The Heisman Trust’s judgement on Wednesday to grant Reggie Bush the 2005 Heisman Trophy does not mean that Bush will abandon his false-label complaint against the NCAA.
If something, Bush might be more encouraged than ever to plead his case.
The Heisman Trust, according to ESPN, cited “fundamental changes in school sport” as a important cause for its decision. College athletes are now compensated for their name, picture, and resemblance, or NIL, a term that was originally used to describe athletes who used their publicity rights without being subject to an NCAA penalty. But, as a matter of practice, that has expanded to even contain inducement- type arrangements with NIL collectives and, probably immediately, direct payments by schools.

The Trust, a separate entity from the NCAA, also cited the Supreme Court’s decision in the case of NCAA v. Alston ( 2021 ), in which it claimed that the NCAA and its affiliated institutions conspired to prevent athletes from receiving payments for education-related expenses. Alston ended an era of respectful care of the NCAA under antitrust law and meant that its rules restricting performer compensation may be subject to standard antitrust scrutiny, despite not being about NIL or pay-per-play.
Bush took the trophy back in 2010 after the NCAA’s investigation revealed that he and his family had received gifts from agents and would-be agents representing him when he joined the NFL ( Bush contends that the NCAA’s investigation had been rigged and flawed ). In other words, those reported payments to Bush were both for the benefit of his NIL as a university athlete nor as incentives to enroll in USC. Otherwise, they would have encouraged him to work with an agent to advance his marketing goals as an NFL player. Bush spent 11 months in the NFL before being selected with the following overall pick in the 2006 review, and he is now a journalist and scientist.
Bush sued the NCAA in an Indiana jury last August. The essence of his situation is that an NCAA director reportedly defamed him in 2021 when responding to a reporter’s problem. Given that the NCAA had agreed to allow NIL in the face of state laws compulsion it to do so, the issue was whether the NCAA may go back and discuss how it handled Bush. The director did not mention Bush by brand and said, “NCAA rules still do not allow spend- for- enjoy type arrangements”.
Central to the event is how to view “pay- for- enjoy type plans”.
The phrase “pay for enjoy” has a history of being used to refer to illegal payments made by boosters to athletes who want to go or stay at a college. Bush’s reported payments, which allegedly caused him trouble with the NCAA, were no inducements to perform at USC; they were payments made in exchange for his future with the NFL.
The NCAA has criticized Bush’s constitutional theory in court papers as absurd because of what the spokesperson claimed was accurate. Pay-for-play is still deemed prohibited by the NCAA’s regulations. When the director made the statement in 2021, pay-for-play was formally prohibited, despite recent advances suggesting that the NCAA has become more accepting of bills that appear to be pay-for-play. Additionally, the NCAA also forbids bills to current, eligible NCAA players through would-be agents in order to represent them as professionals. To that point, the spokesperson did not say “pay- for- play” but preferably”” pay- for- play type arrangements,” a broader term perhaps inclusive of payments by would- be master agents.

A reading to examine the NCAA’s motion to dismiss will be held on Monday in Marion Superior Court Judge Heather Welch’s place. The reading, originally set for this Thursday, was postponed to hold an attorney’s planning issue.
Now that Bush has won, he may come to the conclusion that his case is stronger than previously. Bush has furthermore gained the support of nicely- known proponents. Fellow Heisman Trophy success Johnny Manziel has pledged to no attend the annual prize service until Bush’s prize is returned, and St. John’s mind men’s basketball coach Rick Pitino has called the loss of Bush’s trophy”, one of the most dishonest moves of all time” and an” injustice.”
Bush seeks monetary damages from the NCAA to hold it” accountable for its unlawful conduct” and reflect the” damages, mental anguish, humiliation and embarrassment “it allegedly caused him via the spokesperson.
Expect the NCAA to argue at the hearing that Bush’s case is legally unrelated to the Trust’s return of the trophy. The Trust is a separate organization and a non- party whose decision about a trophy is unrelated to whether an NCAA’s spokesperson’s statement—which is what the case is about—was truthful and accurate.
The litigation would move to pretrial discovery if the NCAA is unable to persuade Welch to dismiss the case. That means NCAA officials could be compelled to give sworn testimony and share emails, texts and other correspondences. The same would apply to Bush.
One intriguing question is whether Bush would be willing to accept a settlement whereby the NCAA offers him an apology rather than payment ( save for his attorney’s fees ). Charlie Baker, president of the NCAA, is a proponent of reform that would include direct NIL payments from schools and a new division where athletes are paid at least$ 30, 000 annually through an” Enhanced Educational Trust Fund.” ” Baker, who took over last year, was n’t at the helm during Bush’s controversy. Baker might say that under his leadership, Bush played in a different era and the NCAA is forging a different course.
However, the NCAA might back down and say that Bush’s alleged actions would still violate the rules in place and cause his case to fail despite significant and ongoing changes.