In a groundbreaking development that could potentially change the landscape of collegiate hockey, a proposed class-action lawsuit has been filed against the NCAA, alleging that the organization is in violation of antitrust laws by prohibiting hockey players who have competed in Canadian Hockey League (CHL) games from playing for NCAA teams.
The lawsuit, filed on August 12 in the U.S. District Court of Western New York, lists the NCAA itself as well as several universities including Canisius University, Niagara University, and Boston College, among others, as defendants. The plaintiff, Rylan Masterson, who played two games for the CHL’s Windsor Spitfires at the age of 16, is seeking justice for himself and any other player who has been affected by this ban between August 12, 2020, and the present.
“The NCAA’s ban on current and former CHL players has prevented young hockey players from doing what’s best for their careers for years,” said Stephen Lagos, an attorney for the plaintiff. “We’re optimistic that this lawsuit will put an end to the NCAA’s unfair and illegal practice and provide compensation for the harm caused.”
The lawsuit argues that the NCAA’s rule, which prevents players with CHL experience from joining NCAA teams, is aimed at suppressing player compensation and creating less competitive leagues. The rule is unique to men’s hockey and skiing, and according to the filing, is a form of group boycott that violates U.S. antitrust laws.
The NCAA justifies the rule by claiming it promotes and protects amateurism, as the CHL allows players with NHL contracts to compete and pays a monthly stipend capped at $250. However, the lawsuit alleges that the true motivation behind the rule is to undermine the CHL, which is the NCAA’s main competitor for top young players.
Amidst a changing landscape in collegiate athletics, driven by recent legal challenges and legislative actions allowing athletes to profit from their name, image, and likeness, the NCAA’s CHL restriction has been called into question. Reports suggest that the NCAA has been considering removing the rule, signaling a potential shift in policy.
The lawsuit represents a significant milestone for men’s hockey, which has previously avoided legal challenges in the NCAA realm. The potential implications of this case could have far-reaching effects on the way college hockey operates and the opportunities available to young players.
As we await further developments in this ongoing legal battle, it is clear that the future of collegiate hockey hangs in the balance, with potential changes on the horizon that could reshape the sport for generations to come.
