Posts

ncaa

NCAA Tournament Expansion to 76 Teams Nears Approval for 2027

/in /by

A long-discussed expansion of the NCAA men’s and women’s basketball tournaments is now nearing reality, with the fields expected to grow to 76 teams as early as 2027, ESPN reported.

The proposal, which has circulated within college basketball circles for months, is widely anticipated to move forward. Two Division I athletic directors and three men’s basketball coaches told USA TODAY Sports there is a clear “expectation” the change will happen, with one coach saying, “We’ll be stunned if it doesn’t happen.”

A formal decision could come soon. Individuals familiar with the process say the plan is on track to be finalized in May. However, it must still clear multiple layers of approval, including oversight groups, the Division I Cabinet and the Division I Board of Governors. The NCAA released a statement on Tuesday addressing the expansion.

“Expanding the basketball tournaments would require approval from multiple NCAA committees, including the men’s and women’s basketball committees, and no final recommendations or decisions have been made at this time.”

Embed from Getty Images

The push to expand comes amid growing debate about the current format, which includes 68 teams. The structure has been in place for the men’s tournament since 2011 and adopted by the women’s field in 2022. NCAA president Charlie Baker has previously signaled that changes were likely, adding to expectations that expansion is imminent.

If approved, the most visible adjustments would occur in the tournament’s opening phase. The traditional first round, 32 games played over two days, is expected to remain largely unchanged. Instead, the expansion would significantly reshape the play-in portion of the bracket.

According to ESPN, the men’s “First Four” would expand from eight teams playing four games to 24 teams competing across 12 games for entry into the main draw. Those winners would then advance to face teams already placed in the first round.

Embed from Getty Images

Several key questions remain unanswered. It is unclear how many of the additional berths would go to at-large teams versus automatic qualifiers, which currently include four mid-major champions and four at-large selections. There is also uncertainty about where the expanded play-in games would be held. Since 2011, those contests have been held in Dayton, Ohio, except for the 2021 tournament, which was held in Indianapolis.

While a larger field would add more games to one of the most popular events in college sports, critics worry it could dilute the quality of competition. Expanding access may allow teams with middling records to compete for a national title, raising concerns about the overall strength of the bracket.

Others argue that the change could further tilt the field toward power-conference programs. UC Irvine head coach Russell Turner voiced skepticism about whether expansion would benefit smaller programs.

“It’s become stacked against mid-majors now. Whether that’s been the purpose of those who oversee the system or not is unclear to me, but with the way that they’re deciding the tournament bids now, it’s virtually impossible. I don’t see that changing if they let more teams in. I think they let more teams in, they’re just going to end up letting more power conference teams in.”

ncaa

NCAA Sues DraftKings Over Use Of March Madness Trademarks 

/in , /by

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) filed a complaint in federal court last week in which they’re requesting an emergency restraining order to stop the online sportsbook DraftKings from using registered trademarks connected to March Madness and the NCAA men’s and women’s basketball tournaments. 

Embed from Getty Images

According to reports the trademark infringement complaint was filed in the Southern District of Indiana. 

It specifically is requesting that DraftKings stops using terms like “March Madness,” “Final Four,” “Elite Eight,” and “Sweet Sixteen,” as well as variations of them in sports betting products, campaigns, or marketing. 

In the complaint, the NCAA stated that their trademarks are used in order to identify, brand, advertise, and distinguish the tournaments across various broadcast media, digital platforms, merchandise, sponsorships, and licensed commercial activities. 

“On the eve of the Tournaments, DraftKings deliberately adopted and prominently began using the NCAA’s iconic NCAA Basketball Marks, including confusingly similar variations thereof, to trade on – and usurp – the immense goodwill, recognition, and consumer trust embodied in those Marks at the precise moment of peak public attention,” the complaint said.

In the exhibits attached to the complaint, screenshots of DraftKings wagering platforms were used to exemplify the NCAA’s issue. 

Embed from Getty Images

“DraftKings’s unlawful use quickly proliferated across its consumer-facing websites and mobile applications, embedding the marks and logos into betting menus, promotional graphics, and marketing publications, to deliberately exacerbate consumer confusion and reinforce a false association with or sponsorship by the NCAA in order to continuously capitalize on the goodwill of the NCAA,” the complaint said.

The NCAA also said that it avoids any appearance of affiliation with gambling companies. They’ve declined sponsorships, banned sports betting by athletes and staff, and have publicly made their opposition to prop and micro bets clear. 

The NCAA also said that it had launched initiatives to prevent harassment and improper influence in college sports. They’re biggest focus is to maintain integrity when it comes to the sport and competitions as well. 

“Every day that DraftKings continues to use these marks, millions of sports fans – and, critically, college students and young adults who are particularly susceptible to gambling harm – are exposed to the false suggestion that the Association has authorized or endorsed DraftKings’ gambling platform,” the NCAA said in a statement.

track

US Trans Runner, Evie Parts, Sues Over ‘Bigoted’ Ban From College Track Team 

/in , /by

Long-distance track runner, Evie Parts, is suing the NCAA, Swarthmore college, and members of its athletic department over claims that they illegally removed her from the track team because she is transgender. 

Reports state that Parts’ lawsuit is saying that the NCAA’s ban on transgender athletes in women’s sports does not have legal grounds due to the fact that it’s not a governmental organization, so it doesn’t have jurisdiction over Pennsylvania state law or the Title IX federal statute.  

Embed from Getty Images

The NCAA is US college sports’ largest governing body. Parts was taken off the team on February 6th, the date that the NCAA issued its new policy on transgender athletes. 

Also named in the lawsuit was Swarthmore men’s and women’s track coach Peter Carroll, athletic director Brad Koch, and athletics officials Christina Epps-Chiazor and Valerie Gomez. The complaint cited that Parts was sent into “such a depressive state that she engaged in self-harm and in one moment told a friend that she wanted to kill herself.”

“We stand by the allegations in the complaint,” said Susie Cirilli, an attorney who represents Parts.

“As stated in the complaint, the NCAA is a private organization that issued a bigoted policy. Swarthmore College chose to follow that policy and disregard federal and state law.”

Swarthmore released a statement that the college “deeply values our transgender community members.”

“We recognize that this is an especially difficult and painful time for members of the transgender community, including student-athletes,” the school stated. 

Embed from Getty Images

“We worked to support Evie Parts in a time of rapidly evolving guidance, while balancing the ability for other members of the women’s track team to compete in NCAA events. Given the pending litigation, we will not comment any further.”

The NCAA, who’s chosen not to comment on the suit, changed their participation policy for transgender athletes so that in women’s sports competitions only athletes assigned female at birth can participate. 

This change occurred a day after Donald Trump signed an executive order intended to ban transgender athletes from girls’ and women’s sports. 

Parts initially joined the Swarthmore track team in the fall of 2020. She took off the following four winter and spring seasons before joining the team again in 2023 to compete in the indoor and outdoor track seasons and in cross country. 

The lawsuit stated that once the NCAA issued the ban, Parts was told by Epps-Chiazor and Gomez that she could compete with the men’s team or as an unattached athlete. Additionally, she would only be able to receive medical treatment if she competed on the men’s team, the complaint added.  

Carroll and his staff were told they were not allowed to coach Parts and she could not travel with the team. She also was not allowed to receive per diem, food, and had to pay her way into meets. She also was not able to wear a Swarthmore uniform.

basketball

Federal Judge Approves $2.8B Settlement For College Athletes To Be Paid Millions

/in , /by

Last week, a federal judge signed off on what is being referred to as one of the biggest changes in the history of college sports. US Judge Claudia Wilken approved the final proposal that has cleared a path for schools to start paying their athletes millions of dollars.

Read more
football

NCAA Announces New Rules To Combat Players Faking Injuries

/in , /by

The NCAA announced this week that the Playing Rules Oversight Panel has officially approved changes to the injury timeout rules beginning this fall. The new rules were made in an effort to prevent players from faking injuries, a predominant issue in college football, according to ESPN. 

Embed from Getty Images

The new rule was approved officially on Wednesday, and it stated that if medical personnel enter the field to evaluate a player that has been potentially injured after the ball is spotted by the officiating crew, the player’s team will be charged with a timeout, Heather Dinich wrote.

The initial proposal was created due to an increase in teams faking injuries in order to stop their opponents’ momentum. 

Steve Shaw, the NCAA secretary-rules editor/national coordinator of officials, is the individual who was in charge of accepting requests from teams when they believed their opponents had faked an injury, and would then take disciplinary action.

According to the NCAA’s release, the rule change next season will allow fake injuries to be called out mid-game because “Football Rules Committee members think these actions negatively affect the overall perception of the game.”

Shaw told ESPN that while he still will review film if asked, his role is now to determine if a team is taking advantage of an injury timeout to gain an advantage. 

Embed from Getty Images

With the new rule, the committee compiled a nine-minute video highlighting moments that could have been considered fake injuries from last season. 

Shaw stated that this video “shows an integrity issue in our game that needs to be addressed.”

“When you watch that video, action is required,” Shaw said. 

“Sometimes players may do it on their own because it feels accepted, and that’s what we want to stop. I’m not sure there is a perfect solution, but I think this is a good first step. 

This will have an impact on those that are very obvious and are late and looking to the sideline and going down. Coaches do not want to risk a timeout under any circumstances. Those are very valuable commodities in the game.”

“If it doesn’t have an impact, there will probably be another step, but it’s a good starting point and hopefully this will clean it up.”

ncaa

More Plaintiffs Join Lawsuit v. NCAA Claiming Student Athletes Deserve Pay

/in , /by

Former Villanova University football player Ralph “Trey” Johnson sued the N.C.A.A. in November 2019, claiming that college athletes should be considered employees at the schools they play for under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The case has grown since then, with several former athletes joining as plaintiffs and seeking to form a class-action lawsuit.

This case is one of many blows the N.C.A.A. has taken to its current model of the relationship between athletes, their schools and the N.C.A.A.

In a statement, Johnson said that the lawsuit was “not about being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars.” The case was also not restricted to a few select athletes with endorsement deals.

“We are simply asking the N.C.A.A. to pay its student-athletes the basic minimum wage as required by federal law. They pay the students who tear the tickets and sell popcorn at our games. The least that the N.C.A.A. can do for those who bring so much money to the N.C.A.A. and its schools would be to pay them the minimum wage.”

Embed from Getty Images

In June 2021, the Supreme Court passed a unanimous decision in the case N.C.A.A. v. Alston to uphold a lower court’s ruling that the N.C.A.A. restrictions on “education-related benefits” for college athletes violated antitrust laws. These benefits included scholarships for graduate school, payment for academic tutoring and paid post-eligibility internships.

Though the Supreme Court case did not debate the issue of compensation, it was one of the first major blows to the N.C.A.A.’s status quo. Over the last two years, several states have passed legislation that challenged the N.C.A.A.’s rules prohibiting athletes from profiting off their NIL—name, image and likeness. Congress in both parties have proposed new legislation that would grant student athletes long-term medical care and a portion of the revenue they generate.

Embed from Getty Images

The National Labor Relations Board’s General Counsel, Jennifer Abruzzo, released a memo stating that she considered college athletes employees under federal law. The memo states that Abruzzo would consider referring to the “employees as mere student-athletes,” violating the Fair Labor Standards Act. It was a sign that the N.L.R.B. would be willing to pursue claims against colleges, conferences and the N.C.A.A. on behalf of the students.

“The broad language of Section 2(3) of the Act, the policies underlying the N.L.R.A., Board law, and the common lawfully support the conclusion that certain Players at Academic Institutions are statutory employees, who have the right to act collectively to improve their terms and conditions of employment.”

The case is currently in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. If the case is ruled in favor of the athletes, it will counter the Seventh and Ninth circuit’s rulings. The conflicting rulings would increase the likelihood that the Supreme Court would step in to make a final decision.

In 2021, the N.C.A.A. made $1.15 billion in revenue and distributed the bulk of it to its 1,200 member schools.