Can someone help me with some internal (within my brain) logic here:
The NCAA is a voluntary organization, right? In other words if OSU, Bama, USC etc wanted to leave to form their own league they could, correct?
As such, the members of the voluntary organization, who also provide input the rules of said organization via committee, agree to abide by the rules of the voluntary organization.
Athletes are not forced to attend NCAA institutions. By choosing to attend NCAA institutions, those athletes are choosing to abide by the rules of those institutions and the larger member organization (the NCAA).
Did I get any of that wrong?
So you can argue the NCAA "money model" isn't fair (but frankly neither is the pay model at any Fortune 500 company), but I don't understand how it would be considered illegal, or a violation of anti-trust law.
If I was an athlete, the source of my frustration would be with the professional leagues who do not allow players to enter the league out of high school (NBA, NFL). It seems like that would be a good target for a lawsuit (e.g. I am legal adult with the skills needed to perform this job; you are excluding me because of my age (yes, I realize "age" as a protected class doesn't kick in until 40, but the principle of ageism is the same)).
I would much rather see players who care more about money to play in the minor leagues and leave college athletics to people who actually want to "play school" (and also want to play a sport).