College Football 2023

Stonedfish said:
Maybe this is why the NCAA suggested new schools can pay athletes / NIL rules earlier this week.
SF

www.espn.com

Athletes sue NCAA, Power 5 for not getting paid

Three athletes have sued the Power 5 conferences for not allowing athletes to get paid.
www.espn.com www.espn.com
Click to expand...
I can't believe that it has taken this long. The fact that athletes have not been able to bargain for their compensation for their labor either individually or collectively has long been an enormous injustice. I have never heard one argument that in any way made any sense as to why it has been legal for the employers (D-1 schools) to collude via NCAA rules that they create to disallow the basic free market right for labor to negotiate their compensation in any manor.
Choosing one university or the other is not negotiation. Having a choice is not negotiation.
As much as I enjoy watching college athletics, the way in which D-1 athletics has been set up is akin to modern indentured servitude.
Historically, the ability of he athlete to even accept money from other employers through advertising or speaking engagements has been disallowed. This is where NUIL comes in. The employer, who is colluding with the other employers can not also dictate that the employee can't find other paid work. NIL money has nothing to do with the collusion that the schools are still actively engaged in. The employee still should retain the right to negotiate their compensation either individually or collectively without the labor market being manipulated via the employers colluding.
 
charles sullivan said:
I can't believe that it has taken this long. The fact that athletes have not been able to bargain for their compensation for their labor either individually or collectively has long been an enormous injustice. I have never heard one argument that in any way made any sense as to why it has been legal for the employers (D-1 schools) to collude via NCAA rules that they create to disallow the basic free market right for labor to negotiate their compensation in any manor.
Choosing one university or the other is not negotiation. Having a choice is not negotiation.
As much as I enjoy watching college athletics, the way in which D-1 athletics has been set up is akin to modern indentured servitude.
Historically, the ability of he athlete to even accept money from other employers through advertising or speaking engagements has been disallowed. This is where NUIL comes in. The employer, who is colluding with the other employers can not also dictate that the employee can't find other paid work. NIL money has nothing to do with the collusion that the schools are still actively engaged in. The employee still should retain the right to negotiate their compensation either individually or collectively without the labor market being manipulated via the employers colluding.
Click to expand...

I think the NCAA knows they are going to lose......
SF
 
The NCAA has always made the argument that students participating in athletics, like the students in the school band or a play or any one of a number of extracurricular activities, are NOT employees; they are students. Therefore, if they are not employees, they do not have to be paid (and no benefits either). There are concerns that if athletes must be treated as employees, many division II and III schools would have to gut their athletic programs because they lack the resources to pay the players. And if athletes were to be paid, ALL athletes would have to be paid, see Title IX. The NIL arrangements were an indirect workaround (a fig leaf) that allowed students to be paid via "outside" supporter groups, but not classify them as employees if the money were to come directly from the universities.
Steve
 
Cabezon said:
The NCAA has always made the argument that students participating in athletics, like the students in the school band or a play or any one of a number of extracurricular activities, are NOT employees; they are students. Therefore, if they are not employees, they do not have to be paid (and no benefits either). There are concerns that if athletes must be treated as employees, many division II and III schools would have to gut their athletic programs because they lack the resources to pay the players. And if athletes were to be paid, ALL athletes would have to be paid, see Title IX. The NIL arrangements were an indirect workaround (a fig leaf) that allowed students to be paid via "outside" supporter groups, but not classify them as employees if the money were to come directly from the universities.
Steve
Click to expand...
Not to mention the liability implications were they to be injured "on the job" thus costing the athlete potentially millions in lost revenue after their college playing days are done.
 
Like Watergate…….”Follow the Money”
Between the NIL, the new NCAA Play for Pay and the Vegas et al betting lines I’m sure at least 4 of those 3 points 🤫 may be a valid reason why Alabama is involved.
 
Cabezon said:
The NCAA has always made the argument that students participating in athletics, like the students in the school band or a play or any one of a number of extracurricular activities, are NOT employees; they are students. Therefore, if they are not employees, they do not have to be paid (and no benefits either). There are concerns that if athletes must be treated as employees, many division II and III schools would have to gut their athletic programs because they lack the resources to pay the players. And if athletes were to be paid, ALL athletes would have to be paid, see Title IX. The NIL arrangements were an indirect workaround (a fig leaf) that allowed students to be paid via "outside" supporter groups, but not classify them as employees if the money were to come directly from the universities.
Steve
Click to expand...
NIL payments happened because it was found that the NCAA was violating anti-trust laws by not allowing the athletes to make money of of their likeness. That was collusion.

It is also collusion to not allow them to negotiate their compensation either individually or collectively. It is collusion. Plain and simple.

The issue with the NCAA's argument that the athletes are not employees is that they are employees. The definition of employee is: a person who is hired to work for another or for a business, firm, etc, in return for payment. D-1 athletics is a business. People are employed by it and profit from it. Corporations profit from it.

Every person at the NCAA tournament is either being paid to be at the game or acquired a ticket to be there that has value. It is a business. The athletes are providing the entertainment in an entertainment business.

The NCAA has done this to themselves. To keep from blowing up the current way that intercollegiate athletics are conducted, the NCAA would need to have a players union that negotiated on behalf of all athletes,. This is good old fashioned collective bargaining. Having fought against collective bargaining rights for so long, the NCAA finds itself in a position where the athletes may finally be given the right to negotiate their salary on an individual basis. Those athletes from programs that do not generate income for their schools have a lot to lose. They have little to no value financially or do their sports. This is sad in some ways but there are some real issues with distributing money from men's basketball and football to all the other sports. Among them are racial and financial issues where we take money generated by athletes who tend to be poorer and are more likely to be black and use it on sports dominated by more affluent and far whiter participants. This article from the whacky left wing social justice dominated National Bureau of Economic Research does a better job of explaining the redistribution of income at the power 5 conferences:
www.nber.org

Revenue Redistribution in Big-Time College Sports

www.nber.org www.nber.org


NCAA football and basketball have become far too big and profitable to remain "amateur". Having not paid attention to the repressive model that they have created, the NCAA and their member schools have become little more than a reverse Robin Hood cabal. Although I do love watching the product, I can't help but think that it should and needs to be blown up completely.
 
charles sullivan said:
NIL payments happened because it was found that the NCAA was violating anti-trust laws by not allowing the athletes to make money of of their likeness. That was collusion.

It is also collusion to not allow them to negotiate their compensation either individually or collectively. It is collusion. Plain and simple.

The issue with the NCAA's argument that the athletes are not employees is that they are employees. The definition of employee is: a person who is hired to work for another or for a business, firm, etc, in return for payment. D-1 athletics is a business. People are employed by it and profit from it. Corporations profit from it.

Every person at the NCAA tournament is either being paid to be at the game or acquired a ticket to be there that has value. It is a business. The athletes are providing the entertainment in an entertainment business.

The NCAA has done this to themselves. To keep from blowing up the current way that intercollegiate athletics are conducted, the NCAA would need to have a players union that negotiated on behalf of all athletes,. This is good old fashioned collective bargaining. Having fought against collective bargaining rights for so long, the NCAA finds itself in a position where the athletes may finally be given the right to negotiate their salary on an individual basis. Those athletes from programs that do not generate income for their schools have a lot to lose. They have little to no value financially or do their sports. This is sad in some ways but there are some real issues with distributing money from men's basketball and football to all the other sports. Among them are racial and financial issues where we take money generated by athletes who tend to be poorer and are more likely to be black and use it on sports dominated by more affluent and far whiter participants. This article from the whacky left wing social justice dominated National Bureau of Economic Research does a better job of explaining the redistribution of income at the power 5 conferences:
www.nber.org

Revenue Redistribution in Big-Time College Sports

www.nber.org www.nber.org


NCAA football and basketball have become far too big and profitable to remain "amateur". Having not paid attention to the repressive model that they have created, the NCAA and their member schools have become little more than a reverse Robin Hood cabal. Although I do love watching the product, I can't help but think that it should and needs to be blown up completely.
Click to expand...
I sympathize with many of the points that you have raised. The issue of equity even became an issue in Varsity Blues scandal when it was pointed out that the athletes admitted to play "Olympic" sports (e.g., tennis, squash, fencing) tend to be far whiter and far richer than the general student body. I agree that the future of the total enterprise of intercollegiate sports is in huge flux and is likely to look quite different in a few years. One wonders how the "Olympic" sports can survive if the funds transferred from high-revenue basketball and football programs are cut off. And the title IX issues are very complex.
Frankly, I wouldn't mind seeing universities getting out of the business of big-time athletics. If students want to participate in club sports with minimal funding support, then fine. Minor league hockey, basketball, and baseball already exist. The NFL has enough cash to subsidize a developmental league. But the overall landscape for sports outside of these (and for women) is dire / bleak.
Steve
 
Last edited:
charles sullivan said:
I can't believe that it has taken this long. The fact that athletes have not been able to bargain for their compensation for their labor either individually or collectively has long been an enormous injustice. I have never heard one argument that in any way made any sense as to why it has been legal for the employers (D-1 schools) to collude via NCAA rules that they create to disallow the basic free market right for labor to negotiate their compensation in any manor.
Choosing one university or the other is not negotiation. Having a choice is not negotiation.
As much as I enjoy watching college athletics, the way in which D-1 athletics has been set up is akin to modern indentured servitude.
Historically, the ability of he athlete to even accept money from other employers through advertising or speaking engagements has been disallowed. This is where NUIL comes in. The employer, who is colluding with the other employers can not also dictate that the employee can't find other paid work. NIL money has nothing to do with the collusion that the schools are still actively engaged in. The employee still should retain the right to negotiate their compensation either individually or collectively without the labor market being manipulated via the employers colluding.
Click to expand...
My wife works at a University, and we were talking about this just last night. She was unsure about paying athletes and what it would entail. I said " What is the difference between them and the students who work for you? To that she tilted her head and said" Hmmm".
 
Cabezon said:
I sympathize with many of the points that you have raised. The issue of equity even became an issue in Varsity Blues scandal when it was pointed out that the athletes admitted to play "Olympic" sports (e.g., tennis, squash, fencing) tend to be far whiter and far richer than the general student body. I agree that the future of the total enterprise of intercollegiate sports is in huge flux and is likely to look quite different in a few years. One wonders how the "Olympic" sports can survive if the funds transferred from high-revenue basketball and football programs are cut off. And the title IX issues are very complex.
Frankly, I wouldn't mind seeing universities getting out of the business of big-time athletics. If students want to participate in club sports with minimal funding support, then fine. Minor league hockey, basketball, and baseball already exist. The NFL has enough cash to subsidize a developmental league. But the overall landscape for sports outside of these (and for women) is dire / bleak.
Steve
Click to expand...
I honestly don't care about oltmpic sports.They suck to watch. I have watched my kids run the 4x100 relay. Its only interesting in proportion to my interest in the participents.
The straight toothed white people sports survive in other places where they are not tied to a college.
As far as womans sports go, I agree that it they would be hurt. There is no question. I am the son of a college basketball player and the brother of a scholarship womans basketball athlete. Title 9 has led to equity and advancement.
This is where collective bargaining could have maximized the benefit of revenue sharing. Unfortunately, it has been fought tooth and nail by the benefactors of the current system.
 
NCAA…No Clue At All

My dad was in the army, so I usually rooted for Army…until local guy Niumatololo became head coach, then I rooted for Navy…now that he’s no longer the coach, I think I root for Army again.

I think it’s telling that the head coach of Army & Navy makes more than four times the amount we pay the President of the USA…he’s the highest paid federal employee
 
I was in Jr. High and watched a very good 1980 UW team host Navy and Huskies got their asses handed to them and lost 24-10. UW was a rose bowl team that year too but lost to Michigan.
 
In most states a college sports coach is the highest paid state employee... like 40 out of 50 I think.
Would not be surprised to find out that an ex coach is the second highest paid state employee in some states.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top