Sports In the Courts Blog : New York Attorneys & Lawyers Specializing in Sports Law & Legal Analysis

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Do you remember Ed O'Bannon? 

The former UCLA Bruin legend is spearheading what may be one of the most significant lawsuits the NCAA has been faced with.  The class-action lawsuit may only be in the preliminary stages, but the overall effect it could have on the NCAA and its student athletes, both past and present, would set a game changing precedence for years to come. 

It came to O'Bannon's attention when one of his friends pointed him out on a video game that contained a player with his number, his appearance, and his statistics on the 1995 UCLA Bruins championship team.  Although the player resembled O'Bannon, his name is not mentioned in the game and he along with any other players do not receive any compensation for the use of their likeness.  Retired from the NBA and now making a living as a car salesman, O'Bannon is on a mission to collect where he believes compensation is due from the NCAA.  With Rivalry Week wrapping up and March Madness on the way, it is only a matter of time before the advertisements, "Instant Classic" airings, top ten buzzer beater lists, and memorabilia to roll out to create a buzz.  But who has the rights and is entitled to the revenue generated by those things?  "Ed-O" thinks he deserves a cut.

Whether it is Christian Laettner's buzzer beater or Doug Flutie's "Hail Mary";  these images not only are ingrained in sports fans minds forever, but may provide a cash cow for the participants in those events.  But how could this follow the simple rules the NCAA is trying to enforce?  Student athletes do not "play for pay".  

With all the buzz in the past year over Reggie Bush, Cam Newton, and Terrelle Pryor, how could the NCAA stand for or accept a payout to the participants in these circumstances?  NCAA rules specifically frown upon student athletes receiving improper benefits or gifts for their performance within competition.  If there was a ruling in favor of O'Bannon in this case, NCAA athletes would be given compensation of some sort for their likeness and performances on the playing field.  

In addition to the overhaul of their stance on "pay for play" that would have to take place if there was a ruling in favor of the plaintiffs, the NCAA would also have to keep a close eye on premeditated setup for memorable moments, and the throwing of games.  If NCAA players have an incentive to keep scores close to reap the benefits of their participation in an instant classic, the integrity of the games and the genuine occurrences of  historic and classic performances.  

Only about 1% of NCAA athletes make it to the professional level, and even less become great and generate a big payout at that level.  It is only a matter of time before other athletes involved in some of the NCAA's memorable games and events come out and demand their piece of the pie.