Colleges and universities throughout the United States have made countless millions and billions of dollars off of their sports programs over time. This has been possible in part due to the athletes inside these programs being considered amateur status rather than professional players. The long and short of the matter is that college student-athletes, whether they are among the best in the nation or are a bench-warmer, have faced severe limitations on earning money whether they were on a scholarship or not.

This may now all be history. The Supreme Court of the United States has issued a ruling in the the case National Collegiate Athletic Association vs. Alston (case 20-512) regarding certain NCAA rules which limit education-related benefits schools may make available to student-athletes. The ruling is that this has been consistent with established antitrust principles.

The NCAA v. Alston case was brought by current and former student-athletes in an antitrust suit challenging the NCAA’s restrictions on their athletes’ compensation. According to the Supreme Court ruling:

Colleges and universities across the country have leveraged sports to bring in revenue, attract attention, boost enrollment, and raise money from alumni. That profitable enterprise relies on “amateur” student-athletes who compete under horizontal restraints that restrict how the schools may compensate them for their play. The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) issues and enforces these rules, which restrict compensation for student-athletes in various ways. These rules depress compensation for at least some student-athletes below what a competitive market would yield.

Using the Sherman Act and other references, the Supreme Court’s ruling for the student-athletes is nothing short of a slam-dunk, home run and touchdown. The Supreme Court further noted that there is a massive business at the center of the thicket of associations making up the NCAA. These were the values cited:

• March Madness basketball tournament broadcast contract is worth $1.1 billion annually.
• The television contract for the FBS conference’s College Football Playoff is worth approximately $470 million annually.
• Division I regular-season games from the Southeastern Conference generated over $409 million in revenues from television contracts alone in 2017 (and total conference revenues exceeded $650 million that year).

The Supreme Court ruling also showed just how much money is made by individuals who are in charge of the athletics programs and associations. This president of the NCAA is shown to earn nearly $4 million per year, and commissioners of the top conferences make $2 million to $5 million per year. College athletic directors are shown to average over $1 million annually. Annual salaries for top Division I college football coaches are shown to approach $11 million, and some of their assistants make more than $2.5 million annually.

How all of this plays out remains to be seen, and it remains to be seen what sort of endorsements and contracts may unfold in the year and years ahead. A multi-year challenge was brought by former student-athletes against video game publisher Electronic Arts (EA), which resulted in millions of dollars to be paid to college football and basketball players for improperly using the likenesses of athletes.

Many academicians have argued that too much emphasis is put on college athletic programs. That may be true depending upon your own personal opinions. That said, pretend that there was one day where only two televised college events are allowed. One is a debate or discussion group featuring the top intellectual from each university. The other televised event is a football game featuring two of the least-known colleges in the nation. Which one will get higher viewership that day?

There have already been sports cards issued by Topps and Panini featuring top draft picks and other college players and coaches in card sets. The question to ask is if there will now be many more. How this will ultimately play out remains to be seen.