This topic contains 32 replies, has 10 voices, and was last updated by AvatarAvatar Tongue-Out-Like-23 10 years, 1 month ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #53603
    AvatarAvatar
    kazam
    Participant

     Just read an article on espn about Kain Colter beggining the stages of a union for division one mens football and basketball players. Do you on the site think that this could be a step towards ultimately paying collegiate athletes? Is it a positive or a negative? What do you guys think?

     

     

     

     

     

     

    0
  • #865885
    AvatarAvatar
    The Q
    Participant

     This thing will end up in court as the NCAA and the schools will argue that players are not employees and thus shouldn’t be allowed to unionize. 

     

    My own personal opinion is that players should take a swing at the anti-trust laws as the courts haven’t been very kind to th NCAA over the years. And limiting scholarship amounts, and compensation for a player’s services could be enough to trigger treble damages as well. 

     

     

    0
    • #866164
      AvatarAvatar
      Mopgrass
      Participant

      It is an interesting and unprecedented legal situation. Are they workers? It’s almost an internship, where there is the promise of a job later.. but since they wouldn’t get a job from the NCAA (it would be the NBA), it isn’t that either.

      I’m not sure what the solution is, but wherever you find a super rich guy, you’ll also find some cheap labor.

      0
    • #866267
      AvatarAvatar
      Mopgrass
      Participant

      It is an interesting and unprecedented legal situation. Are they workers? It’s almost an internship, where there is the promise of a job later.. but since they wouldn’t get a job from the NCAA (it would be the NBA), it isn’t that either.

      I’m not sure what the solution is, but wherever you find a super rich guy, you’ll also find some cheap labor.

      0
  • #865989
    AvatarAvatar
    The Q
    Participant

     This thing will end up in court as the NCAA and the schools will argue that players are not employees and thus shouldn’t be allowed to unionize. 

     

    My own personal opinion is that players should take a swing at the anti-trust laws as the courts haven’t been very kind to th NCAA over the years. And limiting scholarship amounts, and compensation for a player’s services could be enough to trigger treble damages as well. 

     

     

    0
  • #865904
    AvatarAvatar
    The Q
    Participant

     Let me be clear that the players won’t be able to do both at the same time. If they’re a union then the anti-trust laws are prohibited under the non-statutory labor exemption. 

    However if this fails and they still want a piece of the piethen it will be antitrust law claims which I believe were a part of the Ed O’Bannon/Sam Keller lawsuits. 

     

     

    0
  • #866007
    AvatarAvatar
    The Q
    Participant

     Let me be clear that the players won’t be able to do both at the same time. If they’re a union then the anti-trust laws are prohibited under the non-statutory labor exemption. 

    However if this fails and they still want a piece of the piethen it will be antitrust law claims which I believe were a part of the Ed O’Bannon/Sam Keller lawsuits. 

     

     

    0
  • #865906
    AvatarAvatar
    Tongue-Out-Like-23
    Participant

    I like this.  The NCAA is a communist program, it’s good to see someone fighting back.  The NCAA is in everyone’s pockets and they pocket billions of dollars a year.

    0
    • #866050
      AvatarAvatar
      Status Quo
      Participant

      The NCAA looks to take all the money and not share it with the student athlete that generates the big money. In communism, the money would be shared amongst everyone, leaving no one entity gaining more than the other. You are right about the students fighting against the system, it’s long overdue. The NCAA is the last legal form of free labor in America, whether or not a student athlete gets an education is secondary as long as the money is being generated for those who can collect it. 

      0
    • #865946
      AvatarAvatar
      Status Quo
      Participant

      The NCAA looks to take all the money and not share it with the student athlete that generates the big money. In communism, the money would be shared amongst everyone, leaving no one entity gaining more than the other. You are right about the students fighting against the system, it’s long overdue. The NCAA is the last legal form of free labor in America, whether or not a student athlete gets an education is secondary as long as the money is being generated for those who can collect it. 

      0
      • #866139
        AvatarAvatar
        Tongue-Out-Like-23
        Participant

        You’re thinking of a socialism — not communism.

        0
      • #866035
        AvatarAvatar
        Tongue-Out-Like-23
        Participant

        You’re thinking of a socialism — not communism.

        0
  • #866010
    AvatarAvatar
    Tongue-Out-Like-23
    Participant

    I like this.  The NCAA is a communist program, it’s good to see someone fighting back.  The NCAA is in everyone’s pockets and they pocket billions of dollars a year.

    0
  • #865926
    AvatarAvatar
    Chewy
    Participant

     and create youth development programs/leagues that are similar to European soccer. They are using AAU/ NCAA to do that for them for the bargain price of 0 dollars. They even made HS studs go to college for a year to get publicity behind these kids so that they sell merchandise right off the bat their rookie year.

    "The FA went ahead and created a new blueprint for player development which mandated that every Premiership club must have a Youth Academy with specific requirements for staff qualifications and licensing, facilities, training, games, player ages, and supporting educational opportunities for the players."

    This would allow youth players to get coached by people who know what they are doing, in a way that helps them grow and will eliminate some of the "financial foul play" that always surrounds top players.

    Doubt this will happen since we just had the Millionaires vs Billionaires lock out battle recently.

     

    0
    • #866054
      AvatarAvatar
      King Calucha
      Participant

      This would be a solution for the unfair treatment of young athletes. However, this would cause big franchises to have more advantage, because they are more likely to attract the young players. Also, if they do this, college basketball would be dead.

      0
    • #865950
      AvatarAvatar
      King Calucha
      Participant

      This would be a solution for the unfair treatment of young athletes. However, this would cause big franchises to have more advantage, because they are more likely to attract the young players. Also, if they do this, college basketball would be dead.

      0
      • #866133
        AvatarAvatar
        Chewy
        Participant

         when we could watch a youth Bulls vs youth Heat team? The level of talent on the floor would undoubtable be higher than prep schools and NCAA.

        Let Universities be about academics, rather than sloppily and unfairly handling athletics. (Obviously, universities wouldn’t want to lose the money athletics bring in…)

        0
      • #866029
        AvatarAvatar
        Chewy
        Participant

         when we could watch a youth Bulls vs youth Heat team? The level of talent on the floor would undoubtable be higher than prep schools and NCAA.

        Let Universities be about academics, rather than sloppily and unfairly handling athletics. (Obviously, universities wouldn’t want to lose the money athletics bring in…)

        0
        • #866148
          AvatarAvatar
          King Calucha
          Participant

          Sure, I wouldn’t miss NCAA BB. The point is… that this would totally eliminate a draft system and automatically give big market teams an advantage. You’d see the best youngsters joining the Lakers, Knicks, Bulls, Heat, etc.

          0
        • #866251
          AvatarAvatar
          King Calucha
          Participant

          Sure, I wouldn’t miss NCAA BB. The point is… that this would totally eliminate a draft system and automatically give big market teams an advantage. You’d see the best youngsters joining the Lakers, Knicks, Bulls, Heat, etc.

          0
        • #866180
          AvatarAvatar
          Tongue-Out-Like-23
          Participant

          Allow me to play Devil’s Advocate.

          Let’s look at the other side of the coin.  A lot of players never make it to the NBA, throw their money away if they do, or have a short-lived career.

          This is where the education and degree that they received in college helps them.  We’ve seen it many times, an NBA player goes broke 5 years after leaving the league but since some of them have a college education, they are able to get a decent job making a good living for the rest of their lives.

          If we exclude the NCAA system, we are keeping these young players away from school.  Which means, if they blow out a knee or fail at the NBA level, they are out of luck for the rest of their lives because they put too many eggs in one basket.

          Even if a player goes to college for 1 year and drops out as soon as they make the NBA, they still have 1 year of college experience and a reason to go back if their financial situation goes awry.  

          In short, the NCAA allows student-athletes to receive a degree and even pays for some, if not most of it, while they are on their journey to the NBA.  Which is something that a simple AAU/DLeague style league, simply would not be able to do, especially if they play multiple games a week while going to different cities and states around the country.

          0
        • #866283
          AvatarAvatar
          Tongue-Out-Like-23
          Participant

          Allow me to play Devil’s Advocate.

          Let’s look at the other side of the coin.  A lot of players never make it to the NBA, throw their money away if they do, or have a short-lived career.

          This is where the education and degree that they received in college helps them.  We’ve seen it many times, an NBA player goes broke 5 years after leaving the league but since some of them have a college education, they are able to get a decent job making a good living for the rest of their lives.

          If we exclude the NCAA system, we are keeping these young players away from school.  Which means, if they blow out a knee or fail at the NBA level, they are out of luck for the rest of their lives because they put too many eggs in one basket.

          Even if a player goes to college for 1 year and drops out as soon as they make the NBA, they still have 1 year of college experience and a reason to go back if their financial situation goes awry.  

          In short, the NCAA allows student-athletes to receive a degree and even pays for some, if not most of it, while they are on their journey to the NBA.  Which is something that a simple AAU/DLeague style league, simply would not be able to do, especially if they play multiple games a week while going to different cities and states around the country.

          0
  • #866030
    AvatarAvatar
    Chewy
    Participant

     and create youth development programs/leagues that are similar to European soccer. They are using AAU/ NCAA to do that for them for the bargain price of 0 dollars. They even made HS studs go to college for a year to get publicity behind these kids so that they sell merchandise right off the bat their rookie year.

    "The FA went ahead and created a new blueprint for player development which mandated that every Premiership club must have a Youth Academy with specific requirements for staff qualifications and licensing, facilities, training, games, player ages, and supporting educational opportunities for the players."

    This would allow youth players to get coached by people who know what they are doing, in a way that helps them grow and will eliminate some of the "financial foul play" that always surrounds top players.

    Doubt this will happen since we just had the Millionaires vs Billionaires lock out battle recently.

     

    0
  • #866059
    AvatarAvatar
    DolanCare
    Participant

    This is definitely going to be dredged out in court. If a judge rules that broadly that players are employees then things could get interesting. Do schools get to decide salaries, do players get paid a percentage of program profits? I think a stipend is a good starting off point, would also protect smaller schools. We shall see. 

    0
  • #866163
    AvatarAvatar
    DolanCare
    Participant

    This is definitely going to be dredged out in court. If a judge rules that broadly that players are employees then things could get interesting. Do schools get to decide salaries, do players get paid a percentage of program profits? I think a stipend is a good starting off point, would also protect smaller schools. We shall see. 

    0
  • #866111
    AvatarAvatar
    llperez

    I can kinda see the argument for football players because they have to stay 3 years and don’t really have any other options. BUt I will never understand the argument that basketball players are treated unfairly. They have tons of options including overseas or the nba dleague. No one is making them go to college. They also only have to stay 1 season if they do go to college. And not even a full season, they can drop out in march or april or whenever the season ends and immediately hire an agent and start getting ready for the draft if they want.

    0
  • #866215
    AvatarAvatar
    llperez

    I can kinda see the argument for football players because they have to stay 3 years and don’t really have any other options. BUt I will never understand the argument that basketball players are treated unfairly. They have tons of options including overseas or the nba dleague. No one is making them go to college. They also only have to stay 1 season if they do go to college. And not even a full season, they can drop out in march or april or whenever the season ends and immediately hire an agent and start getting ready for the draft if they want.

    0
  • #866184
    AvatarAvatar
    Grandmama
    Participant

     I actually did a speech on paying college athletes when I was in college.

     

    On one hand, schools are profiting from player likenesses.  Think about how much money Florida State has made of Jameis Winston, A&M with Manziel, Duke with Jabari Parker.  Jerseys, tickets, memorabilia.  Schools make tons of money off these kids.  It would only seem fair that they receive some piece of the profit.

     

    But then on the other hand, there are a few problems.  Most athletes are on scholarship, so people will argue they are getting free schooling, that’s enough money.

     

    The other problem is the amount of money schools will pay kids just to play.  Think about it.  It’s basically free agency, who’s the highest bidder?  That creates a huge problem.  The wealthiest schools have a huge leg up on schools who don’t have as much to spend.  Major problem.

     

     

     

     

     

     

    0
    • #866198
      AvatarAvatar
      Tongue-Out-Like-23
      Participant

      I choose to disagree with those counter-arguments.

      Most athletes are on scholarships and get free-schooling.  But think about this, tuition for a school is 10g-15g per year.  First off, the school isn’t spending 10k-15k per year, they’re only paying 2k-4k per year to have a student attend their school, which isn’t all that much really.

      If basketball players would get cash on hand for what the colleges are spending, they would be receiving about $5,000 maximum for 6 months of work — October – March, NCAA season basically.

      That means they would be receiving a maximum of about $400 every two weeks.  In California, working minimum wage as well as part-time, one makes a minimum of $320.

      In essence, student-athletes are getting paid about $10 an hour for their work while they make the NCAA billions of dollars per year.  Doesn’t seem very fair because, to be honest, the NCAA is simply a middle-man between student-athletes and schools as well as a mediator between schools.

      ——————

      Now, the argument about schools being able to pay more money for better players because of their revenue.  Think of the NBA, where the small market teams get a revenue share if they don’t make as much money as the other teams.  Now implement this into the NCAA.  This won’t be a bidding war because players would be paid a fixed amount, no matter what school they attend.  This will make sure that all NCAA athletes are paid and no schools have an upper-hand.

      Since Alabama makes the most revenue, they would pay a higher percentage than say Clemson but their athletes would be compensated equally.

      Now, how much would they get paid is difficult to really judge but it should be a mixture of the federal minimum wage while working part-time as well as how much the sport/program they are affiliated with makes in total revenue and profit.

       

      0
    • #866301
      AvatarAvatar
      Tongue-Out-Like-23
      Participant

      I choose to disagree with those counter-arguments.

      Most athletes are on scholarships and get free-schooling.  But think about this, tuition for a school is 10g-15g per year.  First off, the school isn’t spending 10k-15k per year, they’re only paying 2k-4k per year to have a student attend their school, which isn’t all that much really.

      If basketball players would get cash on hand for what the colleges are spending, they would be receiving about $5,000 maximum for 6 months of work — October – March, NCAA season basically.

      That means they would be receiving a maximum of about $400 every two weeks.  In California, working minimum wage as well as part-time, one makes a minimum of $320.

      In essence, student-athletes are getting paid about $10 an hour for their work while they make the NCAA billions of dollars per year.  Doesn’t seem very fair because, to be honest, the NCAA is simply a middle-man between student-athletes and schools as well as a mediator between schools.

      ——————

      Now, the argument about schools being able to pay more money for better players because of their revenue.  Think of the NBA, where the small market teams get a revenue share if they don’t make as much money as the other teams.  Now implement this into the NCAA.  This won’t be a bidding war because players would be paid a fixed amount, no matter what school they attend.  This will make sure that all NCAA athletes are paid and no schools have an upper-hand.

      Since Alabama makes the most revenue, they would pay a higher percentage than say Clemson but their athletes would be compensated equally.

      Now, how much would they get paid is difficult to really judge but it should be a mixture of the federal minimum wage while working part-time as well as how much the sport/program they are affiliated with makes in total revenue and profit.

       

      0
    • #866305
      AvatarAvatar
      Tongue-Out-Like-23
      Participant

      Just a quick fact to show how much money they make off of these athletes.

      The NCAA March Madness tournament in 2013 made the NCAA $702 million dollars on the TV broadcast alone.

      Yes, 7-0-2 million in a 3 week period.  This isn’t even including how much they made during the regular season, ticket prices, concessions, ads, marketing, or merchandise before, during, and after the tournament.

      This is off the TV contract.  $702 million.

      Again, not counting football, hockey, soccer, or baseball.  Not counting any other sport or even the basketball regular season.  Or even tickets, merchandise, concessions, ads, marketing, or selling likenesses.

      $702 million.  And the 800-some kids that played their hearts out during the tournament didn’t even see as much as a penny.  Would it really hurt to give those 800-some kids a $1,000 bonus for making the tournament?  

      Would $850,000 really make a dent in a $702,000,000 revenue?

      0
    • #866202
      AvatarAvatar
      Tongue-Out-Like-23
      Participant

      Just a quick fact to show how much money they make off of these athletes.

      The NCAA March Madness tournament in 2013 made the NCAA $702 million dollars on the TV broadcast alone.

      Yes, 7-0-2 million in a 3 week period.  This isn’t even including how much they made during the regular season, ticket prices, concessions, ads, marketing, or merchandise before, during, and after the tournament.

      This is off the TV contract.  $702 million.

      Again, not counting football, hockey, soccer, or baseball.  Not counting any other sport or even the basketball regular season.  Or even tickets, merchandise, concessions, ads, marketing, or selling likenesses.

      $702 million.  And the 800-some kids that played their hearts out during the tournament didn’t even see as much as a penny.  Would it really hurt to give those 800-some kids a $1,000 bonus for making the tournament?  

      Would $850,000 really make a dent in a $702,000,000 revenue?

      0
  • #866287
    AvatarAvatar
    Grandmama
    Participant

     I actually did a speech on paying college athletes when I was in college.

     

    On one hand, schools are profiting from player likenesses.  Think about how much money Florida State has made of Jameis Winston, A&M with Manziel, Duke with Jabari Parker.  Jerseys, tickets, memorabilia.  Schools make tons of money off these kids.  It would only seem fair that they receive some piece of the profit.

     

    But then on the other hand, there are a few problems.  Most athletes are on scholarship, so people will argue they are getting free schooling, that’s enough money.

     

    The other problem is the amount of money schools will pay kids just to play.  Think about it.  It’s basically free agency, who’s the highest bidder?  That creates a huge problem.  The wealthiest schools have a huge leg up on schools who don’t have as much to spend.  Major problem.

     

     

     

     

     

     

    0

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login