On October 19, 2018, the NCAA athletes submitted their closing arguments, firing away against the NCAA’s bar against compensating student athletes. The critical antitrust trial has centered on collegiate sports wages, with the plaintiffs arguing against the NCAA is, “economically invalid” in its arguments based on amateurism.
The NCAA has countered that paying student athletes would harm both the demand for college sports and the integration of student-athletes in college campus. The athletes reject these arguments, alleging in their 51 page redacted brief that the organization has failed to provide credible evidence to support their defenses.
As we have previously reported, the 10-day bench trial has been closely watched, with the results of the trial holding the power to fundamentally change the way collegiate sports are conducted. Now, the NCAA athletes are making their efforts to seal the deal in their favor, arguing that the NCAA is manipulating the overly-broad definition of amateurism, and that the NCAA’s defense have only been supported by irrelevant lay-witness testimony.
Their brief states, “”Defendants’ complete failure of proof is a result of the fact that amateurism and integration have been exposed at trial as economically invalid myths clung to only by those with pecuniary or philosophical interest in the status quo.”
The NCAA will submit their closing arguments by November 9, 2018.