- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: NLRB suit on behalf of 12 USC football players started 12/18
Posted on 12/29/23 at 12:07 pm to MOT
Posted on 12/29/23 at 12:07 pm to MOT
quote:
Because contrary to what most people said before, they got much more than the tangible benefits (tuition, room and board, etc.) afforded to them by their scholarship. They got world class training, skill development, and branding that increased their future earnings exponentially. They didn’t want to go other places that allowed all of the things they bitched about not having, or to take their fight directly to the professional leagues who lock them out until a certain age. They wanted their cake and to eat it too. They wanted all of the extra benefits and the platform provided by the NCAA, but not to play by the NCAA’s rules.
Exactly. Players were bitching about not getting paid, the XFL said "we will take you" and virtually no players went.
Then they try to say they aren't being paid what they are worth. Outside of MAYBE 1 percent of all college athletes, a full scholarship is significantly more they they are worth to the school. The vast majority of college athletes are a net negative to the school financially.
0
Posted on 12/29/23 at 12:14 pm to Tjcajun
Now that’s funny right there I don’t care who you are
Posted on 12/29/23 at 1:59 pm to Poppy201
This needs to happen and Josh Pate was talking about this happening last year. Once this stuff becomes a job, then you csn put restrictions. You can restrict transfers by making a contract multi year and legally binding. You can restrict things the players can do on their free time (NFL doesn't allow players to do anything dangerous outside of daily things and football). You can set salary caps and set the market on pay per position.
Instead of the wild west, it will be governed.
Instead of the wild west, it will be governed.
Posted on 12/29/23 at 2:24 pm to Datbayoubengal
Are they going to pay California income tax on their compensation?
Posted on 12/29/23 at 3:26 pm to Purple Spoon
quote:they'll have to. They have to pay tax on NIL now.
Are they going to pay California income tax on their compensation?
Posted on 12/29/23 at 3:34 pm to Poppy201
This is the direction this entire mess is headed towards. NCAA completely went awol on their job.
Posted on 12/29/23 at 3:46 pm to Poppy201
Amateur sports are GONE. Time for professional farm leagues out of high school and eliminate professional paid sports in college.
And take away all antitrust legislation in professional sports.
Blow it all up.
And take away all antitrust legislation in professional sports.
Blow it all up.
Posted on 12/29/23 at 4:03 pm to Datbayoubengal
quote:
Instead of the wild west, it will be governed.
And that'll be great for the programs that still exist.
Most football teams lose money. Now we're going to ask taxpayers to spend another few million a year on a roster for every team the state is gonna keep.
This post was edited on 12/29/23 at 4:05 pm
Posted on 12/29/23 at 4:05 pm to Poppy201
quote:
If the NLRB is successful in this lawsuit, it will pave a variety of roads toward an agreement similar to professional sports...a salary cap for each university set up by governing board of college football and a free-agency period in place of the transfer portal. Collective bargaining would be granted at some level to the NCAA to protect from antitrust lawsuits.
That won't do anything more than what a stipend did. It doesn't level the playing field between teams. Individual players will still be able to profit from their NIL outside of any CBA that covers all athletes and the teams whose boosters have the deepest pockets will still be able to recruit and poach the best players. The only way the NCAA can stop this madness is to revert back to more restrictive transfer rules.
This post was edited on 12/30/23 at 2:21 pm
Posted on 12/29/23 at 4:08 pm to LSU82BILL
quote:
and the teams whose boosters have the deepest pockets will still be able to recruit and poach the best players.
Not if they're employees subject to a non-compete.
Posted on 12/29/23 at 4:17 pm to wadewilson
quote:
Not if they're employees subject to a non-compete.
Good luck with that. The NLRB considers overbroad non-compete agreements a violation of the NLRA.
Posted on 12/29/23 at 4:33 pm to Zephyrius
The new NCAA president said he was in favor of a payment structure to student athletes.
Of course it can be successfully argued these SAs can be considered employees. They provide services in exchange for compensation(whatever that may be). They are directed when and where to go by the university. The services rendered are
almost completely facilitated by university’s resources and its direction to accomplish the service. Failure to comply with school policies can result in rescission of the scholarship and/or expulsion of the student athlete.
Nonetheless, I think this is all meant to sever all the non-p5 schools with a new entity as an exclusive league with a 12 team playoff. I believe the B10 pres said a few months back this is moving towards an “AFC-NFC structure” or something to that effect. I can see the “conference” as they are now carved up to make more geographical sense if this is the end game.
Speaking as an advocate, that would be sick. No more Ball St, Grambling non-conference games. You play Oregon in Autzen or Penn State comes to Tiger Stadium as a non-conference matchup. That would be a beautiful thing.
A major issue is that mid majors like UL need their own league so they could compete for a national championships like McNeese can. Whether they will have the resources to pull that off WTF knows.
Of course it can be successfully argued these SAs can be considered employees. They provide services in exchange for compensation(whatever that may be). They are directed when and where to go by the university. The services rendered are
almost completely facilitated by university’s resources and its direction to accomplish the service. Failure to comply with school policies can result in rescission of the scholarship and/or expulsion of the student athlete.
Nonetheless, I think this is all meant to sever all the non-p5 schools with a new entity as an exclusive league with a 12 team playoff. I believe the B10 pres said a few months back this is moving towards an “AFC-NFC structure” or something to that effect. I can see the “conference” as they are now carved up to make more geographical sense if this is the end game.
Speaking as an advocate, that would be sick. No more Ball St, Grambling non-conference games. You play Oregon in Autzen or Penn State comes to Tiger Stadium as a non-conference matchup. That would be a beautiful thing.
A major issue is that mid majors like UL need their own league so they could compete for a national championships like McNeese can. Whether they will have the resources to pull that off WTF knows.
Posted on 12/29/23 at 5:16 pm to Poppy201
Well, a salary cap is functionally meaningless here — because the Supreme Court ruled that caps related to NIL money are unconstitutional.
Any “cap” can & will be circumvented by “autograph signing” events etc.
Also, if they’re employees of the school does that mean they have to be paid with school money? Because as high as tuition is, no one is going to tolerate any portion of that going to kids playing sports who also get scholarships to play sports.
Any “cap” can & will be circumvented by “autograph signing” events etc.
Also, if they’re employees of the school does that mean they have to be paid with school money? Because as high as tuition is, no one is going to tolerate any portion of that going to kids playing sports who also get scholarships to play sports.
This post was edited on 12/29/23 at 5:31 pm
Posted on 12/29/23 at 7:51 pm to PP7 for heisman
quote:
This would result in dozens of schools dropping football entirely
Once college football is dropped, you can say goodbye to any non-revenue sport. So, basically all of them. College athletics would cease to exist as it is now. It would go back to rec sports playing other schools rec teams and it would leave thousands of athletes with nowhere to go. People get greedy and ruin it for everyone. This is what arbitration was invented for. Once the court is involved, everybody loses eventually.
Posted on 12/29/23 at 8:13 pm to PP7 for heisman
quote:
It would be much, much worse than what we have right now. The entirety of CFB unionizing would likely be the end of all non-revenue producing male sports in college athletics due to Title IX. Can pretty much guarantee you there would be no salary cap. It's likely you'd see typical eligibility requirements/limits thrown out the window entirely. How can someone who's considered an employee of the school be limited to 5 years of participation? That would be challenged in court and the school/NCAA would lose.
What lawsuits like this one are moving us toward is the P5 completely pulling away from the NCAA and separating ties from the universities. This new entity will license names, logos, colors, etc from the universities and rent facilities as a way to move some money back to the schools and keep them on board.
This ends any Title 9 impact and paves the way for direct employment, and contracts based on collective bargaining. It will also effectively end the current Wild West portal setup and end the collectives since teams will pay players directly. NIL won’t matter since these players will really be paid pros at this point, but the only outside payments will be endorsements.
This is certainly not good. It basically kills the G5 and will likely close down some programs or relegate them to FCS level. It will also end a lot of the best aspects of college football. But it will bring stability back to the sport and end the current chaos. I actually think it will preserve more fans and what we love about the sport than sticking with any possible variation of the current path we are on.
Posted on 12/29/23 at 8:19 pm to Poppy201
quote:
The suit by the NLRB on behalf of 12 USC football players seeks to classify football players at USC as employees and not student-athletes as they now are classified.
So as EMPLOYEES and not "student-athletes" they would be paid to work(play football) and not play school. Therefore they would likely not be required to maintain any certain GPA.
Posted on 12/29/23 at 11:05 pm to misey94
Title IX won’t escape this tidal wave because men will just identify as female and take over softball, soccer, etc. — ain't karma a bitch.
Posted on 12/30/23 at 10:23 am to Datbayoubengal
Yes but you run into the age thing, 18-21, taxes, health care, exemptions, still under parents umbrella- the wild Wild West would get technically confusing.
Lawsuits with exemptions and loopholes for each situation, state laws, A Lawyers freaking dream
Lawsuits with exemptions and loopholes for each situation, state laws, A Lawyers freaking dream
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News