The NCAA and 11 major conferences say that if college athletes "are allowed to be paid, the development would 'likely lead many -- if not most -- Division I institutions' to reduce the number of scholarships for less-renowned football and men's and women's basketball players," according to Jon Solomon of CBSSPORTS.com. That is "one of several arguments the NCAA and the conferences made in court documents filed late Thursday night opposing a pair of scholarship lawsuits from becoming class actions." The consolidated Shawne Alston and Martin Jenkins lawsuits are "challenging the NCAA's cap on compensation at the value of a scholarship." The NCAA and the conferences said that most D-I athletic departments "operate with deficits and face serious financial constraints that would result in cutting scholarships if there's unlimited payments to players." The NCAA and conferences wrote that "claims by the Alston and Jenkins plaintiffs that schools could increase the compensation to players by reducing how much head coaches are paid is 'economic nonsense.'” Instead, they wrote that college football and basketball coaches "who earn significant salaries are 'likely in the same market as the head coaches of professional football and basketball teams, and their salaries are far more directly affected by the level of compensation for coaches of professional teams than by the level of financial aid for student-athletes.'" The American Athletic Conference, Conference USA, MAC, Mountain West, Sun Belt and WAC are "named defendants in only the Alston cost-of-attendance lawsuit." The SEC, ACC, Big Ten, Pac-12 and Big 12 are "defendants in both cases." A class certification hearing on the two cases is "scheduled for July 23," and the plaintiffs "have until May 28 to respond to Thursday's filing" (CBSSPORTS.com, 5/1).
