By Ed McGranahan.

There seems to be a great deal of confusion over two recent decisions pertaining to money that could become available to college athletes.

One was a class-action antitrust suit filed against the NCAA on behalf of football and basketball athletes by former UCLA basketball player Ed O’Bannon. At issue in the suit was the use of an athlete’s name or likeness by various entities including but not excluding their schools for commercial purposes.

The other was the decision by the NCAA to permit another subset of affiliated schools and conferences. The Power 5, which includes the 64 members of ACC, SEC, Big Ten, Big 12 and Pac-12 plus Notre Dame, may rewrite current NCAA rules for recruiting, scholarship limits, staffing and a whole realm of guidelines to serve their purposes.

In each case athletes may receive money that has not been available under current scholarship guidelines.

The O’Bannon suit was filed in 2009 against the NCAA, Collegiate Licensing Company which serves 200 schools with official paraphernalia and video game producer Electronic Arts. It was a sticky area, particularly in licensing where the argument wasn’t as clear cut. While his name wasn’t on it, all those No. 10 jerseys sold by Clemson didn’t have Tajh Boyd’s name on them, but the intent was obvious.

In 2011, Oscar Robertson and Bill Russell joined the suit. In short Collegiate Licensing and Electronic Arts agreed to drop $40 million into an account intending to pay up to $4,000 to about 100,000 former athletes who appeared in EA videos since 2001.

That left the NCAA to argue its case. This summer in San Francisco, the suit was tried in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, and on Aug. 8, Judge Claudia Wilken found that NCAA rules and bylaws operate as an unreasonable restraint of trade in violation of antitrust law.

Ultimately it may have created additional leverage, but days earlier the NCAA granted autonomy to the five conferences and Notre Dame. Threats that they may create splinter organization and take their billions of dollars in TV revenue with them were the ultimate leverage.

Members of the 65 insist they have the resources to provide more to athletes. Attempts to expand scholarships to cover the cost of
attendance or provide a capped stipend were shot down by the full NCAA membership.

Also likely to be tackled are the cost of medical coverage for athletes, time demands, money for athletes’ families to attend games, a loosening of rules limiting contact between athletes and agents.

Until the new group assembles its oversight committee and legislation is submitted, there are no assurances how resources might be apportioned to athletes.  While some assume football and men’s basketball may receive more because their sports generate the lion’s share of the revenue, that has not been stipulated and it was be a murky road given Title IX and civil rights guidelines.

Clemson coach Dabo Swinney generally likes the creation of the Power 5 – or whatever they intend to call the group – because of the potential benefits to athletes. He does not champion adding athletes as employees.

“I definitely think that this is a positive because it’s going to bring about positive change. It already has,” he said, pointing out the more liberal guidelines for feeding athletes. “Just the conversation has already brought about positive change. We’ve got to be careful that there’s a good balance, that we don’t lose sight of what college football is all about and the model of college football and those core
values.”

An 80-member panel including 15 athletes will determine policy for the Power 5. Swinney hopes the other 65 members will listen to the young people. If nothing else he wants athletes to see a tangible benefit from this new relationship, by “modernizing the scholarship to reflect 2014” to reflect “common sense.”

“Just understanding that the scholarship has to be a little different,” he said, “Preparation has changed. The game has changed. And – more importantly – society has changed. Gas is more experience, clothes cost more. Food costs more.

“These guys work year round.”