By: Lauren Cuppy
October 27, 2024
Photo Credit: ESPN
Denard Robinson has an impressive list of collegiate accolades: cover athlete for EA Sports's NCAA Football 2014, finished sixth in the Heisman Trophy race as a sophomore, and won Big Ten Offensive Player of the Year in 2010.
Braylon Edwards won the Biletnikoff Award for the country’s best wide receiver in 2004 along with being named an All-American, Big Ten Offensive Player of the Year.
However, all of these accomplishments occurred before 2016, the cutoff year for Division 1 athletes to claim past damages from the House v. NCAA settlement. The statute of limitations on antitrust claims extended the ruling back only four years, excluding players like Robinson and Edwards from receiving payment.
Therefore, in September, Robinson and Edwards filed a class-action lawsuit with Mike Martin and Shawn Crable against the NCAA and Big Ten Network for being “ ‘wrongfully and unlawfully denied’ the opportunity to earn money off their name, image, and likeness” (ABC News). They are representing all Michigan football players from before 2016 and are seeking over $50 million retroactive compensation.
Their argument is that the NCAA and Big Ten Network have continued to exploit and profit from players such as Robinson and Edwards by marketing them through current “YouTube and social media clips, merchandise, and broadcasts of ‘classic’ Michigan games” – therefore, these actions “preclude (the NCAA and Big Ten Network) from relying on the statute of limitations” (The Athletic).
In 2005, Reggie Bush won the Heisman Trophy, as he rushed for 1,740 yards on 200 carries and scored 18 total touchdowns at USC. In 2010, Bush voluntarily gave up the award after it was unveiled that he received monetary benefits and a vehicle due to his success, which was illegal at the time. Post-NIL ruling, the award was rightfully returned to Bush after a messy decade in which USC was forced to disassociate with Bush. During this process, Bush filed a defamation claim against the NCAA after a spokesman claimed that Bush was involved in "pay-for-play arrangements."
Similar to Robinson and Edwards’s argument, the NCAA, USC, and the Pac-12 Conference have continued to profit off of Bush’s success at both the collegiate and professional level. Therefore, Bush filed another lawsuit to “address and rectify ongoing injustices stemming from the exploitation of [his] name, image, and likeness during his tenure as a USC football player” (Shorefire Media). The ongoing litigation surrounding Reggie Bush represents the unjust treatment that many athletes have endured, and his lawyers have stated their hope that this case sets a precedent for the fair treatment of athletes.
As NIL reshapes college sports, ongoing legal battles signal a growing movement toward even greater compensation and rights for student-athletes. In addition to lawsuits such from Robinson, Edwards, and Bush, the NCAA and its conferences are facing litigation towards athletes being paid directly from their schools. Recently, judge Judge Claudia Wilken granted preliminary approval to the terms of an antitrust settlement that, if finalized, will allow schools to pay their players up to a certain limit (ESPN).
Comments