Kris Jenkins sues NCAA seeking lost income after championship shot

In the United States, former Villanova basketball player Kris Jenkins has filed a lawsuit against the NCAA and multiple conferences, claiming he lost potential income due to restrictions on athlete compensation related to name, image, and likeness (NIL) prior to July 2021. Jenkins, who played for Villanova from 2013-2017 and famously made the winning shot in the 2016 national championship game, argues that he is entitled to a share of the financial benefits that followed his game's success. This includes significant payments and gifts to the Villanova athletic department, increased alumni donations, and revenue generated from game broadcasts. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and requests a jury trial along with a compensation determination based on Jenkins' contributions as an athlete. As part of a broader trend, Jenkins is among approximately 350 athletes opting out of a proposed $2.8 billion antitrust settlement with the NCAA to pursue individual lawsuits claiming they are entitled to compensation for lost NIL income. His suit highlights issues of fairness in the compensation for college athletes, especially as the landscape of college sports compensation evolves. Further complicating matters, the NCAA has faced criticism over the years for its restrictive policies on athlete compensation, limiting athletes' ability to benefit from personal endorsements and other income avenues. The legal implications of Jenkins' lawsuit may have far-reaching effects on college athletics, potentially leading to changes in how athlete compensation is approached and regulated in the future. As more former athletes and current players seek compensation through legal means, the NCAA’s policies may come under increased scrutiny as courts evaluate the legality of their practices against antitrust laws and economic fairness. Jenkins claims that due to NCAA restrictions, he missed out on substantial earnings from various income opportunities, such as media broadcasting uses of his name and likeness, and third-party endorsements. This recent action against the NCAA reflects a growing dissatisfaction among college athletes regarding compensation practices and has the potential to prompt systemic changes in collegiate sports governing structures and athlete financial rights.