- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: Northwestern players denied request to form first union for athletes
Posted on 8/17/15 at 5:02 pm to Adam Banks
Posted on 8/17/15 at 5:02 pm to Adam Banks
quote:
I hate the argument that the players are getting screwed. They get elite healthcare, room and board, and a free degree of which the majority would not qualify academically at the institution they are attending much less have a scholarship. Marshall lynch attended uc Berkley. For free. Think about that.
If they don't like it and want to profit off their image the arena league and Canada are ready and willing out of high school.
This, all of this.
Hell, a players' union probably would have a hard time negotiating better terms that what is already available to NCAA football players.
Look at the NFLPA - they can't get guaranteed contracts and let Goodell act as judge and jury. What is good for 99% of NCAA players is the current standard. The sooner people understand that, the better.
0
Posted on 8/17/15 at 5:06 pm to moneyg
quote:
People like yourself are going to be so excited to be right while the game itself and its fans are screwed. Congrats.
Per the model of amateurism, NCAA decisions should not be made for the fans' benefit. The fact that the NCAA caters to its fans (often at the detriment to its student-athletes) makes it a business, not an amateur enterprise. As such, the people providing the labor should challenge their compensation, especially with regards to capitalizing on their own names and likenesses.
quote:
The only restriction is eligibility with the NCAA itself.
In the case of football, the NCAA provides the only viable path to a career in that multi-billion dollar entertainment industry , so that's another implied restriction.
As for destroying the game itself - it's up to the NCAA to make proactive common sense changes to their policies to not let that happen. These include providing better long term medical coverage for career ending injuries, multi-year scholarships, allowing athletes to transfer directly without taking a year off if their coaching staff transfers (especially in football where athlete-scheme pairings are so important), and giving athletes some ownership of their own name.
Posted on 8/17/15 at 5:34 pm to BRIllini07
quote:
Per the model of amateurism, NCAA decisions should not be made for the fans' benefit. The fact that the NCAA caters to its fans (often at the detriment to its student-athletes) makes it a business, not an amateur enterprise. As such, the people providing the labor should challenge their compensation, especially with regards to capitalizing on their own names and likenesses.
Those people freely agree to the "compensation" that they get...and are not bound at all in any way unless they wish to remain under said agreement. It's humorous that we should call those that freely choose to play in an NCAA sanctioned sport victims.
quote:
In the case of football, the NCAA provides the only viable path to a career in that multi-billion dollar entertainment industry , so that's another implied restriction.
What you mean is that the NCAA brings a lot to the table (huge fan base, billions of dollars facilities, negotiated television deals, elite training and coaching staffs, etc.)
There is nothing preventing players from going to the NFL without playing NCAA football. There are semi-pro leagues, the CFL, Arena football, etc. that have all put players into the NFL. What you seem to be crying about is that the players get the most exposure from the NCAA...yet you somehow view that as a right of the player vs. a benefit afforded by the NCAA.
The NCAA doesn't prevent players from going straight to the NFL...that's an NFL decision.
quote:
As for destroying the game itself - it's up to the NCAA to make proactive common sense changes to their policies to not let that happen. These include providing better long term medical coverage for career ending injuries, multi-year scholarships, allowing athletes to transfer directly without taking a year off if their coaching staff transfers (especially in football where athlete-scheme pairings are so important), and giving athletes some ownership of their own name.
All bleeding heart stuff. Logically, the NCAA needs to offer enough of a "compensation package" to encourage the players to agree to play in the NCAA. If/when the players as a whole do not see enough value in the arrangement to play football, then things would logically change. As it stands, players are basically throwing themselves at the opportunity to play in the NCAA. It's kind of hard to make the case that they aren't getting enough value.
Posted on 8/17/15 at 5:44 pm to moneyg
At many universities graduate students because they work for professors and departments have unions and they are still students.
Considering the revenue players bring in they are essentially employees of the university and the scholarships are not given due to academic merit. They get scholarships to play football. They perform work (play football) in return for room and board and schooling. That is the difference in my opinion on why athletes should get a better share of the pie.
Considering the revenue players bring in they are essentially employees of the university and the scholarships are not given due to academic merit. They get scholarships to play football. They perform work (play football) in return for room and board and schooling. That is the difference in my opinion on why athletes should get a better share of the pie.
Posted on 8/17/15 at 5:47 pm to Baloo
The vast majority of college athletes don't generate revenue, let alone a net profit, for their school. If we are to reform the system entirely, we could risk upending college sports as we know it. It would make the ramifications of Title IX look like child's play.
There are a number of problems that people bring up, with no uniformity of solutions. Usually, the goal posts of the situation shift between how much a Leonard Fournette generates for LSU vs. the issues of players not having time to have a job. Those are entirely separate issues.
Unfortunately, I think the tide of public opinion is turning such that your average MSB poster thinks he is trying to help out an underprivileged kid and that some drunk tailgater posting on the rant is a selfish racist trying to keep college athletes down. I think that's overly simplistic and ignores some of the huge difficulties in coming up with a solution...ie, where does all the money come from?
There are a number of problems that people bring up, with no uniformity of solutions. Usually, the goal posts of the situation shift between how much a Leonard Fournette generates for LSU vs. the issues of players not having time to have a job. Those are entirely separate issues.
Unfortunately, I think the tide of public opinion is turning such that your average MSB poster thinks he is trying to help out an underprivileged kid and that some drunk tailgater posting on the rant is a selfish racist trying to keep college athletes down. I think that's overly simplistic and ignores some of the huge difficulties in coming up with a solution...ie, where does all the money come from?
This post was edited on 8/17/15 at 5:49 pm
Posted on 8/17/15 at 5:53 pm to Ralph_Wiggum
quote:
At many universities graduate students because they work for professors and departments have unions and they are still students
...quite possibly the worst formed sentence I've ever read on here. You want to try again?
quote:
Considering the revenue players bring in they are essentially employees of the university and the scholarships are not given due to academic merit. They get scholarships to play football. They perform work (play football) in return for room and board and schooling. That is the difference in my opinion on why athletes should get a better share of the pie.
Revenue is driven largely from the following of the universities...moreso than the players. The players are pawns in the marketing game. People show up to see LSU...not any single player.
Nobody ever said the scholarships were due to academic merit. That's a strawman you are building.
The players agree to their "compensation", and are free to leave at any point with zero penalty other than continuing to play under the NCAA.
Posted on 8/18/15 at 11:14 am to Ralph_Wiggum
As I said, I have no issues with NCAA athletes being considered employees. But when it comes to them getting "a better share of the pie", then they should be required to pay taxes on that share like the rest of us working stiffs. And when it comes to giving them "more control over their names": do you honestly not see the danger that that will lead to: come to UGA. Our boosters will pay you $2K for each autograph. Come to UK instead, as our boosters will pay you $5K . And that is exactly what will happen. It will be open bidding like it was in the Old Wild West days.
Posted on 8/18/15 at 11:50 am to Ralph_Wiggum
quote:
At many universities graduate students because they work for professors and departments have unions and they are still students.
Graduate Students are excluded from Federal bargaining rights under the Taft-Hartley Act's, they are state employees. It is then up to the states to allow university employees to collectively bargain.
24 states say no, 11 other states allow employees, but haven't ruled on students. Ohio said yes, to employees but not students.
Only 14 states allow students to collectively bargain.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News