Throughout the final stretch of the House v. NCAA antitrust lawsuit, “many involved have pointed to the next big one coming down the pike” — Johnson vs. NCAA, which “gets into one of the thorniest issues in college sports: employment,” according to Seth Emerson of THE ATHLETIC. Johnson v. NCAA, which has been moving through the courts for almost six years now, could be a “clarifying win for the NCAA, or it could be the case that hastens the big changes many have predicted — football breaking away from the rest of college sports, and a football Super League.” The case could go to trial “as early as next year.” Emerson notes there is “always a chance the NCAA and the plaintiffs will settle,” as in the House case, which “leads to new rules and perhaps collective bargaining.” But for now, “both sides seem dug in.” Johnson filed his case before the NIL and revenue sharing eras began, but Paul McDonald, the lead lawyer for the plaintiff, argues that “should have no impact:” All athletes should be “deemed employees because they are performing a job.” The SEC and a group of education associations filed an amicus brief in the Johnson case, warning, “If colleges and universities are forced to pay their student-athletes (as employees) it is inevitable that many schools will simply eliminate athletics teams.” Emerson added the NCAA has “expressed no interest in granting hourly wages to any athletes, even those in football and basketball, hoping the House settlement’s revenue-sharing structure shows that athletes are now being sufficiently paid” (THE ATHLETIC, 6/12).
