📣 Objection Worth Reading 📣

Here is an excellent objection letter that lays out everything wrong with the House v. NCAA settlement 🧾⚖️

It’s clear, thoughtful, and deeply honest — a must-read for anyone who cares about fairness for student-athletes 🙅‍♂️🏅

Thank you to @4common_cents for sharing this heartfelt letter 💌👏

"Dear Judge Wilken,

Lawyers that I have never met and who have never communicated with me, are claiming to represent me. And without my knowledge or consent, they have agreed to roster limits and put my roster spot, and my academic and athletic dreams, in jeopardy. They won’t let me opt-out of the settlement, they will force me to release all claims, and prevent me from pursuing justice on my own.

This can't be legal, can it? 

I don’t belong in this class action. Please help me!

These lawyers claim I have been exploited. I have not. They don’t speak for me. Since I was seven years old, I trained year-round as a competitive swimmer. One of the goals that drove me through those hard two-a-day practices and frigid early morning swims was to earn a spot on a competitive college swim team. My hard work paid off. I am now a freshman swimmer at a Division 1 Power 4 school and happily pursuing my academic and athletic dreams.

I love being a student athlete. Like most student athletes, I fully understand the pros and cons of being a college swimmer. It is a lot of work. We practice ten times a week. We have early mornings and late nights. We work through injuries. And we voluntarily train year-round.

In return, I receive modest scholarship money, Alston money, training table, world class coaching, incredible facilities, healthcare, tutoring, and some SWAG from our sponsors (shoes, sweats, etc…). I’ve made great friends among my teammates and fellow athletes.

I know thousands of swimmers that would love to have the spot that I have today. That is why I am grateful for the opportunity. That is why I do not feel exploited. That is why I do not belong in this class action.

Non-revenue sports do not belong in this class action.

As I understand it, the great majority of the future dollars paid out in this proposed settlement will go to athletes in revenue producing sports like football and basketball, which make up about 22% of the athletes. So, why are the remaining 78% of the athletes, who get no benefits, dragged into this class action? Even worse, why are several thousand athletes being cut from rosters? Class actions are supposed to benefit everyone in the class, not a small minority. We are not getting anything. We are only here to give them something: a release of our rights. That is not how class actions are supposed to work.

The named plaintiffs are former athletes and cannot speak for me.

The named plaintiffs have one thing in common. None of them will be eligible to be rostered next year. None of them will be impacted by the Injunctive Relief settlement. None of them will be exposed to roster limits and cuts, or, answer to their teammates who are being cut. 

Grant House maximized his college experience. He was a full scholarship athlete. The NCAA granted him extra eligibility and six years to swim in college. He trained with world class coach Bob Bowman. At ASU, he trained with professional swimmers and olympic athletes from all around the world. All these benefits likely totaled much more than $500,000 of in-kind compensation. There were no restrictions preventing Grant House from “going pro”. If he House felt exploited, he could have quit at any time and earned as much NIL money as he wanted. Instead, he stayed. In fact, he petitioned the NCAA to continue swimming in college. He exploited the NCAA, not the other way around.

Sedona Prince is another named plaintiff who maximized the college experience. Prince is currently enjoying her seventh year of eligibility. She is another full scholarship athlete. She has persevered through several injuries and petitioned the NCAA to extend her eligibility multiple times. Like House, Prince could have “gone pro” years ago. Instead, she stayed and petitioned the NCAA to keep playing in college.

These athletes are complete outliers. And, now that they are done competing, their interests conflict with current athletes. They do not represent the hundreds of thousands of rank and file athletes that are on partial scholarship or no scholarship, who are grateful to continue their athletic careers and for the benefits that come with being a student athlete.

Why are lawyers for athletes supporting caps on athletes and not on coaches or athletic departments?

In the Complaint, class counsel complains “spending on coaches and athletic directors and conference commissioners has no end”. They further complain that “spending on football coaches … [will soon] equal the spending on athletic scholarships and medical expenses for all athletes across all sports.”
In the very same Complaint, class counsel declares that "rules that limit the scholarships and roster spots available to players for their athletic services are illegal cartel agreements."

But instead of proposing caps on coaches, athletic directors, or general managers, the lawyers for the athletes are supporting the very illegal cartel agreements that form the basis for the class action. They want caps on roster spots and athlete compensation. Why would my lawyers argue that their clients should be cut from rosters? That can’t be legal.

Whoever wants to argue that roster limits and salary caps will somehow creative a more competitive playing field, should look first at capping coaches and athletics departments where the real inequities exist. Instead, my lawyers ignored their complaint and have done nothing to curb the spending on coaches. In fact, the promise of this settlement has ushered in a new era of reckless spending on coaches and general managers. The following new contracts have been recently announced: Kirby Smart ($13m/yr), Deion Sanders ($10.8m), Ryan Day ($12.5m), Bill Belichik ($10m), Dan Lanning ($10m), and Curt Cignetti ($9m).

Even more outrageously, after complaining that the adult coaches, athletic directors, and conference commissioners are getting rich by exploiting the athletes, the adult lawyers exploit the athletes by demanding a $725 million fee. The fee, of course, will be paid from revenue generated by their athlete clients. For this reason, the lawyers only have contempt for their non-revenue generating clients like me. This is why they don't care if we are cut from rosters.

The NCAA Promises to Create Opportunities
Please help me and thousands of student athletes like me. We didn’t ask to be part of this class action. We have not consented to representation by class counsel. The lawyers are hurting us and won’t let us opt-out.

We are grateful to be student athletes. And the proposed roster limits make this settlement completely unfair and unjust to several thousand members of the class.
The NCAA proclaims that its overarching purpose is “to create a safe, and equitable environment that allows student-athletes to reach their full potential in academics, athletics and life,” and that it is “united around one goal: creating opportunities for college athletes.” Imposing roster limits and cutting current athletes directly conflicts with these goals.

Respectfully,
Grateful Student Athlete"