Redefining Amateurism

Growing up, a topic I often heard debated by friends and family was comparing college sports to the professional ranks. Fans of the NBA and other professional leagues explained how they enjoy watching the highest level of any given sport. In the opposing view, college sports enthusiasts argued that the increased passion outweighed any decreased skill level. The crux of the disagreement has always tied back to financial motive amongst the participants. For so long, college sports were the pinnacle of amateur competition in the United States, with strict rules preventing athletes from earning beyond scholarships. The recent lawsuits of NCAA v. Alston and NCAA v. House have been key in the unraveling of that longstanding system. These two landmark cases are crucial aspects of the changing legal, ethical, and business landscape of college sports.

The origin of the term “student-athlete” can be traced back to the 1950s, where executive director of NCAA Walter Byers coined the term to highlight that the players were not professionals. This came about following a 1955 fatal sporting accident involving a college football player that led to claims that collegiate athletes were employees entitled to workers' compensation. The now widespread term “student-athlete” was created to protect the organization from legal challenges related to injured athletes, particularly in football. As the popularity and financial scale of college sports grew, the next key business move was using the “student athlete” tag as a reason to escape paying athletes for playing in the competitions. The BIG 10 conference cited the term in their argument against the Northwestern football team after their attempts to unionize through the National Labor Relations Board in 2014. As a collegiate athlete myself, I understand the employment-like environment that some students find themselves in when playing for a competitive NCAA program. While schools avoided paying the players for their participation in these programs, they also restricted athletes' abilities to make money off their own name, image, and likeness (NIL). In late 2019, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed the “Fair Pay to Play Act,” which made it illegal for California institutions to deny athletes the right to be compensated for their name, image, and likeness starting in 2023. The bill also made it possible for athletes to hire agents to represent them in contract negotiations. Other states followed suit with similar bills moving through their legislatures, which put pressure on the NCAA, which faced growing criticism for resisting these changes.

As the noise was building around the “Fair Pay to Play Act,” a former West Virginia Football player named Shawne Alston sued the NCAA for their limitations on teams' ability to offer non-cash, education-related benefits like grad school scholarships and laptops. Alston argued that these limitations violated Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. The NCAA argued that these restrictions were important to maintain fair competition among schools. The case ultimately reached the Supreme Court, which ruled unanimously 9–0 against the NCAA. The immediate effect of this case was that schools became able to provide holistic benefits to student athletes. The long-term impact helped accelerate change in the NIL landscape.

Grant House is a former Arizona State University swimmer who filed a lawsuit against the NCAA, challenging the restrictions put on schools preventing them from directly compensating athletes for their participation. House and other athletes argued that these restrictions violated antitrust laws and helped maintain the NCAA’s monopoly over college athletics. Coming after the NCAA v. Alston ruling and continued developments involving NIL, this lawsuit gained notable media attention throughout sports and legal news. Eventually, a settlement was reached in 2025, which involved over 2 billion dollars being compensated to thousands of current and former Division I athletes who competed between 2016 and 2024. With that, schools were permitted to directly pay athletes for their work. This settlement changed the long-standing strictly amateur status of college sports to a semi-professional environment.

These developments in college athletics address concerns about athletes being financially exploited. After decades of only receiving scholarships, athletes will finally receive a portion of the revenue generated from large broadcasting deals and ticket sales. Though no one knows exactly what will happen, this will undoubtedly change the landscape of recruiting and competition. With fewer restrictions to work around, will the largest and richest schools increase the gap between themselves and the rest of the teams? Will players regularly play for four different schools in their four seasons of eligibility? Will the business side of the game overshadow the passionate nature of collegiate athletics that so many fans have grown to love?

While most college sports teams will remain strictly an amateur endeavor for the time being it is clear that for some programs the distinction between college and professional sports will no longer be drawn at the financial motive amongst the participants.

References

National Collegiate Athletic Association. (n.d.). Academic Performance Program. NCAA. https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2021/2/18/academic-performance-program.aspx

Nylen, L., & Perez Jr., J. (2021, June 21). Supreme Court rules in favor of athletes in NCAA compensation case. Politico. https://www.politico.com/news/2021/06/21/supreme-court-ncaa-antitrust-ruling-495319

Russo, R., Mandel, S., & Williams, J. (2025, June 6). Historic House v. NCAA settlement gets final approval, allowing schools to pay college athletes. The Athletic. https://theathletic.com/news/historic-house-v-ncaa-settlement-gets-final-approval/

Tish.Law. (n.d.). What is the Fair Pay to Play Act? https://tish.law/blog/what-is-the-fair-pay-to-play-act/

Tucker, T. (2022, March 18). NIL timeline: How we got here and what’s next. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. https://www.ajc.com/sports/georgia-bulldogs/nil-timeline-how-we-got-here-and-whats-next/EOL7R3CSSNHK5DKMAF6STQ6KZ4/