Started By
Message
re: Division IV: Good Or Bad For SEC?
Posted on 6/2/14 at 6:15 pm to Mizz-SEC
Posted on 6/2/14 at 6:15 pm to Mizz-SEC
You have to remember that the NLRB ruling at Northwestern, that football players are employers, was based on two primary things. Revenue generated and time spent generating that revenue. NCAA's "20 hour rule" didn't carry any weight with the labor board when it was shown how much actual time football players spend on football when all the "voluntary" workouts, team meetings, film study, and travel were added up.
The recommended time restrictions are primarily a response to the NLRB ruling, not at the SEC. Since the conferences currently spend the same amount of time on football, I just don't see how putting additional limitations on time spent on football puts the SEC at a disadvantage. All conferences would still be operating under the same rules.
The recommended time restrictions are primarily a response to the NLRB ruling, not at the SEC. Since the conferences currently spend the same amount of time on football, I just don't see how putting additional limitations on time spent on football puts the SEC at a disadvantage. All conferences would still be operating under the same rules.
1
Posted on 6/2/14 at 6:18 pm to Surd
quote:
All conferences would still be operating under the same rules.
With higher academic standards, we will force the SEC and Big 12 schools to cut corners because, let's face it, these two conferences don't hold their athletes to the same standards the Pac 12 and Big Ten do. So, in the long run, it will hurt the student athletes of the SEC because schools will make it so they are taking easy, non-helpful courses so as to keep them eligible for play.
That might be good for us fans and the teams we support, but that won't be good for the individual athlete.
This post was edited on 6/2/14 at 6:21 pm
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News