In June $2021,$ the U$.$S$.$ Supreme Court ruled, in a $9-0$ decision, in National Collegiate Athletic Association v$.$ Alston that the NCAA violated antitrust law by limiting schools from recruiting student athletes by offering better benefits to players as long as the benefits are education$-$related. Prior to this decision, the NCAA has enforced strict limits on the ability of student athletes to share in the NCAAs multibillion$-$dollar industry $($e$.$g$.$ television broadcast rights, school apparel and logoed products, stadium ticket sales, and school reputation benefits$).$ Student athletes had previously been limited to receiving several thousand$-$dollar stipends, tuition, and college related expenses. College athletes can now profit from their name, image, and likeness, which also means that company and product endorsements are now allowed. The Supreme Courts decision did not open the possibility of paying unlimited salaries in a market system that pays for the talent. The NCAA emphasized that it will be enforcing reasonable rules as to what qualifies for education$-$related benefits. This may pit individual university recruitment efforts in a conflict with the NCAA. $1.$ What are the benefits that universities and colleges receive from the talent provided by student athletes? Explain$\mathrm{.}2.$ Do you agree with the Supreme Court decision? Explain.