Labor board: Northwestern University football players can unionize

[ABQCOWBOY]

It's laughable to think that paying players what market value would dictate would cause the demise of all college sports. Paying football coaches $5+ million per year, chartering flights all over the country, paying billions of dollars for facilities, etc., none of that apparently threatens the viability of all college sports. Even baseball coaches in the SEC make over a million a year.

The ad revenue alone for March Madness last year was $1.15 Billion... with a B. Fuzzy's right. Acting like paying players is going to bankrupt these universities or cause college sports to collapse is fear mongering.

I don't think anybody is suggesting that the demise of college sports completely. I think what is being discussed is the demise of College Sports in Schools that are not at the very top of the heap. I.E., Power Conferences.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

They are students when they are in the classroom. Outside the classroom there is literally no difference between them and an employee. They devote 40-50 hours per week to their craft, and have strict schedules. They get "paid" in the form of scholarships, room & board, books, etc. They have strict requirements on what they can and cannot do, from what "gifts" they can accept to what they can post on social media.

A student who is just a student has the ability to go get a job outside of class. He gets paid, he pays taxes. He has the time to devote to an outside job. He is still a student for purposes of the university, but he is also an employee outside of class.

Those students, for the most part, are paying for their educations. Not so with the large majortiy Scholar Athletes. A very important distinction I believe.

 

[peplaw06]

I don't think anybody is suggesting that the demise of college sports completely. I think what is being discussed is the demise of College Sports in Schools that are not at the very top of the heap. I.E., Power Conferences.

Those schools already get the bargain basement prospects anyway... The market may dictate that those players "compensation" is only going to be scholarship. How would that be any different than it is now?

 

[peplaw06]

Those students, for the most part, are paying for their educations. Not so with the large majortiy Scholar Athletes. A very important distinction I believe.

Why is it an important distinction?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Those schools already get the bargain basement prospects anyway... The market may dictate that those players "compensation" is only going to be scholarship. How would that be any different than it is now?

Because it's not about the talent. It's about the profitability of a Sports Program if you are not in a Power Conference.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Why is it an important distinction?

I think you know why pep. One is paying their own way and the other is having their way payed for by a University. When I buy my own car, I can say how I want to drive it and when I want to drive it. When, for example, my parents by my car and I am being supported by them, I must live by their rules and if those rules say I can't drive it after Midnight, then that's how it is until I am paying my own way.

This may be a bit simplistic but that is how it works IMO.

 

[Doomsday101]

Let players go on strike and see what happens. College is still going to bring in money and students will still attend to get an education. Players can sit, college is not dependent on athletics to survive. NFL has one business outside of the game there is no other means of survival so when NFL goes on strike both owners and players feel it, College will survive with or without student athletes.

 

[peplaw06]

Because it's not about the talent. It's about the profitability of a Sports Program if you are not in a Power Conference.

If those non-power conference schools are profitable now by just offering scholarships to players, then how will continuing to offer scholarships to players change anything?

I think you know why pep. One is paying their own way and the other is having their way payed for by a University. When I buy my own car, I can say how I want to drive it and when I want to drive it. When, for example, my parents by my car and I am being supported by them, I must live by their rules and if those rules say I can't drive it after Midnight, then that's how it is until I am paying my own way.

This may be a bit simplistic but that is how it works IMO.

You're not understanding.

If the traditional student is an employee, that employer controls what the student does -- as an employee. When the student-athlete is following the rules dictated to him, he follows the rules because if he doesn't he won't get to play football. The rules are dictated to student-athlete the same as they are an employee. The traditional student doesn't have the same regulations as the student-athlete, because the traditional student is not an employee of the school.

 

[peplaw06]

Let players go on strike and see what happens. College is still going to bring in money and students will still attend to get an education. Players can sit, college is not dependent on athletics to survive. NFL has one business outside of the game there is no other means of survival so when NFL goes on strike both owners and players feel it, College will survive with or without student athletes.

I seriously doubt colleges want to discontinue having revenue-producing sports teams. Yeah, let's just forget those billions we're making.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

If those non-power conference schools are profitable now by just offering scholarships to players, then how will continuing to offer scholarships to players change anything?

Because there will be considerable cost associated with unionizing players in future. In addition, how do you know that those schools are running far enough in the black to justify more cost?

You're not understanding.

If the traditional student is an employee, that employer controls what the student does -- as an employee. When the student-athlete is following the rules dictated to him, he follows the rules because if he doesn't he won't get to play football. The rules are dictated to student-athlete the same as they are an employee. The traditional student doesn't have the same regulations as the student-athlete, because the traditional student is not an employee of the school.

No, I understand completely but what you asked was: "Why is it an important distinction?"

If the now Student Athlete is an employee, then he is no longer a Student Athlete. He/She is an employee. They are then making their own way, so to speak.

 

[Doomsday101]

I seriously doubt colleges want to discontinue having revenue-producing sports teams. Yeah, let's just forget those billions we're making.

I'm sure they would rather not but again the money that comes into the schools goes to more than just the football program or basketball it goes to all the athletic programs they have and it goes into scholorships in the different program which in turn gives kids many who would never be able to afford a college education the oppertunity to do so. Vast majority will get more use out of that paper as opposed to having any chance at a pro career.

 

[Doomsday101]

The other factor is unlike other business college are not surviving on college sports, this is not the NFL where if they don't play owners and players suffer the colleges are not dependent upon college sports

 

[peplaw06]

Because there will be considerable cost associated with unionizing players in future. In addition, how do you know that those schools are running far enough in the black to justify more cost?

I don't see what the costs of the union have to do with it. Schools don't bear the costs of the union. And conceivably the student-athlete doesn't have to be a part of the union. If the student-athletes want to continue to play only on a scholarship, they should be able to do that.

So if there are no more costs, then nothing changes.

No, I understand completely but what you asked was: "Why is it an important distinction?"

If the now Student Athlete is an employee, then he is no longer a Student Athlete. He/She is an employee. They are then making their own way, so to speak.

The terms student-athlete and employee are not mutually exclusive.

 

[peplaw06]

I'm sure they would rather not but again the money that comes into the schools goes to more than just the football program or basketball it goes to all the athletic programs they have and it goes into scholorships in the different program which in turn gives kids many who would never be able to afford a college education the oppertunity to do so. Vast majority will get more use out of that paper as opposed to having any chance at a pro career.

So what? Why do we put it on the backs of the student-athletes' labor and skills to subsidize the scholarships of those who can't afford a college education?

The other factor is unlike other business college are not surviving on college sports, this is not the NFL where if they don't play owners and players suffer the colleges are not dependent upon college sports

Even more reason why the players need to be properly represented. The colleges have all the leverage.

 

[Doomsday101]

So what? Why do we put it on the backs of the student-athletes' labor and skills to subsidize the scholarships of those who can't afford a college education?

Even more reason why the players need to be properly represented. The colleges have all the leverage.

Put it on the backs? This is not forced labor no one is making them take the scholarship to play sports and get a top notch education in the process.
Yes college has leverage they are allowing kids who many can't afford to go to college the opportunity to do so by playing sports. How dare they.
I’m all in favor of giving kids a certain amount of spending money because they can’t take on jobs between school and sports and I think it should be an equal amount given to each member of the team. This is not pay for play it is a means to help the kids out the real payment is the fact you are getting a top notch education that will last a life time when for many that opportunity would not be there for them at all.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I don't see what the costs of the union have to do with it. Schools don't bear the costs of the union. And conceivably the student-athlete doesn't have to be a part of the union. If the student-athletes want to continue to play only on a scholarship, they should be able to do that.

So if there are no more costs, then nothing changes.

I am not all together sure if you are being serious here or not. I think you are being intentionally obtuse in this matter. You know full well that Unionization eventually means additional costs.

The terms student-athlete and employee are not mutually exclusive.

But they can be and, I would guess, will be if the players Unionize.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

So what? Why do we put it on the backs of the student-athletes' labor and skills to subsidize the scholarships of those who can't afford a college education?

Why do we put it on the backs of citizens to do the same thing?

Even more reason why the players need to be properly represented. The colleges have all the leverage.

If you believe this, then that's fine but don't try and say that everybody is going to be just fine if Unionization actually happens. There will be winners (Power Conferences) and there will be losers (all other conferences).

 

[Doomsday101]

So if they are now employees their scholarship will no longer be tax free they will have to pay taxes on that which they do not do now. While bigger school may not cut programs they could reduce the amount of scholarships they hand out . There no doubt will be gained benefits in the process of now being an employee but there are some draw backs as well.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

and that is why it will be appealed, you don't fire students. They are required to go to class to learn and when grades drop they are suspended from play. You act as if this is some typical business and it isn't. Kids benifet with a college education that is the trade off. I'm not surprised that a big union town is behind this and as most unions have done to industry they will destroy it. Town after town in strong union areas have paid the price and schools too will suffer at the hands of the Union.

As I have said before the appeal is going to look to see if the school is financially compensated for the service provided by the 'student-athlete.' If that is the case then the appeal will stand. You cant talk about special cases and how the NCAA is special like an angel but I have see the legal arguments and I know that the law doesn't find it a worth exception.

This really comes down to the freedom of the individual. People that are not sports fans see it right away. 50 guys cannot make legal entities and control the lives of a group of people without their consent for the rest of eternity. It's why I say the NCAA needs to get out in front. I like the idea of the institution. I am just like the ethic of consent of the governed even more.

 

[Doomsday101]

As I have said before the appeal is going to look to see if the school is financially compensated for the service provided by the 'student-athlete.' If that is the case then the appeal will stand. You cant talk about special cases and how the NCAA is special like an angel but I have see the legal arguments and I know that the law doesn't find it a worth exception.

This really comes down to the freedom of the individual. People that are not sports fans see it right away. 50 guys cannot make legal entities and control the lives of a group of people without their consent for the rest of eternity. It's why I say the NCAA needs to get out in front. I like the idea of the institution. I am just like the ethic of consent of the governed even more.

There are some things I would like to see the NCAA do in terms of helping student athletes such as set amount for each student because it is impossible to play and go to class and take on a part time job. However not a situation where QB are getting paid big money while some other kid is getting little. Also this ruling only covers kids coming in on scholarships so what about the walk on?