BIG story-NCAA football players attempt to unionize

[downtown]

Here is another explainer as to exactly what this means: http://www.sbnation.com/college-foo...lege-football-players-union-northwestern-nlrb

Tl:dr..

1) This only potentially impacts private schools with FBS football programs. Most of the FBS programs are public schools with only a handful of the actual "good" programs falling under the private umbrella (Notre Dame, USC, Stanford, BYU, Miami, Boston College, Vandy, Baylor and Duke).

2) This ruling probably does not reach sports outside of football, basketball, and in a few instances, hockey or baseball. That includes women's sports.

3) Players who are not on scholarship (walk-ons) would not be covered.

4) Northwestern is going to be appeal.

5) As of right now, there is no evidence that students at other schools are interested in unionizing themselves.

6) There seems to be a potential legal pathway for payouts to comply with Title IX

If I had to GUESS, I'd say the NCAA turns to Congress to help navigate these issues before the courts can settle everything. Given the anti-union makeup of Congress (and SCOTUS), I'd say that the longterm prospect of formal unionization of college athletes isn't great...but it's a lot better than it was three days ago.

 

[Light Cleric]

snip

oh God the shorts my eyes hurt

Also:

I wouldn't. I've been around blue-state lefty universities long enough to know they stop very short of their stated ideals when they're the ones paying salaries.

Yeah, you can also apply this to rich or powerful people in general. It always amuses me to see people fall for things like the "patriotic" Americans who want to pay more taxes so badly...that they have accounts and lawyers do everything they can to avoid taxes they already owe via loopholes and offshore accounts and pile up millions in back taxes at their companies?

It's really easy to be "generous" with other people's money. It's more telling what someone does with their own.

 

[illram]

Well at the next Free Masons meeting I guess all of the University presidents and Regents will secretly agree to end all scholarships for all student athletes, so they are all equally screwed and no one gains a competitive recruitment advantage of offering a union shop.

 

[downtown]

Northwestern players will vote on whether to unionize this week. Thanks to a huge pushback from both their highly popular coach and some well-placed Northwestern Alumni in the business community, many folks (including me), are expecting the players to actually vote AGAINST unionization.

Another part of that is a proposal working its way through the NCAA that will give players at schools like Northwestern most (but not all) of the things they were asking for anyway, like a trust for ex-players to use to come back and finish school, a cost-of-attendance stipend, and rules that are designed to further limit the amount of hours that could be spent on football. Healthcare costs, perhaps the lynchpin of the unionization proposal, will not be addressed though. I believe the best way for players to win that concession, outside of the NCAA falling apart under the weight of lawsuits, is for unionization.

I know there are a few other schools where students are kicking around the idea of pursuing a union, but based on the pushback at Northwestern, I'd be surprised if it happens in the immediate future (i.e, before this football season starts in August).

 

[Birdjaguar]

The NCAA and the sports media companies are totally exploiting "students" by paying off colleges and coaches. Students receiving scholarships to play televised sports should be paid as professionals hired by the schools. While employed, they should not go to classes or be considered students at all. They are would hired guns to make their employer look good on TV.

Paying college players would ruin the current business model for the NCAA and ESPN, but it needs changing. If done right, college sports would give the current pros a run for their money.

 

[Zack]

Paying college players would ruin the current business model for the NCAA and ESPN

Actually, the SEC has been quite successful the last decade or so, and ESPN loves them - even gave them their own network.

Spoiler :

 

[Core Imposter]

I haven't read the thread at all so I am just commenting on the concept in general.

There are two big problems with the current setup. First, the majority of the athletes getting a scholarship aren't even prepared for college. Second, student athletes are for the most part full time players and even if they were capable of doing college level work, they would not have time.

So mostly a few get pro careers and a few make socioeconomic connections that will be valuable to them later in life. And a cultural experience.

Most of them are just exploited.

I'd like to see the system work like this: Players get a full academic scholarship in exchange for their athletic play. They should not be required to go to class during their playing years, except for optional (but potentially extensive) preparatory classes. After their playing eligibility ends they get 4 years of regular curricula education anytime in the next decade (which allows them to pursue a pro career if they like).

If a player does a one and done they'd be owed one year of school. If a player gets hurt and can't play he or she gets the full four years.

Beyond that a general liberalization of allowances could be done but it has to take into account that non-revenue sport athletes aren't going to get these perks so it needs to be a minimalist approach. In all cases you need to understand that a lot of the revenue goes to worthy uses. Its not all going to pay sky high coaching salaries.

That's my bright idea for fixing the world.

 

[Zack]

Sports do not require the huge time commitment year round. Your system would have them sitting on their asses in the offseason, instead of going to classes.

 

[downtown]

There are two big problems with the current setup. First, the majority of the athletes getting a scholarship aren't even prepared for college.

I actually don't think there is evidence for this. It may be true for a certain subset of high profile football and basketball players, but not for student athletes generally.

Sports do not require the huge time commitment year round. .

Yes they do. At least, football and basketball do.

 

[Core Imposter]

I actually don't think there is evidence for this. It may be true for a certain subset of high profile football and basketball players, but not for student athletes generally.

I thought about changing it to "significant percentage". I admit I have no evidence. Outside of the one lady at UNC, I doubt anyone is tracking it. And she is probably somewhat biased. But I believe it is a pretty big problem. I think that what went on at UNC is a pretty good snapshot of behavior across the spectrum of the big schools. If UNC is no outlier then its a practice that needs to be addressed.

I just think that the very least that the NCAA should do is give the players a real chance at an education.

 

[Zack]

Yes they do. At least, football and basketball do.

There is still a significant time commitment, but not nearly as large as when the sport is in season. It's not large enough to make the claim that there is insufficient time to go to class. For that matter, I've had football and basketball players in several of my classes, and they attended every class/lecture/whatever, regardless of the time of year.

 

[downtown]

I thought about changing it to "significant percentage". I admit I have no evidence. Outside of the one lady at UNC, I doubt anyone is tracking it. And she is probably somewhat biased. But I believe it is a pretty big problem. I think that what went on at UNC is a pretty good snapshot of behavior across the spectrum of the big schools. If UNC is no outlier then its a practice that needs to be addressed.

I just think that the very least that the NCAA should do is give the players a real chance at an education.

I completely agree that there are NCAA polices that prohibit athletes from taking full advantage of their education, but I don't think there is evidence to suggest that what happened at UNC is systemic, or the norm. That was a spectacular example of wholesale fraud, and one that could (or at least should) have given folks prison time. It led to the dismissal of a university president. It was, and continues to be, a *huge* scandal.

There is still a significant time commitment, but not nearly as large as when the sport is in season. It's not large enough to make the claim that there is insufficient time to go to class. For that matter, I've had football and basketball players in several of my classes, and they attended every class/lecture/whatever, regardless of the time of year.

Actually, that's exactly what they claimed, and that claim was upheld by the NLRB that ruled that NW football players were employees, not students. Players still go to class (I went to class with several OSU athletes, including a few current professional athletes), but the program may set their schedule, keep them out of certain majors, labs, or other academic opportunities.

Major college football and basketball are NOT 20 hour a week commitments, no matter what the NCAA says. The way they formally track hour commitments is completely nuts, and has no basis in the reality of what players actually experience now.

 

[Zack]

Well, you are far more knowledgeable than me on the issue, so I defer to your judgement and take your word for it.