•••
The current rule, which has been in place since 1973, calls for scholarships to be awarded on a year-by-year basis--for up to five years. Proponents of the one-year scholarship limit say it is only logical for coaches and the athletic department to assess an athlete's performance and contributions to the team on an annual basis, while detractors of the one-year rule say it leaves athletes in a precarious position--especially if they were to suffer an injury or have some sort of disagreement with the coaching staff that strained relations.

"Some of the government interest in college athletes has been in issues around the periphery," Ramogi Huma, President of the National College Players Association, told Inside Higher Ed. "There's a laundry list of things that could show how the NCAA breaks antitrust laws, but this one-year scholarship rule is at the core of how players are taken advantage of. I'm pleased to see this issue be taken up by the Department of Justice."

Over the past few years, more and more advocates for change like Huma have surfaced. It has been suggested that the rule be rewritten so athletes might be able to secure multi-year scholarships from their school instead. If the rule were to change to allow multi-year scholarships, however, the recruiting landscape could be altered dramatically.

"Maybe if there was no NCAA rule for one-year scholarships, some colleges would offer four-year scholarships instead," Michael McCann, a professor at Vermont Law School and legal analyst for Sports Illustrated told Inside Higher Ed. "If a college is competing for a player, then that could be an appealing thing. From an athletic director's point of view, a college might not have the budget to do this. But, if it were a free market, then who knows what they would do."

The inquiry begs some larger-picture questions as well, the most popular of which are related to a college athlete's amateur status. The NCAA has faced many questions in the past about whether its member school athletes truly fit the definition of "amateur" or if they should be compensated with pay.

It's been said that an NCAA scholarship is pay, it's just disguised as a scholarship. Case in point: a lawsuit brought against the NCAA by a group of former football and men's basketball players that was settled in 2008. Under the settlement, the association agreed to reallocate more than $200 million to help more than 150,000 Division I athletes pay for basic expenses not covered by their scholarships.

By settling this case, the NCAA has "conceded the point that there's reasonableness in the argument that the grant-in-aid [or athletics scholarship] should be larger," Andrew Zimbalist, an economics professor at Smith College, told Inside Higher Ed after the settlement. "It gives some greater force and ongoing momentum to the forces of reform that are challenging the NCAA notions of amateurism and the prevailing hypocrisy of running these very commercialized operations and not paying the players."

Some news outlets have speculated that based on past patterns of the Justice Department, the antitrust inquiry will be conducted out of the public eye and could take a very long time. The NCAA said in the statement on its Web site that it is working with the Justice Department to "help it understand" the current system.

Abigail Funk is an Assistant Editor at Athletic Management.