The spectrum of antitrust lawsuits against the NCAA expanded this week when 19-year-old Ontario hockey player Rylan Masterson sued the NCAA and 10 universities in federal court in New York over a “boycott” of Canadian Hockey League players.
In a modern world where college athletes can make millions of dollars through name, image and likeness deals and where former professional hockey players from European teams are eligible to play Division I hockey, excluding players who earned modest sums as teenagers playing in the CHL junior leagues seems outdated and more ripe for legal challenge than ever.
More from Sportico.com
Masterson, a defenseman who most recently played for the Fort Erie Meteors of the Greater Ontario Junior Hockey League, lost his NCAA eligibility in 2022 when he played two exhibition games for the Windsor Spitfires of the OHL, part of the CHL. CHL players are not eligible for the NCAA because they are considered “professional athletes” and not amateurs.
Masterson is a high school graduate who would like to play DI hockey, preferably at a college near his home in Ontario. The 10 universities named as defendants are Boston College, Boston University and Niagara University.
The underlying anti-monopoly theory in Masterton vs NCAA is the same as that used in O’BannoN, Alston, House and other lawsuits challenging the rules of amateurism. Masterson argues that the NCAA and its member schools, which are competing businesses, have conspired to prevent them from competing for athletes. Those athletes, in turn, suffer financial and professional harm when potential competitors agree not to compete or compete less aggressively than the market would otherwise encourage.
The NCAA rule that disqualifies a hockey player who has played in a CHL game is portrayed as preventing “competition between the CHL and NCAA for top players.” This would lead to a suppression of compensation for those players and places “16-year-olds in the impossible position of having to decide at that young age whether they ever want to play Division I hockey.” Fans and consumers also experience a form of harm, as DI hockey would be improved if CHL players were allowed to participate.
Masterson is represented by Richard A. Lafont and other attorneys from two law firms, Freedman Normand Friedland LLP and Berger Montague PC. The case is assigned to U.S. District Judge Lawrence J. Vilardo, whose courtroom is in the Robert H. Jackson United States Courthouse in Buffalo, N.Y.
Masterson is seeking a class action lawsuit on behalf of anyone who played in the CHL from August 12, 2020 to the present, or who attended college after playing in the CHL between August 12, 2020 and the present. There are 60 teams in the three leagues (OHL, QMJHL and WHL) that make up the CHL, meaning the class, if certified, would include thousands of players. Masterson is seeking an injunction that would prohibit the NCAA from enforcing the rule and that would allow a jury to award damages, which could be tripled under antitrust law.
The compensation of CHL players is important to the case because it involves the question of whether those players are “professional athletes.” Masterson emphasizes that CHL players “do not receive a salary.” Instead, they receive an allowance that is intended to cover living expenses — not wages for labor, payment for NIL or other compensatory purposes — and does not exceed $600 per month. Masterson further notes that the allowance is not considered income for tax purposes and is instead classified as an expense reimbursement.
While there are several possible routes to the NHL, Masterson says CHL and DI hockey teams are “the primary feeders” and offer players “the best opportunity to make a career out of hockey.” The complaint notes that more than 50% of NHL players played in the CHL and about 30% played DI hockey. Another route to the NHL is the United States Hockey League, another junior league, but Masterson says the quality of play is “consistently perceived as lower than the CHL” and is more accurately viewed as a feeder to DI.
Masterson argues in his complaint that the NCAA’s ban on CHL players is nonsense, as the NCAA allows other professional hockey players to compete.
For that reason, the complaint cites BU defenseman Tom Willander, who the Vancouver Canucks selected with the 11and overall pick in the 2023 NHL Draft. Before playing for the Terriers, Willander was a professional hockey player in Sweden.
The complaint also notes that USHL players, who are eligible for the NCAA, receive similar stipends as CHL players, and that the NCAA allows athletes in other sports to “receive significant compensation without losing their NCAA eligibility.” The complaint notes that tennis players can earn up to $10,000 per year without losing their eligibility and that other NCAA athletes, such as swimmers Katie Ledecky and Joseph Schooling, have earned hundreds of thousands of dollars while retaining their eligibility.
The NCAA, Masterson claims, considered dropping the boycott but did not do so. He notes that NCAA coaches held their annual meeting in Florida in May and discussed legal concerns about the boycott but chose not to vote on it.
The NCAA will respond to the complaint and ask for it to be dismissed. It is expected to argue that the rule pursues amateurish goals related to separating college athletes, who are also students, from professional athletes.
But that reasoning hasn’t worked in recent NCAA cases and appears especially vulnerable to criticism in this situation.
“The boycott of CHL players makes little sense given the substantial NIL money that current college athletes earn, and the NCAA eligibility of players who played professional hockey outside of North America,” attorney and retired hockey player Jonathan Calla said in a telephone interview.
In 1994-95, Calla scored 103 points for the Cowichan Valley Capitals of the British Columbia Hockey League before transferring to Northeastern University, where he continued his hockey career and education. He is now a principal at Goulston & Storrs in Boston and serves as outside general counsel for Winners Alliance, a global athlete-focused commercial group licensing solution, and the Professional Women’s Hockey League.
Calla stressed the importance of providing young players and their families with choices.
“Historically, elite teenage hockey players and their families have been faced with a decision that, if the CHL were to be chosen, would result in the loss of the opportunity to earn a scholarship and play DI hockey at an NCAA school. Given the changes in college sports, a player from the OHL’s London Knights should be able to continue his hockey path at Boston University.”
Calla also believes that lifting the boycott would allow DI hockey to field better players.
“NCAA hockey will be more competitive with a larger pool of players to choose from, making all players within NCAA hockey NHL ready.
The best of Sportico.com
