the no-scholarship agreement between the league. The limitation on athletic scholarships has been around since its establishment in 1954, with a slight revision in 2017. Eight Ivy League institutions are defendants in the lawsuit: Harvard, Yale, Brown, Princeton, Dartmouth, Cornell, Columbia, and Penn. There is policy support by Robin Harris, executive director of the Ivy League, who claims that the true league's athletic programs exist on the fundamental idea that student-athletes should be representative of the larger student body, including having access to the need-based financial aid. Each Ivy League student-athlete embarks on a journey that balances top-tier academic education with the chance to play Division 1 athletics, ultimately paving the way for lifelong success. Attorneys for the Brown athletes, however, emphasize that other prestigious academic institutions, like Stanford and Duke, provide athletic scholarships, uphold high academic standards, and compete for exceptional athletes without predetermined price caps. The lawsuit also claims that Ivy League universities significantly influence a small group of individuals who are elite students and athletes. The league artificially reduces the market for those kids by refusing to award athletic scholarships. Among Division 1 athletic leagues, the Ivy League is unique in not providing athletic scholarships although the league has competed with more prominent schools for some solid recruits. With notable alums including Ryan Fitzpatrick and Jeremy Lin, Ivy League schools have found success beyond their collegiate playing years. The Ivy League's stance has its critics who claim that the elite applicants may decide to attend other institutions that give scholarships, decreasing the athletic competition. Others contend that the league's academic requirements and the availability of need-based financial aid adequately compensate the athletes. The League's policy was contested in court in 2008 by former Dartmouth football player Miles Richardson. Richardson similarly claimed that the Ivy League and its member institutions had conspired to restrict financial aid and scholarships in violation of antitrust laws. A federal judge dismissed the complaint after finding that the Ivy League's policy did not violate antitrust laws. How the current legal dispute will turn out is still up in the air. To increase the chances of success, the plaintiffs are asking for the Ivy League acts to be, per se, illegal. However, they have defended this stance in the past, and its member institutions may contend that their academic standards justify it. With Princeton's current run in the NCAA tournament, this lawsuit could gain some traction in the public eye. AJ Calabro is a former student-athlete at Syracuse University and a current law student at Roger Williams University. He can be reached by email at [email protected] or on Twitter @AJ_Calabro Sources: https://www.ctinsider.com/news/article/ivy-league-lawsuit-among-changes-in-college-sports-17853463.php?src=ctiartribbon https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/35812605/athletes-sue-ivy-league-no-scholarship-policy https://apnews.com/article/ivy-league-lawsuit-athletes-brown-scholarship-771b34fa36ea06f6109435102d939299

In the latter part of the 20th century, St. John’s was one of the proudest and most successful college basketball programs in the country. Under coach Lou Carnesecca, the Red Storm won over 72% of their games, was a 1 seed three times, and reached the Final Four. However, since the turn of the century, things have gone downhill for the program. Remarkably, St. John’s hasn’t won a game in the NCAA Tournament in over 20 years now. Who receives the blame when programs fail to meet their historical expectations? Most of the time, it falls on the coaches. After the Red Storm slumped in Big East play for yet another season, the school fired fourth-year head coach Mark Anderson. Many in college basketball expected the move given the program’s struggles. However, an interesting development about Anderson’s firing popped up this week: St. John’s fired Anderson for cause. According to the termination letter obtained by ESPN, St. John’s claimed there was "failure to create and support an environment that strongly encourages student-athletes who are in the men's basketball program to meet all university academic requirements," "failure to perform your duties and responsibilities in a manner that reflected positively on St. John's University ... in actions [that] brought serious discredit" to the school and "failure to appropriately supervise and communicate with your assistant coaches." If you’ve ever looked at a college coach’s contract, you’ll see that there are numerous responsibilities a coach has beyond just the Xs and Os. In addition to the most obvious task of winning games, there are clauses about team academic performance, media obligations, reflecting positively on the school, etc. Furthermore, there are clauses about how a coach could be terminated for cause if they run into legal issues, commit NCAA violations, and other off-the-field/court problems (i.e. Chris Beard at Texas). From what we know, Anderson isn’t in any legal trouble with the law or the NCAA, so this is all about his inability to perform his essential duties within the program. Clearly, St. John’s believes they have enough on him to fire him for cause. On the other hand, Anderson strongly disagrees. "I vehemently disagree with the university's decision to terminate my contract for cause," Anderson said in a statement to ESPN. "The for cause accusation is wholly without merit and I will be aggressively defending my contractual rights through an arbitration process." According to the contract, St. Johns would have been on the hook for an $11 million buyout if Anderson had not been fired for cause, so it’s unsurprising the coach isn’t going down without a fight. The backdrop behind all of this is that St. John’s is reportedly hiring legendary coach Rick Pitino to replace Anderson. By firing Anderson for cause, could St. John’s be saving money needed to hire Pitino? It’s definitely a conclusion one could draw from this situation. Most Big East schools are not hurting for cash as the conference has a solid TV deal with Fox. But it’s worth noting that St. John’s likely doesn’t have the same resources that the football-playing SEC, Big Ten, Big 12, and Pac-12 schools do. Firing a coach for cause is not a sure bet by any means. One of St. John’s Big East rivals, UConn, learned the hard way in the past couple of years when they attempted to fire Kevin Ollie. In fact, I wrote for Conduct Detrimental about how that situation served as a warning sign to schools looking to save some money when firing their coaches. We obviously don’t know all the facts in this case, so making any grandiose statements or conclusions at this point would be a little premature. But as I’ve said before and will say again when it comes to situations like these. If Mike Anderson had the Red Storm in the NCAA Tournament and competing for Big East titles, would they have fired him for cause? I find it doubtful. It will be interesting what happens in the arbitration process. So even as St. John’s hires Rick Pitino and embarks on a new (and hopefully more successful) era of Red Storm basketball, there will still be lingering questions regarding their previous head coach. Brendan can be found on Twitter @_bbell5

On Wednesday, March 22, 2023, the Texas State Affairs Committee held a public hearing on two separate pieces of legislation on sports betting. Representative Jeff Leach brought forth House Bill 1942 and House Joint Resolution 102. House Bill 1942 would authorize sports betting in Texas by providing an online-only format. Currently, as the bill stands there is no brick-and-mortar component to the legalization of sports betting. The bill includes a 10% tax on the adjusted gross gaming revenue. The bill also includes an initial application fee of $500 thousand. The skins associated with the legislation are tethered to “sports entities.” The sporting entities include Texas professional sports teams and the PGA which holds multiple tournaments within the state. The sports entities can then contract with a designee to receive a permit on behalf of the entity. This means each team will partner with a sportsbook to provide sports betting for their fans. House Joint Resolution seeks to amend Article III, Section 47 of the Texas state constitution. Rep. Leach believes this amendment is necessary to allow for the passage of sports betting in Texas. The language added would give the legislature the authority to regulate sports betting within the state. Given that this is a constitutional amendment, the people would vote to decide the fate of the amendment in a November vote. During the public hearing, individuals representing groups that were either for or against the bill were given a chance to speak on the bill. Below I will summarize the main arguments that were made by each side of the debate. FOR the Bill The main argument that was brought for by the proponents of the bill is an argument that I have heard before when sports betting is being debated. The crux of the argument is something along the lines of “Texans are already betting on sports but they are doing it through illegal means. Let’s bring that money into the legal and regulated space.” This argument is very similar to others made when states debate legalizing other vices: other forms of gambling or marijuana. Another argument for the bill focused on the revenue the state could generate from legalized sports betting. Connecting this argument to the previous one, Texas is currently receiving zero dollars in revenue because all the bets placed are through illegal means. A partner from Eilers & Krejcik Gaming, LLC brought forth some projections the state of Texas could see if it legalizes sports betting. The research shows that in five years the state would generate around $2.37 billion in gaming revenue. With that revenue, the state would be taking in around $180 million per year in taxes. A final argument for the bill that was brought up by multiple individuals is the need to provide safety for those looking to place wagers. Sportsbooks go through intense safety procedures to ensure that their product is as fair as can be for the customers. However, with illegal offshore betting marketplaces, there is no guarantee of the safety or reliability of a wager being placed. Since the bettor is doing something illegal, they will find it hard to fight any legal fights they may have with the offshore book. Those for the bill want to regulate sports betting to ensure the safety of the customers. AGAINST the Bill One of the main arguments brought forth against the bill is the danger sports betting could pose to kids. While the betting age of the bill is set at 21, these groups pointed to statistics that showed younger audiences getting in on the sports betting craze however they could. They also stated they believed the ads for sports betting were specifically targeting children. A rather important argument against the bill as it stood was made by a representative of the Kickapoo tribe. The tribe was left out of the bill and rather than opposing the bill outright, they want to amend the bill to include language that would allow them to have a slice of the pie. The wording is important as it has to conform with the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA). The other arguments against the bill could be summarized as going against traditional family values. They point to gambling addiction and its crippling nature on individuals. They also pointed to the stat showing gambling addiction has the highest rate of suicide among all forms of addiction. Both bills were left pending in committee following the hearing. I will make sure to keep an eye on the progress of the bill as sports betting in Texas would be a major economic boost given the almost 30 million residents in the state of Texas. Justin Mader is a recent graduate of the University of New Hampshire Franklin Pierce School of Law where he earned a J.D. and a Sports and Entertainment Law Certificate. He can be reached via Twitter: @maderlawand LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/in/justin-mader-15a602119/.

A new bill filed in the Arkansas House of Representatives would amend the state’s name, image, and likeness (NIL) law to allow certain high school athletes to profit from their name, image, and likeness. Under the state’s current law, only athletes enrolled at a college or university can enter into NIL deals. If the new bill passes, high school athletes will be able to enter into NIL deals, provided the athlete has been admitted, signed a National Letter of Intent, or signed another agreement to enroll in an institution of higher education. To keep Arkansas institutions a step ahead of schools outside the state, legislators added a provision authorizing an institution’s athletic foundation to facilitate or create NIL deals for an athlete, including a high school athlete. Interestingly, there was a growing trend of southern states repealing NIL laws to keep in-state schools at the forefront of NIL, including Florida and Alabama. If the bill passes, Arkansas legislators are taking a different approach and will join over 20 states that allow high school athletes to enter into NIL deals. As the NCAA’s NIL policy continues to evolve, expect states to adjust to new ideas to keep their in-state universities ahead of the changes. Landis Barber is an attorney at Safran Law Offices in Raleigh, North Carolina. You can connect with him via LinkedIn or via his blog offthecourtdocket.com. He can be reached on Twitter @Landisbarber.

Absent from the NCAA Tournament this year is a frequent participant, my alma mater, New Mexico State University. The Aggies are usually one of the top teams in the WAC, and last year took Arkansas down to the wire in the second round. What followed one of the best seasons in school history was one of the most shocking scandals that have not been talked about enough. New Mexico State had both a player kill a person in self-defense, and a sexual abuse scandal, in the same season. In March of 2022, head coach Chris Jans left the school for Mississippi State. Shortly after that NMSU hired little-known coach Greg Heiar, a coach with no Division 1 experience, to head the program. It has now become evident that Mr. Heiar was in way over his head. In October of 2022, Forward Mike Peake was involved in a brawl at a football game between NMSU and the University of New Mexico. Brandon Travis was involved in this altercation, and in November, he and two associates jumped Peake at the University of New Mexico dorms. Travis had a firearm and one of the other men had a bat when they attacked Mr. Peake. Peake responded to the attack by running on foot while being shot at, to which he returned fire, killing Travis. Peake was hit by one of the rounds that Travis fired, suffering a leg injury. Peake, after suffering his injury, was then taken back to the team hotel where he gave his gun to assistant coach Dominique Taylor. When the police sought to locate the gun and speak to NMSU players, Heiar had the team board their bus in an effort to return to Las Cruces. Eventually, the bus was stopped on the interstate and returned to Albuquerque. Peake’s gun was found inside Taylor’s hotel room wrapped in a towel. Peake will not be charged with murder because of the video footage that demonstrates a clear self-defense claim, additionally, the police have been referring to him as the “victim.” Somehow, this was not the worst scandal that rocked the program. In early February it is revealed that three players were involved in the hazing of one of their teammates. The names of those involved have not been released. However, the allegations in the police report are the following: Harassment, False Imprisonment, and Criminal Sexual Contact. Details about this situation are scarce currently, however, the situation is serious enough that Chancellor Dan Arvizu canceled the season on February 12th, and two days later, he fired Heiar. New Mexico State now stands at a crossroads, one of its own makings. Arvizu has said that there will be a season next year, but who would want to come into this situation? I cannot imagine a situation where the NCAA does not sanction the program. Further, they will need to hire a coach that can rebuild the school's credibility with both the community and the players. Wake Gardner is a 1L at the Brandeis School of Law at the University of Louisville. Someday he hopes to work for a sports team in Florida. He can be reached on Twitter @WakeGardner and by email at [email protected]. Sources: Body camera footage shows fight at UNM-NMSU football game 10 pm - YouTube Mike Peake shoots Brandon Travis in self defense, surveillance video - YouTube Full Video: Police interview New Mexico State University Coach Greg Heiar - YouTube New Mexico State fires men's basketball coach Greg Heiar (espn.com) NM State cancels rest of men's basketball season after hazing allegations are detailed (ktsm.com) NMSU hazing police report - Twitter Search / Twitter