"Why The Latest NCAA Lawsuit Is Unlikely To Change Its Amateurism Rules - But Should"

When it comes to the economics expert witnesses, the NCAA has far more throw-weight.

The plaintiffs bring to the case two economists in Dr. Roger Noll and Dr. Daniel Rascher. To counter, the NCAA has retained its own accomplished economists in Dr. James Heckman and Dr. Kennith Elzinga.

But you can never tell. I looked at an antitrust case years ago in which one side presented an affadavit by a future Nobel Prize winner and other superstars of the profession, and the other side's expert witness was an unknown--at least to me--economist. The other side won, in large part because the judge felt the superstars testimony was boilerplate, not at all specific to the case at hand and also that said experts did not, the judge felt, answer questions well, while the unknown guy was quite specific and responsive.

"The wage gap and the WNBA"

Short, nicely done explanation of why women basketball players don't earn as much as men. The key:

To put it simply, as there is more demand for the NBA, whether that be tickets sales, TV contracts or merchandise, they generate more revenue, justifying a much larger wage for their players. The vast difference between the total revenue of the NBA ($7.4 billion) and the WNBA ($25 million) is a prime example of this.