Started By
Message
re: You knew it was coming (at least us smart folks did)...college players now unionizing
Posted on 7/23/22 at 7:56 am to Colonel Ingus
Posted on 7/23/22 at 7:56 am to Colonel Ingus
quote:
Honestly, this is better than the Wild West we currently have. There is already de facto pay for play with “NIL”. This could be huge in leveling the playing field across the board.
How is this a either/or situation?
If they do become employees,it's not prevent players from getting NIL deals
0
Posted on 7/23/22 at 7:58 am to JetDawg
Good for them
Posted on 7/23/22 at 8:09 am to Colonel Ingus
quote:
This could be huge in leveling the playing field across the board.
I agree but not via a union IMO. The ramifications of a union on a student athlete will be to great.
I think we are already seeing the direction of CFB heading away from the NCAA with their lack of control and power to do anything. Mega conferences are coming whether we like it or not and together I see uniformity across the landscape by those in charge of these conferences.
Union or not until the those in charge at the conference level come together it will offer no value to the sport.
Have to remember as well that the entire SEC footprint is Right to Work states. Unions have very little power in the Right to Work states.
Posted on 7/23/22 at 8:12 am to JetDawg
"Better medical care"??? What in the actual
Posted on 7/23/22 at 8:14 am to psk_Vol
So let’s look at UGA for instance… UGA is a state school with state funds, so Title IX .. is a factor.
NCAA Membership Financial Reporting System and for the 2021 reporting year, UGAA reported $169,064,656 in operating revenue and $122,722,893 in operating expenses, leaving a difference of $46,341,763..
UGA has 600 athletic scholarships, this doesn’t count non scholarships..
If the 46M is what’s shared @ 50% that’s roughly 39K per scholarship. That’s probably acceptable…. but my guess is athletes are thinking pro level Millions a year..
If you go off revenue alone.. 169M @ 50% that’s 140k per scholarship, leaving 84M for expenses..with an operating budget of 123M, that leaves the UGAA @39M in the red.. good by non revenue sports.
NCAA Membership Financial Reporting System and for the 2021 reporting year, UGAA reported $169,064,656 in operating revenue and $122,722,893 in operating expenses, leaving a difference of $46,341,763..
UGA has 600 athletic scholarships, this doesn’t count non scholarships..
If the 46M is what’s shared @ 50% that’s roughly 39K per scholarship. That’s probably acceptable…. but my guess is athletes are thinking pro level Millions a year..
If you go off revenue alone.. 169M @ 50% that’s 140k per scholarship, leaving 84M for expenses..with an operating budget of 123M, that leaves the UGAA @39M in the red.. good by non revenue sports.
Posted on 7/23/22 at 8:15 am to FriedEggBowL
quote:
"Better medical care"??? What in the actual
Again they are seeking long term care. Medical care to deal with injuries sustain while playing in college but causing issues in the future long after leaving the program.
As a Vet I am treated for free for any injury while sustained in the military for the rest of my life as long as it was service connected. They are seeking the same.
Posted on 7/23/22 at 8:19 am to lsu711
quote:
The problems will quickly come when they grossly overestimate their slice of the pie.
And wait til some butch soccer lesbians get wind of this and find out they're being MARGINALIZED....Again!!
The entitlement of this generation of kids will kill college sports.
Posted on 7/23/22 at 8:20 am to CNB
The athletes already get a huge slice of the pie in the form of their scholarships, food, housing, medical etc. If colleges agree to
revenue sharing all that should go away. If the players receive a check then they should pay for admission, class, room, food etc of that money.
revenue sharing all that should go away. If the players receive a check then they should pay for admission, class, room, food etc of that money.
This post was edited on 7/23/22 at 8:21 am
Posted on 7/23/22 at 8:22 am to 3rddownonthe8
quote:
but my guess is athletes are thinking pro level Millions a year..
I think it has more to do with the 95%+ athletes on the team that will never go pro, receive any substantial NIL deal, but yet feel they are owed something for helping those who are receiving the money.
Hence the concept of union is not making the rich richer but leveling the playing field so that everyone gets a piece of the pie. It ignores individual value and at the same time creates opportunity for those that add nothing but have the union behind them to protect their status in the collective. So that cancer in the locker room that refuses to buy in will remain on scholarship and be a drain on resources.
Posted on 7/23/22 at 8:22 am to JetDawg
They would become employees at that point and subject to labor laws. You will also be able to terminate their employment. I don’t know about other states but Alabama is an at will state so if you are a bust…..
Posted on 7/23/22 at 8:23 am to OGtigerfan87
quote:
If colleges agree to
revenue sharing all that should go away. If the players receive a check then they should pay for admission, class, room, food etc of that money.
That would kill college sports more than anything, genius
Posted on 7/23/22 at 8:24 am to CNB
quote:
kill college sports
We’re halfway there already baw! Lets titanic this bitch. We got our natty
This post was edited on 7/23/22 at 8:25 am
Posted on 7/23/22 at 8:28 am to TouchdownTony
quote:
Alabama is an at will state
Montana is the only state in the US that is not an At Will state regarding employment. Many have exceptions to the law but currently 49 states are At Will.
However Alabama and Nebraska are the only 2 that have no exemptions and the employee has no recourse.
Posted on 7/23/22 at 8:33 am to Hailstate15
Starting to think the semi-pro players at the top are gonna ruin shite for the vast majority of athletes that really are amateurs.
Say you’re a D3 program, non-scholarship, probably even subsidizing the program; why would you want to bother with all these shenanigans? Pay for expanded health care? Revenue sharing?
What’s crazy is the interests of pro and semi-pro players and amateurs are still governed by the same institution, the NCAA.
Say you’re a D3 program, non-scholarship, probably even subsidizing the program; why would you want to bother with all these shenanigans? Pay for expanded health care? Revenue sharing?
What’s crazy is the interests of pro and semi-pro players and amateurs are still governed by the same institution, the NCAA.
Posted on 7/23/22 at 8:35 am to psk_Vol
quote:
They should be paid something. How much that should be? Who knows.
I wonder how this effects stuff down stream. Are non revenue sports toast because in theory many schools could potentially be forced to pay football players with revenue that once subsidized other sports? Does title 9 somehow force universities to pay equal amounts of money to both make and female athletes? There’s certainly tons of details needing ironed out
I just cannot wait until players at places like Northwestern and USC get the tax bill for the scholarship portion of their package because in the real world, benefits such as that are taxed if you are a paid employee.
And, yes, it will kill many non-revenue sports. No athletic department runs a "profit". All extra money after football expenditures goes either to other sports or to the general fund. Men's basketball is the only other sport that comes close regularly to being in the black and when it does it is not much of the overall AD budget. No other sport makes a profit at more than a handful of schools. Sports like men's track and men's soccer are doomed.
And, yes, title IX creates a nightmare for these same athletic departments if players are paid directly by the schools.
There will end up being a few dozen top teams that can possibly handle this. At the rest, tens of thousands of scholarships for non-revenue sports will be lost. Sometimes what folks conceive as the right thing can stil have disastrous consequences for more folks than it helps.
This post was edited on 7/23/22 at 8:37 am
Posted on 7/23/22 at 8:37 am to JetDawg
Good. Make them employees and make them pay tuition.
Posted on 7/23/22 at 8:37 am to Olderthandirt
quote:
I just cannot wait until players at places like Northwestern and USC get the tax bill for the scholarship portion of their package because in the real world, benefits such as that are taxed if you are a paid employee.
That and the Jock Tax.
Posted on 7/23/22 at 8:43 am to pioneerbasketball
quote:
Do we get replacement players if they go on strike?
Is Shane Falco up for it?
Posted on 7/23/22 at 8:51 am to TideWarrior
quote:And what will this "association" do if the schools tell then to take a hike?....strike?....boycott school functions, or form school marches?
quote:
Correct, but it is acting as one on behalf of the players.
That is their goal but it is in no way a union. Membership is also open to high school athletes as well.
Another thing that article fails to address is NIL has not made any college athlete an employee. Since NIL does not reclassify them as such they can not form a union at PSU.
Until the NRLB classifies college athletes as employees it will not matter what they want to call themselves. Because without the employee tag they will never be recognized as a union.
You can call them anything you want, but their only retribution would be union established acts.
Bottom line:"If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then...........It's a duck!
Posted on 7/23/22 at 8:51 am to ibldprplgld
quote:
Better medical care? Don’t they have everything paid for already? What’s better than that?
Are you willing to forgo your salary tomorrow for bare minimum health insurance, a meal plan and a scholarship?
Do you generate as much revenue as these guys do?
Rhetorical question, of course the answer to both is "no."
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News