Quote from: Associated PressA pair of basketball players from Brown allege in a federal lawsuit that the Ivy League's policy of not offering athletic scholarships amounts to a price-fixing agreement that denies athletes proper financial aid and payment for their services.
https://apnews.com/article/ivy-league-lawsuit-athletes-brown-scholarship-771b34fa36ea06f6109435102d939299
Quote from: WederQuote from: Associated PressA pair of basketball players from Brown allege in a federal lawsuit that the Ivy League's policy of not offering athletic scholarships amounts to a price-fixing agreement that denies athletes proper financial aid and payment for their services.
https://apnews.com/article/ivy-league-lawsuit-athletes-brown-scholarship-771b34fa36ea06f6109435102d939299
Yeah, I just don't think this is going to fly. There are hundreds of schools--including some with excellent academic chops--that offer athletic scholarships, so kids coming to the Ivies know what they're getting into right off the bat. This feels different to me than the situation where the Ivies could only offer identical financial aid packages, which was found to be illegal price fixing.
so its illegal for ivies to offer the same financial aid to kids but not illegal to pay the same wages?
https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/35812605/athletes-sue-ivy-league-no-scholarship-policy
I see the arguements, but they make no sense. whats next suing for more financial aid? Can we sue because amazon pays 300% than other companies for some jobs?
"Services." I'm not motivated enough to check the Brown basketball attendance numbers. Surely a vital outlet for the population of greater Providence.
Quote from: scoop85Quote from: WederQuote from: Associated PressA pair of basketball players from Brown allege in a federal lawsuit that the Ivy League's policy of not offering athletic scholarships amounts to a price-fixing agreement that denies athletes proper financial aid and payment for their services.
https://apnews.com/article/ivy-league-lawsuit-athletes-brown-scholarship-771b34fa36ea06f6109435102d939299
Yeah, I just don't think this is going to fly. There are hundreds of schools--including some with excellent academic chops--that offer athletic scholarships, so kids coming to the Ivies know what they're getting into right off the bat. This feels different to me than the situation where the Ivies could only offer identical financial aid packages, which was found to be illegal price fixing.
Actually, it's the same thing as the aid packages. It's a group of schools agreeing to price fixing - and price fixing isn't legal.
It's not that the schools don't offer scholarships. Its that they have agreed together to not award scholarships, collusively keeping the cost of attendance artificially high for athletes.
If there was no league level agreement to ban scholarships (and no tacit agreement between the schools either) and each of the schools independently decided to not award scholarships, that's a different story.
Also, kids applying to ivy league schools also know the deal with financial aid going in, but that doesn't make the price fixing on aid legal either.
Quote from: upprdeckso its illegal for ivies to offer the same financial aid to kids but not illegal to pay the same wages?
I believe the Ivy League (the schools, not the sporting league) has had its hands slapped for saying accepted students should choose the best Ivy based on what school is best, not what Ivy school offers the best bang for the buck. Or was that at the appeals court level?
Quote from: Cop at Lynahhttps://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/35812605/athletes-sue-ivy-league-no-scholarship-policy
Quote from: https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/35812605/athletes-sue-ivy-league-no-scholarship-policyHarvard, Yale, Brown, Princeton, Dartmouth, Cornell, Columbia and Penn don't offer merit scholarships of any kind, including athletic scholarships. The policy, which dates back to 1954 ...
This is technically true but substantively untrue. When I attended Cornell in the 1960s, NY state offered Regents scholarships based on a combination of merit and need. Technically it was the state, and not Cornell, offering these pots of money. But A. D .White was responsible for this. When NY established its land grant college, he created a special category of Regents scholarship awarded only to the persons with the highest scores on the Regents Exams in each congressional district. So, in effect White, who chaired the committee in the NY legislature, established a state-funded merit scholarship at Cornell.
if the ncaa as a whole can get together and decide limits on scholies and the amount of players and the number of games, then a league would seem to have the same rights to set rules it wants to play under.
Quote from: SwampyQuote from: Cop at Lynahhttps://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/35812605/athletes-sue-ivy-league-no-scholarship-policy
Quote from: https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/35812605/athletes-sue-ivy-league-no-scholarship-policyHarvard, Yale, Brown, Princeton, Dartmouth, Cornell, Columbia and Penn don't offer merit scholarships of any kind, including athletic scholarships. The policy, which dates back to 1954 ...
This is technically true but substantively untrue. When I attended Cornell in the 1960s, NY state offered Regents scholarships based on a combination of merit and need. Technically it was the state, and not Cornell, offering these pots of money. But A. D .White was responsible for this. When NY established its land grant college, he created a special category of Regents scholarship awarded only to the persons with the highest scores on the Regents Exams in each congressional district. So, in effect White, who chaired the committee in the NY legislature, established a state-funded merit scholarship at Cornell.
Cornell (and I assume other Ivies do this) also has various fellowships for students that replace need-based loans with grants. I've always felt this is a fairly large loophole in the school saying there is no "merit-based" aid, considering the fellowships are definitely awarded on merit.
i think it's a very dubious premise but i don't mind if the ivies give athletic scholarships
Quote from: abmarksQuote from: scoop85Quote from: WederQuote from: Associated PressA pair of basketball players from Brown allege in a federal lawsuit that the Ivy League's policy of not offering athletic scholarships amounts to a price-fixing agreement that denies athletes proper financial aid and payment for their services.
https://apnews.com/article/ivy-league-lawsuit-athletes-brown-scholarship-771b34fa36ea06f6109435102d939299
Yeah, I just don't think this is going to fly. There are hundreds of schools--including some with excellent academic chops--that offer athletic scholarships, so kids coming to the Ivies know what they're getting into right off the bat. This feels different to me than the situation where the Ivies could only offer identical financial aid packages, which was found to be illegal price fixing.
Actually, it's the same thing as the aid packages. It's a group of schools agreeing to price fixing - and price fixing isn't legal.
It's not that the schools don't offer scholarships. Its that they have agreed together to not award scholarships, collusively keeping the cost of attendance artificially high for athletes.
If there was no league level agreement to ban scholarships (and no tacit agreement between the schools either) and each of the schools independently decided to not award scholarships, that's a different story.
Also, kids applying to ivy league schools also know the deal with financial aid going in, but that doesn't make the price fixing on aid legal either.
I don't agree that it's the same as the across-the-board financial aid agreement that was found to violate the law. Each athlete may now received a different financial aid package from he different league schools based on that school's particular aid formula. The 8 schools have established that athletic prowess is not to be considered in determining any part of the financial aid, which can help maintain competitive balance for varsity athletics. Ultimately of course it will be in the courts rather than our message board that will determine the outcome, but I'll be surprised if the plaintiffs prevail.
Quote from: Cop at Lynahhttps://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/35812605/athletes-sue-ivy-league-no-scholarship-policy
The attorneys for the Brown athletes point out that other elite academic schools, such as Stanford and Duke, do offer athletic scholarships and "The natural, foreseeable, and intended result of the Ivy League Agreement is that Ivy League athletes have paid more for their education and earned less in compensation or reimbursement than they would have in the absence of the agreement."
This is arguably true, but no one forced these scholar-athletes to go Ivy. As far as I know, athletes pay no more than other Ivy students with similar financial need. Plus, Ivy athletes typically get very good summer jobs, although local auto dealerships are unlikely to pay as much for an athlete's NIL, as might some wealthy alum at an athletic powerhouse.
.
Quote from: George64Quote from: Cop at Lynahhttps://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/35812605/athletes-sue-ivy-league-no-scholarship-policy
The attorneys for the Brown athletes point out that other elite academic schools, such as Stanford and Duke, do offer athletic scholarships and "The natural, foreseeable, and intended result of the Ivy League Agreement is that Ivy League athletes have paid more for their education and earned less in compensation or reimbursement than they would have in the absence of the agreement."
This is arguably true, but no one forced these scholar-athletes to go Ivy. As far as I know, athletes pay no more than other Ivy students with similar financial need. Plus, Ivy athletes typically get very good summer jobs, although local auto dealerships are unlikely to pay as much for an athlete's NIL, as might some wealthy alum at an athletic powerhouse.
.
The problem with that argument is that someone who plays varsity
anything for Brown would most likely ride the bench or dress for the practice squad (or not make the team at all) at any "athletic powerhouse." These athletes weren't getting any NIL money regardless. They chose Brown because of the reasons people usually choose Brown, and they've had their demonstrated financial need met.
Quote from: BeeeejQuote from: George64Quote from: Cop at Lynahhttps://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/35812605/athletes-sue-ivy-league-no-scholarship-policy
The attorneys for the Brown athletes point out that other elite academic schools, such as Stanford and Duke, do offer athletic scholarships and "The natural, foreseeable, and intended result of the Ivy League Agreement is that Ivy League athletes have paid more for their education and earned less in compensation or reimbursement than they would have in the absence of the agreement."
This is arguably true, but no one forced these scholar-athletes to go Ivy. As far as I know, athletes pay no more than other Ivy students with similar financial need. Plus, Ivy athletes typically get very good summer jobs, although local auto dealerships are unlikely to pay as much for an athlete's NIL, as might some wealthy alum at an athletic powerhouse.
.
The problem with that argument is that someone who plays varsity anything for Brown would most likely ride the bench or dress for the practice squad (or not make the team at all) at any "athletic powerhouse." These athletes weren't getting any NIL money regardless. They chose Brown because of the reasons people usually choose Brown, and they've had their demonstrated financial need met.
I conflated two thoughts that I shouldn't have. First, "no one forced these scholar-athletes to go Ivy." If they feel deprived because they're not remunerated for their athletic prowess, too bad, it was their choice. Even Brown students should be able to do the math before commiting. Second, some Ivy athletes are getting NIL money, for example, our own Jameson Wong, although I'm certain he's getting nothing close to what big-time
scholar-athletes are getting.
the problem with the suit is that it presumes a likelihood of giving athletic scholarships in a non-collusive environemnt, as if it were the only conference to do so but neither the patriot nor all of D-III give athletic scholarships either, both by a rule agreed to and imposed by a higher body. i don't think it flies in a post-NIL world. the NLRB's ruling that student-athletes, in at least some circumstances, are subject to pervasive control of their time and behavior that they are employees is a more compelling argument but i don't know that Brown squash is tantamount to Alabama football.
Quote from: ugartethe problem with the suit is that it presumes a likelihood of giving athletic scholarships in a non-collusive environemnt, as if it were the only conference to do so but neither the patriot nor all of D-III give athletic scholarships either, both by a rule agreed to and imposed by a higher body. i don't think it flies in a post-NIL world. the NLRB's ruling that student-athletes, in at least some circumstances, are subject to pervasive control of their time and behavior that they are employees is a more compelling argument but i don't know that Brown squash is tantamount to Alabama football.
I agree with your point, but FYI I believe all Patriot schools are now giving athletic scholarships
couldnt the same argument be made that kids who pay for school and dont get grants and scholies are also under the same hardship as those who do . Some of these kids would not get into the school if not for playing sports . Now non sport playing kid will sue because others got in for something they had to offer, that they couldnt.
Everyone that applies know what they are getting into. If you don't like it, go play your sport elsewhere and get ur scholarship from that other school.
Quote from: toddloseEveryone that applies know what they are getting into. If you don't like it, go play your sport elsewhere and get ur scholarship from that other school.
a little too reductionist as legal analysis since there obviously are voluntary agreements that are deemed invalid under various statutory regimes.
Quote from: scoop85Quote from: ugartethe problem with the suit is that it presumes a likelihood of giving athletic scholarships in a non-collusive environemnt, as if it were the only conference to do so but neither the patriot nor all of D-III give athletic scholarships either, both by a rule agreed to and imposed by a higher body. i don't think it flies in a post-NIL world. the NLRB's ruling that student-athletes, in at least some circumstances, are subject to pervasive control of their time and behavior that they are employees is a more compelling argument but i don't know that Brown squash is tantamount to Alabama football.
I agree with your point, but FYI I believe all Patriot schools are now giving athletic scholarships
The linked ESPN article says "The policy, which dates back to 1954, makes the Ivy League the only Division I athletic conference that prohibits member schools from offering athletic scholarships."
So to ugarte's point about presuming a likelihood of scholarships being offered in a non collusive environment, I agree. The question is whether the law cares about just how likely it is, or if the law cares only that it could ever possibly happen.
Quote from: abmarksQuote from: scoop85Quote from: ugartethe problem with the suit is that it presumes a likelihood of giving athletic scholarships in a non-collusive environemnt, as if it were the only conference to do so but neither the patriot nor all of D-III give athletic scholarships either, both by a rule agreed to and imposed by a higher body. i don't think it flies in a post-NIL world. the NLRB's ruling that student-athletes, in at least some circumstances, are subject to pervasive control of their time and behavior that they are employees is a more compelling argument but i don't know that Brown squash is tantamount to Alabama football.
I agree with your point, but FYI I believe all Patriot schools are now giving athletic scholarships
The linked ESPN article says "The policy, which dates back to 1954, makes the Ivy League the only Division I athletic conference that prohibits member schools from offering athletic scholarships."
So to ugarte's point about presuming a likelihood of scholarships being offered in a non collusive environment, I agree. The question is whether the law cares about just how likely it is, or if the law cares only that it could ever possibly happen.
fair enough re: patriot league. makes it a closer question anyway. there was probably internal agitation from inside the patriot league for a rule change and i don't know that the record will be as good among the ivies but that's a fact question that will require discovery.
Why would this lawsuit apply only to the Ivy League?
By extension, couldn't the NCAA be sued on the same grounds because they collude to prevent D3 schools from offering scholarships?
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: abmarksQuote from: scoop85Quote from: ugartethe problem with the suit is that it presumes a likelihood of giving athletic scholarships in a non-collusive environemnt, as if it were the only conference to do so but neither the patriot nor all of D-III give athletic scholarships either, both by a rule agreed to and imposed by a higher body. i don't think it flies in a post-NIL world. the NLRB's ruling that student-athletes, in at least some circumstances, are subject to pervasive control of their time and behavior that they are employees is a more compelling argument but i don't know that Brown squash is tantamount to Alabama football.
I agree with your point, but FYI I believe all Patriot schools are now giving athletic scholarships
The linked ESPN article says "The policy, which dates back to 1954, makes the Ivy League the only Division I athletic conference that prohibits member schools from offering athletic scholarships."
So to ugarte's point about presuming a likelihood of scholarships being offered in a non collusive environment, I agree. The question is whether the law cares about just how likely it is, or if the law cares only that it could ever possibly happen.
fair enough re: patriot league. makes it a closer question anyway. there was probably internal agitation from inside the patriot league for a rule change and i don't know that the record will be as good among the ivies but that's a fact question that will require discovery.
Except, after reading up a bit on antitrust and pricefixing law, it doesn't look like it requires proving that prices will change. It's simply illegal to agree to fix a price.
Using the financial aid case as an example, the issue was the *agreement* on aid levels. But it would be completely legal to offer the same aid levels when it happens absent that agreement. If each of the ivy's independently implemented aid-level matching (aka price-matching) policies on aid offers from their ivy competition, that'd be completely legal.
Quote from: abmarksQuote from: ugarteQuote from: abmarksQuote from: scoop85Quote from: ugartethe problem with the suit is that it presumes a likelihood of giving athletic scholarships in a non-collusive environemnt, as if it were the only conference to do so but neither the patriot nor all of D-III give athletic scholarships either, both by a rule agreed to and imposed by a higher body. i don't think it flies in a post-NIL world. the NLRB's ruling that student-athletes, in at least some circumstances, are subject to pervasive control of their time and behavior that they are employees is a more compelling argument but i don't know that Brown squash is tantamount to Alabama football.
I agree with your point, but FYI I believe all Patriot schools are now giving athletic scholarships
The linked ESPN article says "The policy, which dates back to 1954, makes the Ivy League the only Division I athletic conference that prohibits member schools from offering athletic scholarships."
So to ugarte's point about presuming a likelihood of scholarships being offered in a non collusive environment, I agree. The question is whether the law cares about just how likely it is, or if the law cares only that it could ever possibly happen.
fair enough re: patriot league. makes it a closer question anyway. there was probably internal agitation from inside the patriot league for a rule change and i don't know that the record will be as good among the ivies but that's a fact question that will require discovery.
Except, after reading up a bit on antitrust and pricefixing law, it doesn't look like it requires proving that prices will change. It's simply illegal to agree to fix a price.
Using the financial aid case as an example, the issue was the *agreement* on aid levels. But it would be completely legal to offer the same aid levels when it happens absent that agreement. If each of the ivy's independently implemented aid-level matching (aka price-matching) policies on aid offers from their ivy competition, that'd be completely legal.
i know that but the independent justification for competitive equity is distinct from the aid matching imo. i don't remember the content of the aid matching agreement but i wonder if it would have survived if "offer the most aid that anyone else offers" was the rule.
I would think the logic of a decision that says "the Ivy League can't tell its member schools they can't offer athletic scholarships because that's a conspiracy against the good of the student" would hold equally for "the NCAA can't tell D-3 schools they can't offer athletic scholarships because that's a conspiracy against the good of the student."
The question is would it hold for "Cornell can't tell its member colleges they can't offer athletic scholarships because that's a conspiracy against the good of the student."
We may wind up with Dartmouth the only Ivy that can ban athletic scholarships which would be extremely funny given the history of the Academic Index.
is this different than requiring grades to get in and using criteria to limit the pool of students excepted, the ncaa requires a core set of things to go to college.
or is saying we can only have X number of scholies illegal too? that limits participation as well.
In another sense the lawsuit kinda defeats itself.. If the Ivies had scholies many of the kids who get accepted and play now would be recruited over for better players in almost all the sports.
The Sun (https://cornellsun.com/2023/03/30/cornell-athletes-discuss-ivy-leagues-lack-of-athletic-scholarships-following-lawsuit-filed-by-brown-athletes/) does a piece on the Brown suit.
Quote from: David HardingThe Sun (https://cornellsun.com/2023/03/30/cornell-athletes-discuss-ivy-leagues-lack-of-athletic-scholarships-following-lawsuit-filed-by-brown-athletes/) does a piece on the Brown suit.
Quote from: that articleDue to the 1945 "Ivy Group Agreement," Ivy League institutions have never offered athletic scholarships. Furthermore, the Improving America's Schools Act of 1994 contained a provision under Section 568 that validated Ivy League colleges' ability to collectively decide not to give athletic scholarships so long as students are admitted on a need-blind basis — which means that admissions policies are independent of a student's ability to pay for tuition.
However, Section 568 expired on Sept. 30, weakening the legal support for the Ivy League's lack of athletic scholarships. The lawsuit contends that Ivy League schools' agreement to not compete with each other in athlete recruitment through offering scholarships and other educational reimbursements violates the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, which outlaws actions that impede interstate commerce and marketplace competition.
interesting.
https://twitter.com/unionelections/status/1702305286340452789?s=46&t=lRTujuAsYQEzyQq0LebqtA
Jeez! If this means Dartmouth hoopsters will not be playing, this is going to mess up the March brackets something awful.
Am sympathetic to the Dartmouth players especially if they help push the Ivies towards athletic scholarships. We can make all sorts of moral arguments for and against them within the ivies but all 8 schools keep pumping up the yearly fees by 4% or so. Moral argument aside I am in favor of Ivy athletes getting additional financial aid in light of the increased costs. I find it hard to justify a young man playing hockey at Cornell for example with the family potentially paying full pay of $85,000 or so.
I have to say, Dartmouth is the last Ivy whose students I'd expect to unionize.
Quote from: jtwcornell91I have to say, Dartmouth is the last Ivy whose students I'd expect to unionize.
They have the most vocal douchebags (https://www.vnews.com/More-than-900-people-call-on-Dartmouth-College-to-dissociate-itself-from-The-Dartmouth-Review-35444404), but those are an incel minority there as on every other campus.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: jtwcornell91I have to say, Dartmouth is the last Ivy whose students I'd expect to unionize.
They have the most vocal douchebags (https://www.vnews.com/More-than-900-people-call-on-Dartmouth-College-to-dissociate-itself-from-The-Dartmouth-Review-35444404), but those are an incel minority there as on every other campus.
I feel like that could be a Dartmouth motto: "We have the most vocal douchebags".
Quote from: jtwcornell91Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: jtwcornell91I have to say, Dartmouth is the last Ivy whose students I'd expect to unionize.
They have the most vocal douchebags (https://www.vnews.com/More-than-900-people-call-on-Dartmouth-College-to-dissociate-itself-from-The-Dartmouth-Review-35444404), but those are an incel minority there as on every other campus.
I feel like that could be a Dartmouth motto: "We have the most vocal douchebags".
Duke files injunction.