Two-time NBA Champion J.R. Smith is finally headed to college – but as a golfer for the North Carolina A&T Aggies (Often referred to as A&T or NCAT). As reported by a Greensboro, NC CBS-affiliate, ESPN, and CBS Sports, the NBA vet and twitter meme sensation has confirmed he is enrolled at A&T for the fall semester and intends join the golf team. North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University is a Division-I, historically black university (HBCU) located in Greensboro, NC, and competes in the Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference, although their programs are in the process of completing a move to the Big South Conference. NCAT athletics sport notable athletic alumni such as Chicago Bears running back, Tarik Cohen and NCAA-champion and Olympic medalist Randolph Ross, Jr. Smith was drafted to the NBA straight out of high school in 2004, and is a 16-year NBA vet, with a short stint overseas playing basketball professionally in China. Smith first golfed competitively at a Moses Malone’s charity event in 2009 and reportedly plays at a handicap of 5, according to PGATour.com. A&T’s head men’s and women’s golf coach, Richard Watkins, says Smith stands to be a competitive contributor to the men’s team, pending the NCAA sorting out his eligibility. With college athletics in a state of flux from changes to Name, Image, and Likeness deals, could Smith, like other college golfers, earn endorsements or sponsorships related to NIL? Golfing associations and governing bodies are still grappling with the chaos and fallout from the recent NIL bonanza, but in the midst of this game of hot potato, it appears as though collegiate golfers will get the all-clear, as many NCAA athletes have already. Unlike other sports such as basketball or football, the nature of college golfers’ competitions have caused collegiate golfers to question if NIL rules will allow them to compete in non-NCAA competitions while enrolled and competing on a college team. While it appears as though college golfers will be able to compete in non-NCAA competitions and sign endorsement deals, they will still be prohibited from providing one-on-one, in-person, live instruction in return for compensation. With golfers standing to earn from NIL compensation, Smith seems like the prime candidate pending the certification of his amateur status as a golfer. NCAA’s amateurism standards hinge on key factors such as, if a player has been represented by a professional sports agent, if they have received money in return for participation with a sports club, or if they have received money to offset athletic training expenses. Obviously Smith has done all the above- however, NCAA rules allow for athletes to retain amateur status while being a “professional” in another sport. Additionally, NCAA rules do not explicitly ban former pro athletes from returning to college as amateurs in a sport they have not competed in professionally – that would imply that the former Cavs and Lakers star is in the clear. In the past, the NCAA has allowed athletes to turn pro in one sport, while remaining amateurs in others – recently of note, Kyler Murray, who was drafted and signed by the Oakland A’s while remaining a starting quarterback for the Oklahoma Sooners. The best example of precedent for Smith may be Chris Weinke’s 6-year stint as a pro baseball player in the Toronto Blue Jays minor league system before enrolling in college and subsequently winning a national championship and Heisman trophy as a quarterback for the Florida State Seminoles. Weinke was 25 when he enrolled at Florida State and won the Heisman as a 28 year-old. JR Smith’s enrollment into the largest public HBCU in the nation serves as a potential boon for historically black colleges, as well as the collegiate golfing world, though he certainly would not be the first collegiate golfer to ink a noteworthy deal. Golfers in several states have already signed NIL agreements including Bryant University-commit Cael Kohan, who has signed a deal with Barstool Sports, and All-ACC, Freshman All-American, golfer from Florida State, Brett Roberts, who has signed an ambassador deal with his hometown prep school, Xceed Preparatory Academy. With college NIL compensation in a state of flux, it remains to be seen what types of deals JR Smith could bring in. That said, with JR's platform, popularity and unique story, it is hard to imagine that NIL endorsement offers are not far on the horizon. O. Patrick Sutton is an NFL Agent. You can contact him on Twitter (@SuttonImpaQt), Instagram (@Agent00Sutton) or via email [email protected]

As reported by the Washington Post today, it appears that Trevor Bauer faced a similar complaint from an Ohio woman in 2020. This alleged victim stated that Mr. Bauer allegedly punched the victim and choked her during sex to the point that she became unconscious. It is also reported that she, like his alleged California victim, also sought a permanent restraining order against Mr. Bauer. It appears that the alleged Ohio victim did not take the matter to hearing. What is that? Often times in domestic violence cases, alleged victims are exceptionally cooperative at the onset of the case. That is in part because emotions are rampant and everybody is in the victim’s ear telling them what to do and how to proceed. However, over time, those emotions subside and all the voices tend to disappear. The victim also ponders whether or not he/she would be willing to miss work (and potential pay) to testify in Court to get their alleged abuser held accountable. That same victim(s) also ponders whether or not this is what is best for their mental health and well-being. Some believe that the best thing to do is just put the incident behind them. Finally, some give it a second thought and decide that they want their private life to remain private. That being said, that alleged 2020 incident might some have major ramifications for Mr. Bauer’s 2021 criminal investigation. As stated in a previous post, Mr. Bauer allegedly punched the victim and then proceeded to choke her during sexual intercourse in the 2021 case to the point that she was rendered unconscious. Those specific acts (punching the victim and choking to the point it renders the victims unconscious) are strikingly similar to the alleged facts from the complaint from the Ohio woman in 2020. Mr. Bauer, by his own admission, admitted that he had a casual on and off again relationship with this Ohio woman while he was a member of the Cleveland Indians from 2016-2019. Mr. Bauer allegedly stated to the Ohio woman that he couldn’t see her again because, “He didn’t feel like spending time in jail for killing someone. That is what would happen if he saw her again.” But how could those allegedly striking similarity facts from the alleged 2020 Ohio incident hurt Mr. Bauer in his alleged 2021 California incident? That is through the theory of habit evidence. Under California Evidence Code 1105, “Any otherwise admissible evidence of habit or custom is admissible to prove conduct on a specified occasion in conformity with the habit or custom.” Thus, the alleged 2020 incident (where Mr. Bauer punched the victim during sex as well as choked her to the point where she was rendered unconscious during sex) is potentially admissible in Mr. Bauer’s 2021 incident if he is formally charged and his case goes to trial. That is because these facts theoretically show that Mr. Bauer tends to punch sexual partners and choke them unconscious during sex and continue having sex with them while they are unable to continue to consent. Let me tell you, to a jury, that is compelling evidence. That is because, if admitted, a prosecutor could tell a jury during closing, “He has done the exact same thing to two different women. He punches them during sex and he also chokes them unconscious and continues to have sex with them. They have no ability to say no to whatever he is doing. The alleged 2021 California victim could not say whether or not she wanted anal sex with Mr. Bauer. Mr. Bauer took that decision away from her.” A jury will likely then go back into the jury room and all tell each other, “He did this before and he will do it again. We need to put a stop to this now.” We are obviously a long from trial and/or a conviction for Trevor Bauer but the question remains: Are these two alleged victims isolated incidents or are they the tip of the iceberg? Matthew F. Tympanick is an Associate Attorney at Wicker Smith in Sarasota, Florida. He is a graduate of University of Massachusetts School of Law where he served as a Public Interest Fellow and as a Staff Editor on UMass Law Review. He was previously a felony prosecutor in Sarasota, Florida. In over three years as a prosecutor, he prosecuted thousands of domestic violence cases. You can follow him on Twitter @Tympanick20.

Doping refers to use of prohibited substance or methods by sports-persons for improving their sports performance, which are prohibited by the concerned regulatory body. However, with passing time, Doping has evolved to involve a wide range of dubious and unethical means by which an athlete enjoys an advantage in his performance. For instance, ‘mechanical doping’ refers to the alleged application of illegal technologies for enhanced performance or for gaining n edge over the competitors by means like concealed motors in the frames and wheels of bicycles. Another case is of Oscar Pistorius, who was accused of ‘technological doping’ when his blades were thought to give him an unfair advantage over competitors that did not use them. Financial Doping is one such form of doping and has been the latest addition to this dimension of sports. Financial Doping is a situation where a sports franchise, borrows heavily in order to contract to pay high performing players, which not only hampers their credit value but also jeopardizes their long term financial plans. Thomas Muller was the first who first attempted an academic definition of the concept. Financial Doping was defined as: “… financial means not earned by a club directly or indirectly through its sporting operations or supporter reputation, but rather provided by an external investor, benefactor or creditor detached from sporting merit and supporter reputation as well as from sustainable investment motivations.” Financial doping from a Legal perspective Financial Doping gives a message of performance enhancement through financial enhancements on the same side as an illegitimate enhancement of performance through prohibited substance and practices. In case of a traditional doping, a substance is banned for particular reasons, and then the same factors should also be applicable to financial doping in sports. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list states a substance and/or method is prohibited if at least two of the following apply: i. It enhances sport performance, ii. It poses a potential health risk to the athlete, iii. It violates the spirit of sport. Financial Doping qualifies for at least 2 of the above factors which is enhancement of sports performance and violation of spirit of sport, and therefore ought to be considered illegitimate and should be banned or regulated. One of sports great appeals is unpredictability, the anxiety and excitement of what could be. Sports where you can predict the winner every time tend to be un-engaging. The fact that sports performance has shifted away from the pitch to the pockets of the wealthiest owner or creditor ready to shower millions to gain advantage, is a grave issue to the spirit of sports. The aesthetic and competitive aspects of sports get lost due the commodification of sports by involvements of unregulated financial activities. This form of wealth based distribution and allocation of athletic talent would result in uneven acquiring of talents by one team and thus result in distributive injustice and oligopoly. This disrupts the competitive balance and uncertainty involved in sports as it dents the fundamental aspects and values of sports which is that sporting competition ought to be challenging, competitive and the outcome unpredictable. UEFA Financial Fair Play Regulations- A check on Financial Doping The Financial Fair Play (FFP) regulations was introduced by Union of European Football Associations(UEFA) in 2010-11 to prevent Football Clubs that qualify for its competitions from spending beyond their means and to stamp out the “financial doping” within football. Prior to this clubs took ventured out on acquiring high performing players by incurring inflated transfer fees and salaries, which they could not afford, but with the hope that, on the field, success would follow and the revenues would increase, so that the costs could then be covered. However as of 2021, Football’s financial fair play rules are to undergo dramatic change, with the key break-even measure declared “purposeless” by Andrea Traverso, UEFA’s director of research and financial stability. With Covid-19 creating a crisis “very different from anything we have had to tackle before”, according to officials, they believe new rules should concentrate on clubs’ wage levels and the scale of fees in the transfer market. Instances of Financial Doping in Sports The first highlight in Financial Doping which caught eyes would be the case of Roman Abramovich, the owner of Chelsea FC. Abramovich was the ultimate Premier League Santa-Clause. His money ensured Chelsea were able to assemble a world class squad to compete with the very best in Europe. However, this comes with the darkside as well. As of Feb, 2021 Chelsea owes a debt to tune of £1.3billion, (which has been converted to debt held in a holding company, Fordstam Limited) to its owner, which raises questions about its financial stability and sustainability especially at a time where the pandemic has hit the revenues of most of the sporting clubs globally. Financial Doping again captured the headlines a few days back when La Liga chief Javier Tebas has claimed Manchester City could not sign Lionel Messi on his previous Barcelona terms without the aid of “financial doping” Messi is now a free agent after his contract at Barcelona expired on June 30 . That has led to speculation clubs such as Premier League champions City, who were heavily linked with Messi last summer, or Paris Saint-Germain could step in. It would be interesting to see how this turns out to be. Conclusion Financial doping presents a grave danger to the world of sports as it challenges the core principles that sports is build on: performance and uncertainty. Moreover, it hamper the sports economy as it sees funds being spent that has not been generated by clubs but is given to them as credit. It hampers the spirit of sport as it ends being a mere commercial activity. Just like traditional doping measures, the appropriate authorities must step in and establish regulations (and strengthen the existing one) to limit to curb this form of doping. The influence of money can not be eradicated in sport, nor can it be denied that there are other factors that might undermine the spirit of sport in similar ways. Some team must win for some reason, and it is inevitable that some teams will be more dominant than others. Sports would be better if it was more competitive, unpredictable and where there is increased mobility in terms of who wins. You could say that wealth and success in sport is self-affirming; having one boosts the other and visa-versa. However, the trend of financial doping must be controlled or else the sports world could be at risk of becoming too predictable and more boring.

More than five years after the scandal first came to light, the NCAA concluded their investigation into the Baylor football program. Based on violations related to impermissible benefits and improper recruiting practices involving a female hostess group, the NCAA’s infractions committee placed Baylor on probation for the next four seasons and imposed minor recruiting restrictions against the program. For allegations that some felt deserved the “Death Penalty” back in 2016, the punishment handed down acts as a slap on the wrist. Before getting into the mishandling by the NCAA, I want to point out that I think it’s great that the current coaches and players on Baylor’s roster won’t have to suffer for wrongdoings they had no part of. Head Coach, Dave Aranda, is entering his second season in Waco and is the third head football coach the school has employed since 2016. In addition, many of the players were in middle school when the events took place. Therefore, it’s completely understandable and good that the 2021 Baylor Bears will get to compete for championships this Fall. However, the fact that many who were directly involved in the allegations are getting off scotch free from the NCAA highlights major issues that need to be addressed moving forward. Before diving in, I want to share my utmost sympathy for the victims involved in this case. There have been reports of the physical and mental pain this scandal has caused on these women’s lives, and we should not lose sight of that while talking about sports law. However, because of this, the people most at fault should’ve been held accountable for their actions. An outside investigation back in 2016 showed that the program responded to the allegations with indifference or hostility towards the alleged victims. Furthermore, the victims were reportedly found to have been intimidated or discouraged from reporting attacks to protect the integrity of the football team, which at the time was in the midst of one of it’s most successful stretches in program history. Art Briles (Head Coach), Ian McCaw (Athletic Director), and Ken Starr (University President) all lost their jobs when the scandal broke back in 2016. However, with the NCAA’s investigation concluding this week, it is evident that they will not enforce any punishment on them individually at all. The Infractions Committee Panel released that “Baylor admitted to moral and ethical failing in its handling of sexual and interpersonal violence on campus but argued those failing, however egregious, did not constitute violations of NCAA rules.” With this statement, the NCAA essentially is admitting their current rules are not strong enough to maintain firm control over college athletics. While there have recently been countless examples of the NCAA laying down the law on student athletes who accepted money for memorabilia (Pre-NIL) and programs who allegedly committed recruiting violations, this obvious predatory culture at Baylor under Art Briles and Ian McCaw drew no individual punishment, postseason ban, or scholarship losses. Following the ruling, Art Briles’ attorney released a statement claiming that his client was “completely exonerated” and that “the NCAA’s decision clears Mr. Briles to return to coaching college football.” Whether or not a university will decide to hire Briles in the future is one thing, but he shouldn’t be able to get the chance. He coached high school football in Texas over the last few years, and there was even speculation that Texas Tech was interesting in hiring him this past December. The former Athletic Director, Ian McCaw, has since been hired by Liberty University in the same role. The reality that these two men avoided punishment from the NCAA and continue to have the opportunity to work in college athletics doesn’t feel right at all. Whether or not the NCAA had a specific rule pertaining to the case or not, if they can’t come down hard on the Baylor Sexual Assault case, then what are they really here for? The NCAA states their purpose is “to govern competition in a fair, safe, equitable and sportsmanlike manner, and to integrate intercollegiate athletics into higher education so that the educational experience of the student-athlete is paramount.” However, their ruling on Wednesday contradicts everything about that mission statement. Several women were used and neglected by the Baylor football program and have suffered tremendous pain because of it. Yet the people involved didn’t face any form of discipline from the NCAA. Quite frankly, it puts women at risk moving forward. Coaches and athletic departments are so focused on wins and losses these days to where stuff that happened at Baylor could be overlooked. I hope this sparks conversation for change when it comes to the oversight of college athletics. People have slammed the NCAA for their lack of foresight lately, but this ruling might be the worst of them all.

Sometimes, there is a story that comes from a story. Last week, it was announced that former NBA player J.R. Smith, who enrolled at North Carolina A&T, intends to join the men’s golf team if he gets cleared by the NCAA. Smith’s clock to compete in college never started because he went straight to the NBA after high school. Most athletes get five years to complete four years of eligibility. According to NCAA rules, “an individual shall not be eligible for intercollegiate athletics in a sport if the individual ever competed on a professional team in that sport.” (Sorry Ohio State fans who were hoping to see a retired Lebron James suiting up in an Ohio State men’s basketball uniform.) However, NCAA rules do not ban a former pro athlete from taking part in a different sport. There has been a history of athletes in other sports playing professionally before returning to college to play a different sport. Most notably is Florida State Heisman Trophy-winning quarterback Chris Weinke. Weinke spent six years in the Toronto Blue Jays minor league system before enrolling at Florida State University and leading them to the 1999 national championship in football. However, this could open avenues for retired NBA players who skipped college before turning pro and play in collegiate sports. There have been plenty of NBA stars who skipped college when they turned pro. For example, Lakers stars Lebron James and Dwight Howard, and last year’s Rookie of the Year LaMelo Ball all skipped college to go play professional basketball. Could you imagine Lebron James after he retires deciding that he wants to pursue a swimming or golf career at a university? The internet would explode! While one professional cannot go to college and play in that same sport, J.R. Smith’s situation opens up Pandora’s box.

A new ally has emerged in the USWNT’s fight for equal pay from a potentially surprising source: the men’s team. The women’s national team had filed a claim against the United States Soccer Federation (USSF) in 2019 arguing the players had been victims of discrimination and were paid significantly less than the men’s national team, despite being more successful than the men’s team. The women asked for damages in excess of $66 million, which included backpay for previous performances. In May of 2020, a judge in California dismissed the claim stating that the women players were actually paid more than the men and they had accepted the same pay-to-play structure as the men’s team. As a result, the players appealed, arguing that they receive less money than the men’s team for each game played, which is the definition of sexism and discrimination. The men’s team filed an amicus brief in favor of the women’s team as part of the female player’s appealing of their claim against the USSF for equal pay. In the brief, the men’s team argued that the women’s team had been underpaid and discriminated against. They further stated that the Federation did not even offer the women the same pay as the men’s team when the new collective bargaining agreement (CBA) was being negotiated. Additionally, the brief argued that the judge had ignored the fact that the women’s pay depended on performance, while the men’s pay depended solely on games played. While the judge stated that the women had actually made more than the men, the brief clarifies that the women had maximized their performance bonuses, while the men’s team had underperformed. Perhaps the most scathing statement was the brief stating that “U.S. Soccer has persistently treated the women as second class throughout the 35-year history of the Women’s National Team.”[1] This appeal is not going to be resolved any time soon, with oral arguments not set to be scheduled for another 9-12 months after briefs are submitted this September. In the meantime, the women’s team will continue to complete in the Tokyo Olympics, while the men’s team failed to qualify for the third straight Olympics. The Men’s World Cup is set to take place in 2022 where FIFA has set the total for prize money at $440 million. However, the men’s team failed to qualify in 2018 and the team’s best finish occurred in 1930, where the team placed second. Meanwhile, the Women’s World Cup is set to take place in 2023 where FIFA has set the total prize money at $60 million, which is double of the last Women’s World Cup. The women’s team is the most successful women’s team in history, winning four times. With the USWNT’s performance since the 2015 World Cup win, which pushed the women’s team onto the national stage, female soccer players have been household names and idols to young athletes everywhere, male and female. Youth soccer numbers have soared as a result of the team’s success and has generated a newfound interest in soccer in a football-dominated country. While the fight for equal pay will not be done for the women’s team any time soon, the added support of the men’s team demonstrates strong support for women’s athletics and shows that sports in general are better when everyone is rewarded for their success. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2021/07/30/usmnt-supports-uswnt-equal-pay/ Photo Credit: https://www.goal.com/en-us/news/how-many-trophies-have-the-uswnt-won-record-most-appearances-top-/m8guw99wrtt11xpot4kxonw00

As expected, Bauer’s attorneys have zeroed in on text messages by the alleged victim where she is sounds like she was more than ok with the alleged encounters. According to testimony presented at the hearing, between the two encounters, the alleged victim messaged Bauer that the choking “was a game-changer” that “I’ve never been more turned on in my life” and “give me the pain.” Based on that admitted piece of evidence, it would be reasonable to assume if you were Mr. Bauer that the alleged victim not only enjoyed what he allegedly did to her but she was also very much open to the idea of engaging in said behavior again in the future. As she stated on the witness stand yesterday she, “was going with the flow. I wanted to tell him what he wanted to hear. I wanted to create a better experience than the first time.” Under California law, “A man/woman may withdraw consent to a sex act even after the initiation of sexual intercourse.” People v. Roundtree (2000) 77 Cal. App. 4th 846, 851. Thus, it begs the question, what if it wasn’t possible for the alleged victim to consent. Advance Consent Under case law, “Neither a woman’s actual “advance consent” nor a man’s belief in “advance consent” eliminates the wrongfulness of a man’s conduct in knowingly depriving an unconscious woman of her freedom of choice both at the initiation of and during sexual intercourse. A person who commits the prohibited acts necessarily acts with a wrongful intent.” (People v. Dancy (2002) 102 Cal. App. 4th 21, 37 [124 Cal. Rptr. 2d 898]). Put it another way, under the law, a woman cannot consent to any kind of sexual act if during the alleged sexual act she becomes unconscious. That is because for even a mere moment of time, that alleged individual has lost their freedom of choice to decide whether or not that individual wants to continue to engage in this sexual act. It is somewhat similar to a Defendant who chooses to represent himself. Why is that? That is because the Court usually appoints the Defendant’s now-discharged attorney as stand-by counsel. The Court does that because the Defendant can choose at any time to have an attorney represent him because the Defendant has a Constitutional right to be represented by an attorney in just about every kind of criminal case. For example, if the Defendant was convicted by a jury that Defendant still has the right to be represented by an attorney at sentencing because the right to counsel applies throughout the entire trial including sentencing, and appeal. That same Defendant can invoke his/her right to counsel at any time after he/she has affirmatively waived it. The same is said for consent. The alleged victim maintains her right to withdraw consent throughout the sexual act. If that victim is rendered unconscious, she has lost her right to withdraw consent even for a mere moment. Is it applicable to the matter involving Trevor Bauer? Let’s use a hypothetical rape charge to discuss. As stated previously, Mr. Bauer has not been officially charged with anything. The image below is the California Criminal Jury Instructions for a Rape of an Unconscious Woman or Spouse. When prosecuting a case at trial, a prosecutor must be very familiar with the jury instructions because they have the burden of proving each and every element beyond a reasonable doubt. First element, Mr. Bauer had sexual intercourse with the victim. That is uncontested. Second, Trevor Bauer and the woman were not married to each other at the time of the intercourse. Again, uncontested. Third, the woman was unable to resist because she was unconscious of the nature of the act. Again, uncontested. Finally, the defendant knew that the woman was unable to resist because she was unconscious of the nature of the act. This is where the opposition is likely to begin. As stated in a previous post, Mr. Bauer allegedly choked the victim unconscious with her own hair and proceeded to have anal sex with her. How does the prosecution prove that Mr. Bauer knew the victim was unconscious? Potentially in comes the alleged 2020 incident. In the alleged 2020 incident, Mr. Bauer allegedly wrote in a snapchat message, “Like the only reason I’d ever consider seeing you again is to choke you unconscious, punch you in the face shove my fist up your ass, skull fuck you and kick you out naked. And obviously I would never do something that that to anyone. So I can’t even enjoy the one thing I sometimes enjoyed with you.” Under California Evidence code 1101(b) Nothing in this section prohibits the admission of evidence that a person committed a crime, civil wrong, or other act when relevant to prove some fact (such as knowledge that she would become unconscious by Mr. Bauer choking her with her own hair). Thus, if Mr. Bauer knew the victim was unconscious and it is likely that he did (based on alleged messages where he admits to choking this Ohio woman unconscious) it is unlikely that the Court will conclude that the victim could give consent to that sexual act. That is because in the moments where she was allegedly unconscious, she was without her right to withdraw consent from the alleged sexual act. As we dive further into the Bauer proceeding over the next few days and week, do not lose site of this aspect of the law.

Sports law is an ever-evolving and expanding subset of the law, and as the recent NCAA v. Alston ruling, NIL, and Super League controversy have shown, there are far more legal roles in sports than the typical pro agent. From arbitration and player unions to compliance and contracts, a law degree can open the door to a wide range of opportunities at both the collegiate and professional level of athletics. Many law schools around the country recognize the potential of sports law and offer some opportunities in the field, while some boast full-fledged sports law programs and concentrations. However, unlike business law and health law, U.S. News & World doesn’t offer lists detailing sports law programs; this makes the law school search difficult for a prospective 1L with aspirations for a career in sports. Enter the Sports Law Program Spotlight! Although this was originally intended to be a monthly series, we will be putting these spotlights on a more frequent basis due to the popular demand by both prospective law students and law schools themselves. In this series, we highlight a law school that offers strong opportunities in the field of sports law. These opportunities include, but are not limited to: ● a sports-centric curriculum; ● sports law certifications; ● unique legal internship opportunities within the sports market; ● and sports law journals. The focus of this month’s Sports Law Program Spotlight is… Tulane University Law School Keeping with the “Sports Law Blue Blood” theme from the Marquette spotlight, this week’s school has a championship sports law pedigree. Tulane boasts not only the best team logo in college sports (this isn’t up for debate, and I will not tolerate Angry Wave slander) but also an extensive list of alumni spanning every corner of the sports law world; over 60 alumni currently hold positions in the sports industry as agents, scouts, general counsel, athletic directors, and general managers. Furthermore, the director of the Tulane Sports Law Program, Professor Gabe Feldman, forms enduring relationships with each of his students and even hosts his own sports law podcast. In 1993, Tulane Law became the first law school in the country to offer a certificate of concentration in sports law. Since then, over 450 Tulane Law students have graduated with the sports law certificate, including former NFL GM Mike Tannenbaum and Nick Sabella, the current Manager of Football Administration for the New York Jets. After years as counsel for the Minnesota Vikings, Demeka Fields now serves as counsel for New Balance. That’s right: Tulane Lawyers represent everyone from sports franchises to sportswear. If that wasn’t impressive enough, the Tulane Sports Law Journal also holds the distinction as the most widely read legal sports journal in the country. Talk about dominant. When it comes to internships, the Green Wave can either dive into a familiar part of the industry or get their feet wet in a new sports role. You might have noticed each of the alumni I’ve mentioned have experience with NFL teams. With the nearby New Orleans Saints providing externships exclusively to Tulane Law students, these experiences are common at Tulane. Students also enjoy exclusive externships with the NBA’s Pelicans and compliance internships with the Sun Belt Conference, headquartered inside of the Superdome. Tulane Sports Law students may also intern with Altius Sports Partners to educate organizations on how to best address NIL concerns. These experiences and many more ensure Tulane Lawyers have the expertise to address the ever-evolving landscape of both collegiate and professional sports. Members of the Tulane Sports Law Society (TSLS) gain practical knowledge of the sports industry by facilitating roundtables and career workshops, as well as organizing Tulane’s national four sports law competitions: Basketball and Football Negotiation, Baseball Arbitration, and Mardi Gras Moot Court. These competitions feature judge panels with representatives from the MLBPA, NHLPA, NFLPA, ESPN, and countless sports agencies. Participants and organizers alike gain insights into the business of sports, seeing all that goes into the multi-million-dollar contracts populating your Twitter feed and SportsCenter updates. TSLS events serve as prime networking opportunities as well. “You get exposure to professionals at all levels and you never know where those people will end up,” TSLS President Schuyler Corbin notes, “but because the net is so wide with who you can meet through Tulane, you build strong relationships early on and years later you’re a part of their circle… you’re doing what those professionals are doing, and now you’re the one providing opportunities for the next generation just like they’ve done for you.” In short, Tulane Sports Law is rivaled by few but second to none. From exclusive externships to prestigious alumni, this New Orleans institution has it all. If you’re an undergrad interested in a legal career in sports (and hungry for beignets), consider Tulane Law. (Special thanks to TSLS President Schuyler Corbin, whom I had the pleasure of interviewing for this article)

There has been a long-standing precedent in the American legal system that parties pay their own legal fees. Despite that, 21 Division I conferences that were not named co-defendants in the NCAA v. Alston case are being left with a bill for defendants’ legal fees. The Alston case has been widely regarded as a huge win for athletes and an even larger loss for the NCAA, but recent developments state that the loss will extend beyond the NCAA. Eric Prisbell of On3 recently reported that 90 percent of the $38 million legal bill will fall on the 32 Division I conferences. A confidential memo that was sent to all Division I conference commissioners stated that the NCAA Board of Governors will pay just 10 percent of the bill, while the 11 co-defendant conferences will pay 64.2 percent. The remaining 21 Division I conferences - who were not named co-defendants in the case - will have to put up 25.8 percent of the legal fees associated with the Alston case. According to Prisbell’s report, the NCAA met with Division I commissioners over a year ago to discuss payment for the legal fees associated with the Alston case. The final recommendation from the Finance Committee to the Division I Board of Directors was that the NCAA should absorb the total cost. However, an additional request was submitted should the final request not make it past the NCAA Board of Governors. This secondary request charged the NCAA with 10 percent of the bill, while the remaining 90 percent would be divided amongst the 32 Division I conferences based on each member institution’s maximum grant-in-aid equivalency limits for men’s basketball, women’s basketball, and FBS. Unsurprisingly, the Board of Governors elected to go with the second recommendation rather than paying the entirety of the legal fees associated with the Alston case. Conferences have been told they can pay their share of the fees through a reduction in their revenue distributions over the course of four years, beginning in 2022. An anonymous conference commissioner stated that they were caught “off-guard” by the bill because they thought the NCAA was paying it - after all, they were the primary defendants in the case and make upwards of a billion dollars a year. The anonymous commissioner went on to say they plan to raise the issue with their membership, as “it brings up some serious legal issues.” There was irony in the “#NotNCAAProperty” shirts seen during March Madness, as athletes wore these while participating in the NCAA’s largest money maker - money that was going to be used to fund the case against the athletes. Still, the NCAA’s decision to stick its conferences with the lion’s share of the legal fees will ultimately affect the athletes. For the next four years, athletic departments - many of which took no part in this litigation - will have to adjust their budgets according to the reduction in revenue distributions as a result of this decision. After a big win for athletes, it seems like the NCAA is being a sore loser. Source: Prisbell, E. Confidential NCAA memo details breakdown of Alston case legal fees, On3 (Aug 16, 2021) https://www.on3.com/news/ncaa-panel-reimagine-college-athletics-model-without-current-d-i-athletes/ Rebekah Ansbro is a second year law student at George Mason University where she is the outreach & social media chair and events chair for the Mason Sport and Entertainment Law Association. You can connect with Rebekah about sport and entertainment law on LinkedIn at: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rebekah-ansbro-21a24115a.

Formula One racing is back with the Belgian Grand Prix race weekend. This week several more stories broke surrounding drivers and teams that will shake up the overall look of F1 in the coming years. Daniel Ricciardo Announces McLaren Separation The Australian-born driver and the McLaren team announced they would be parting ways at the end of this season. Given the rumors surrounding younger drivers that have caught McLaren's eye; this is no surprise. It is also no surprise given the performance issues Ricciardo has been plagued with while with the team. It seems that Ricciardo and McLaren are leaving on good terms as Ricciardo stated, “I’ve enjoyed working with everyone at McLaren both trackside and back in Woking and will be giving my all on and off track as we enjoy the remainder of the season together.” The kind words continued with Andreas Seidl, McLaren’s Team Principal, as he stated, “I would like to thank Daniel for his dedication and contribution over the last two seasons so far. Despite the shared challenges, he has always turned up with a fighting spirit and positivity and helped the entire team to always keep pushing forward.” It is uncertain where Ricciardo will end up next, as many teams currently have open seats for the 2023 season. Alpine, Williams, and Haas are all possibilities for Ricciardo. Audi Set to Join Formula One in 2026 Last week, the FIA approved new power unit regulations which will go into effect in 2026. One of the goals of these new regulations was to open the door to more manufacturers who have since been absent from F1. Currently, F1 houses four power unit manufacturers: Mercedes, Red Bull, Renault, and Ferrari. This past Friday, Audi announced they would join the F1 grid for the 2026 season. Audi will be taking over the current Alfa Romeo team. This take over means that the grid will stay at ten teams. “I am delighted to welcome Audi to Formula 1, an iconic automotive brand, pioneer, and technological innovator,” said F1 President and CEO Stefano Domenicali. “This is a major moment for our sport that highlights the huge strength we have as a global platform that continues to grow.” Audi will manufacture its power unit at its facility in Neuburg. This means that Germany will once again produce F1 powertrains for the first time in more than a decade. Audi has stated that they already have established test teams for f1 engine testing. Soon F1 fans will see those four famous rings on a Formula One car. Continued Alpine Issues with Drivers Recently, Fernando Alonso may have provided more insight into his surprise move to Aston Martin for next year. When asked about his relationship with Alpine, Alonso gave insight into the support he felt he was getting from Alpine. “[With Alpine] we were moving around in different things and we were not maybe agreeing on the principles. It’s not only what you agree in terms of the duration of the contract, it’s just also the trust that you feel and how you feel wanted in a place… It was always a strange feeling.” Said Alonso.” Finally, Alonso stated, “I felt that it was the right decision to move to Aston because they seemed to really want me and appreciate every performance that I was putting in in the last two years.” Following the departure of Alonso, Alpine announced that they would promote Oscar Piastri to a driver's seat next year. However, Piastri refuted this statement saying he never signed a contract to drive for Alpine next year. Since then, Alpine has stated they will go to the Contract Recognition Board to clear up this situation. Formula One is back! This summer break had its fair share of drama which may continue through the second half of the season. Even though this series is over, stories will continue to be updated here on Conduct Detrimental. 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: @maderlaw and LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/in/justin-mader-15a602119/.

Typically, when discussing NIL, there’s a presumption that the conversation is only really involving NCAA college athletes. This makes sense since the NCAA is the largest college athletic association in college athletics, but it does not have a monopoly on the space. As a recap, NIL stands for name, image, and likeness, and as of July 2021, has been all the rage in college athletics. In the past, student-athlete “compensation” was limited to scholarships for tuition, books, room, and board, but nothing else. However, this changed in 2021, and in fact, is still changing. As a result of a recent ruling from the Supreme Court of the United States, student-athletes at NCAA schools can be paid for the use of their name, image, and/or likeness (“NIL”). What the Court held in Alston v NCAA was that, in short, schools may not limit students’ ability to receive compensation for their NIL, nor may it declare students ineligible for competition because they received compensation. Towards the end of July, a club athlete, more specifically a club lacrosse player, joined the ranks of student-athletes with NIL deals. The Men’s Collegiate Lacrosse Association, or MCLA for short, is an athletic association, much like the NCAA, and has three divisions and numerous participating institutions including big-name schools that do not have NCAA lacrosse programs such as Alabama, and Tennessee, where this story comes from, WVU, The University of Pittsburgh, and Clemson. The MCLA differs from the NCAA in that the MCLA is non-varsity. Varsity teams receive funding, access to facilities, and equipment through the school’s athletic budget as opposed to non-varsity/club teams that rely on funding from student life or otherwise from the members themselves, much like other campus clubs. Additionally, the MCLA does not have a GPA requirement. There may be other differences as well, such as practice schedules, though this is at the discretion of the individual leagues and member institutions. On July 26, 2022, it was announced that Jackson Zimmer, a sophomore midfielder for the University of Tennessee, inked the MCLA’s first NIL deal with Baltimore-based company East Coast Dyes, which is a well-known lacrosse apparel and equipment company. Per Zimmer’s pitch, which can be viewed here, the MCLA is an “untapped market,” and since the news broke at the end of July, more club athletes have been reaching out seeking to tap into the NIL market as well. More companies should take advantage of this “untraditional channel”, given that there are over 150 teams spanning 2 countries in the association. To that very same end, more MCLA players should take a page from Zimmer’s book and look to set up a pitch, send a deck, a video recording, anything really to take advantage of the moment to advocate and bet on themselves. As it relates to the deal itself, NIL generally requires that the athlete advertise the company on social media and in return get some sort of payment though it is not always money. For Zimmer, he gets unreleased gear, which if anyone knows how expensive lacrosse gear can be, is a pretty solid gig. Worth noting is that NIL's perks and profits do not necessarily have to be monetary. For example, while at The University of Pittsburgh, Kenny Pickett had a deal with a local hotel and restaurant The Oaklander, where he would get free meals and treat his team to dinners before games. More students should try pitching to companies to see if there is any interest in having a sponsored athlete. There are plenty of companies that could use the exposure, and again, given that perks do not have to be monetary, can allow even smaller businesses to get some playing time. Hopefully, more businesses will look to sponsor MCLA athletes as popularity in lacrosse continues to grow exponentially. Stephon Burton is a 2022 graduate of Duquesne University School of Law in Pittsburgh, PA. He obtained his undergraduate degree from Washington & Jefferson College in 2019. He can be contacted via email at [email protected] or on Twitter @stephonburton

On Thursday, August 25, 2022, an anonymous Jane Doe filed a lawsuit in the San Diego County Superior Court accusing Bill's punter Matt Araiza, among others, of gang-raping a 17-year-old minor. The plaintiff alleges that this rape occurred during a Halloween party Araiza, who was at the time the punter for the Sand Diego State Aztecs, attended. Along with Araiza, Doe alleges that two other Aztec players were the main perpetrators of the alleged rape. The complaint also includes allegations of gender violence and false imprisonment. Matt Araiza has made a name for himself after being picked up in the 6th round by the Buffalo Bills. He earned the Ray Guy Award, which recognizes the best college punter in the country, and was named the Mountain West Conferences Special Teams Player of the Year. Recently, the Buffalo Bills released its veteran punter, paving the way for Araiza to take over punting duties for the team. Given Araiza's ability to punt the football 70 to 80 yards, he has earned the nickname "Punt God". With the filing of the lawsuit against Araiza, the punter's future is now uncertain. Araiza’s lawyer, Kerry Armstrong, has publicly stated that his client did not rape the teen and that the rape allegation is false. The NFL has seen its fair share of players facing legal controversy, including the more than year-long Deshaun Watson saga and the recent developments with Alvin Kamara facing possible assault charges. Despite these stories, Roger Goodell placed neither player on the Commissioner's Exempt List; the NFL's paid leave mechanism. The Commissioner has the power to place a player on the Exempt List if (1) the player is formally charged with a crime of violence OR (2) "when an investigation leads the Commissioner to believe that a player may have violated this Policy by committing any of the conduct identified above." More specifically, the NFL is looking for those who are "accused of having used physical force or a weapon to injure or threaten another person, of having engaged in a sexual assault by force or a sexual assault of a person who was incapable of giving consent, of having engaged in other conduct that poses a genuine danger to the safety or well-being of another person, or of having engaged in animal abuse." So why would Araiza be placed on the Exempt List? In the complaint, Doe accuses Ariaza of rape which squarely fits under the NFL's definition of "sexual assault by force." However, the NFL would not be able to use the first prong as neither a prosecutor nor a grand jury has brought formal charges against Araiza. The complaint filed by Doe is civil, not criminal. This means the allegations are not covered under the first prong of the circumstances that would place a player on the Exempt List. However, the second prong gives Goodell the power to launch an investigation into the allegations surrounding Araiza. This provision in the NFL policy gives Goodell the power to temporarily place players on the exempt list while he investigates the pending allegations. The policy also states that the Commissioner's decision does not reflect a finding of guilt and does not follow the same legal standards of a criminal trial. The recent filing makes a compelling case for Goodell to use his power as Commissioner to place Araiza on the exempt list for a temporary amount of time while the NFL investigates the allegations in the complaint. As the lawsuit progresses, more may come to light that forces Goodell's hand to place Araiza on the Exempt List. 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: @maderlaw and LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/in/justin-mader-15a602119/.