"Brantmeier and her mother purchased a portable scanner to track and catalog receipts incurred during competitions. The NCAA asserted that was an unnecessary expense; the organization objected to Brantmeier’s expense for a racket restringing because it took place 15 days before the competition — 24 hours outside a 14-day pre-competition window that is generally applied; officials also challenged the inclusion of Brantmeier’s mother’s share of lodging expenses in New York City, saying it was not an actual and necessary expense, even though Brantmeier was 16 years old at the time."

I'd like to sit down with the compliance officer who argued that last point, and discuss sending their own 16 year old daughter across the country to play a tennis tournament in New York by herself.

(03-19-2024 10:29 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(03-18-2024 08:56 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  It would be interesting if, in the long run, this helps to preserve Olympic sports programs on campuses.

Quite the opposite.

No one thinks football will disappear if athletes make money. Why would tennis?

Like I said that when the court ruled against the NCAA that it would open a can of worms that all athletes would start suing from all the sports, and it would be hard for the schools to drop these non-revenue sports like tennis without being sued as well. This could lead to more expansion by the Big 10 and SEC to grab any remaining schools that they can from the Big 12, ACC, AAC, MWC and like Buffalo, the service academies and the likes. The leftovers of the Big 12 and ACC may have to go more regional with some of the G5 schools. This is a cosmic shift that the courts and lawmakers should not have a say so in the matter at how the NCAA runs the sports.