Sports in Society

Andrew Hunt

Sph-m 423

11-09-16

Article Review

        The article titles, The Potential Unintended Consequences of The O’Bannon Decision by Matthew J. Parlow, discussed important and interesting information about the Supreme Court case involving the NCAA and student athletes. This Supreme Court case is one that has been under fire for more than 2 years now, while the topic of college athletes and being compensated for their play and commercial publicity has been an ongoing discussion for almost 30 years now. According to the article by Parlow, this case has “opened the doors” to new cases being brought onto the NCAA, and also has allowed a voice for student athletes to start discussing the issues of “pay for play.”

        The article first touched on how on how this court case came to be, and why former college basketball star Ed O’Bannon challenged this issue. Ed O’Bannon was an All-American power forward at UCLA during the years of 1991 through 1995. After his career was cut short due to injury in the NBA, O’Bannon began working at a car dealership where one of his co-workers told him he was featured on an NCAA basketball game. The video game did not feature O’Bannon’s name, but it did feature his number he wore at UCLA and the player also embodied his appearance. The article continues how after this realization, O’Bannon reached out to an attorney and sought a lawsuit against the NCAA for commercializing and profiting from the video game that featured him without his consent.

        The O’Bannon vs the NCAA lawsuit was filed on June 9, 2014, which was filed on the behalf of the NCAA's Division I football and men's basketball players, and challenged the organization's use of the images of its former student athletes for commercial purposes. The lawsuit also argued that upon graduation, a former student athlete should become entitled to financial compensation for NCAA's commercial uses of his or her image. According to the article, the NCAA’s argument focused on “protection of commercialization of student athletes”, and also how the act would violate the concept of amateurism in college sports. Unfortunately for O’Bannon and his colleagues, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the NCAA and did not see any right of Certiorari.

        The article and the author’s remarks about the case really made me interested in learning more about this case and Ed O’Bannon himself. I really enjoyed how the author touched on how this case opened the door to other college athletes to speak their mind, and stopping the monopoly the NCAA has created on them. One of the more interesting things I read from this article was how this case helped student athletes with other issues, such as players not having enough to eat during the week. Parlow explained a little bit on how the courage of O’Bannon helped players, such as Shabazz Napier, speak out on issues that are affecting college student athletes daily. The article explained how after the 203-14 NCAA Basketball Championship, former UConn point guard, Shabazz Napier, spoke out on live television about how he wished he could’ve received more food during the weeks, and how on some days he would go almost hungry.  Parlow mentioned that Napier’s comments did not force the NCAA to take action until after the O’Bannon trial was completed. During the same month, following the trial, The NCAA passed the “Shabazz Napier Rule” and allowed unlimited meals for division 1 athletes. Parlow mentioned that there was “much heat” being taken from the NCAA during this time, and he thought this was a way the NCAA could “cool” the tension in the air.