Northwestern University football players are seeking union representation
- Thread starter FoolishFellow
- Start date
DodgerHawki
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure how it dies a quick death, or how the schools "stick together" to make it go away. There are a lot of separate but related issues that are part of this debate, but at it's core the players' argument is based on one thing: the coaches and administrators involved with FBS football have become or are becoming millionaires. Even the lowest-paid full-time assistants at any BCS school earns well over six figures, with the head coaches and administrators getting well beyond that. Yes, tuition (especially out-of-state), room and board, etc. adds up to a lot of money, but it's not surprising that when the dollar amounts are that high that the people actually playing in the games might want more than free tuition.
It's not as easy as simply divvying up the football revenue equally among the players on each team. Football-related revenue goes to fund all the non-revenue sports at a school, to pay for the coaches, scholarships, travel expenses, etc. for track, cross-country, wrestling, baseball, rowing, golf, volleyball, gymnastics, everything that doesn't bring in enough revenue to cover expenses for having that team.
Delaney and the B1G have come out in favor of something where schools could fund "the full cost of the scholarship," whatever that means. It may be a reasonable compromise. Reasonable questions raised in this thread:
If they become employees, yes it would stand to reason that they would have to pay taxes on that income.
If they are employees, then schools would probably have the right to get rid of any players that they felt weren't good enough. This already happens at some places in the SEC with oversigning and players who haven't reached the two-deep by the time they are a junior told to move on. Iowa hasn't done that in the past, with plenty of examples of guys who never cracked the 2-deep staying on scholarship the whole time. If it really is an employee-employer relationship, then the employer has the right to get rid of low-performing employees. If the players want the real world, this is the real world.
If they are employees, then I suppose it follows that schools could pay players whatever amount of money they wanted. The gulf between the teams with boosters with an endless supply of money and those that don't would get even larger. The players might counter that it isn't their concern, that they should be paid whatever the market will bear.
The largesse of the coaches, administrators and the NCAA have basically brought this to a head. It's silly to think that at some point players wouldn't demand that they be given a piece of the action as well. I'm of the belief that there is a lot of value in getting a free education and graduating with zero debt, but also realize that people want the right to be paid for their abilities.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
I couldn't disagree more with that. Our society in this country was founded on the premise that the laborer gets a fair wage for his labor. Up until about 25 years ago, I would agree that a full ride scholarship was a fair wage in exchange for the labor that the players put in. But in this day and age where college football is worth BILLIONS and college coaches are making millions, athletic directors are making millions, thousands upon thousands of administrative positions have been created within athletic departments all across the country in order to spend the billions that are coming in. But all this time, the players, the ones who make the engine of college football go, are still only being paid a full ride scholarship. That's pathetic and must change. There is nothing "amateur" about college football and college basketball anymore. Those entities as a whole make more money than they know what to do with. And as a capitalist, I applaud them for their ingenuity in making this happen. But I do NOT applaud them for doing it at the expense of those that allowed those entities to make that kind of revenue. Presidents, athletic directors, conference commissioners.....all of them opened Pandora's box when they decided that college athletics (football and basketball in particular) were no longer "university functions", but rather profit making machines. By doing that, it was only a matter of time before players started being paid. Within 5 years, this will happen.....and for me, it's about time.
hawkdrummer1
Well-Known Member
welcome to the entitlement generation.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
I call it fairness. Back when Hayden was coaching and tickets were $15 and he was being paid $150,000/year and his assistants may have averaged $30,000/year, then there's no issue with offering a kid a full ride scholarship in exchange for his talents. But in this day and age where tickets are $70, where KF is making $3+million/year, his assistants average $300,000/year, the athletic director is making $600,000/year and the player is still only getting a full ride scholarship, then something is wrong with that model.
HawkeyeWalker
Well-Known Member
How much do they get paid, should it be based on that particular programs revenue?? Do all scholly players get the same?
One things for sure, Unions are great for this Capitalism you speak of, certainly will help everyone and get rid of corruption, right?
My CEO and all the company Presidents, and the Executive teams all make many times more than I, and I'm on the sales team and directly associated with the revenue....and my industry (Financial Services) makes multiple times more than college football.....should I get paid more? Awwww, life ain't fair.
I'm sure the NCAA will do the right thing...and everyone will get the same treatment....just like now, right?
Stipend so they can go out, have fun, get dinner, go bowling, to a movie.....Great, I am all for it. 10's of thousands/year.....HE// NO ! and guess what....It's a privledge to play sport....not a right. Do you know how much you would end up paying for $150,000 in college loans over 30 years at about 5%.....Yeah.....they are getting paid.
My opinion....
hawkinn3
Well-Known Member
This is ridiculous, but that aside how would it work? Let says we get the Supreme Court to say student athletes are in fact employees (btw, they exact question has come up before and the SCOTUS said they aren't employees so good luck overcoming stare decisis on that) so now you have a nice little union. Is everyone in the union? Organized by team? By conference? By division? Is there profit sharing? Does Texas get the same amount to spend as North Texas? This will not work barring legislation at a national level.
Delany has been lobbying for the stipend, the 4 year schollys, and lifetime guarantee for pursuing a degree , for some time. I think these things need to happen. I see no reason that players should not be involved in fashioning rules on how to deal with medical schollys ect.
Time for the SEC to join the Big Ten in these initiatives....and kick Emmerts arse....the only thing off the table is payments for playing.
Time for the SEC to join the Big Ten in these initiatives....and kick Emmerts arse....the only thing off the table is payments for playing.
okeefe4prez
Well-Known Member
ROFLcopter. Did you graduate from Iowa State? Our nation was built on slave or near slave labor imported from Africa, Asia and industrializing European nations. By the grace of God and thanks to selfless men like Nile Kinnick and others in his generation along with the women who stayed behind and ran our factories, we were spared the destructive forces of the Second World War and as a result, we have been blessed with decades of the highest standard of living in the world (which is being eroded as installed capital bases improve in other countries).
But more to the point, this is an utter fail by NU. NU is the biggest welfare queen in the conference, as it siphons massive amounts of money away from the bigger programs and relies completely on them to fund its entire athletic department. And Colter is getting a lesson in leftist economics. Sure, he personally probably contributed a fair amount to NU bince he likely helped them sell some tickets, but he has to subsidize the non-revenue athletes at NU (much like we Iowa fans subsidize NU with a cut of our gate or the OSU fans subsidize NU with a share of BTN/ESPN/Bowl revenue). Northwestern can't just start paying football players because if they do, they will violate Title IX, and if the athletes want to get paid, they will price themselves right out of a "job" because NU will go the route of the University of Chicago and pull the plug if the athletic department is not self-sustaining.
I respect your opinion and your right to have it. I just disagree on this subject. If you take the money ( profit ) out of Football you are going to end the low revenue sports. All woman sports. So what about them. Maybe they shoud be paid too. This only opens up a can of worms. If you want to play sports for your Education fine. If want a job go get one. Just my opinion buddy
kicker22
Well-Known Member
So get rid of scholarships and pay them to play. If they want a slice of the pie and the free education (albeit not something i'm sure many appreciate) and the rock star status, let them pay their own way into school like the rest of us and then simply give them their cash after they they walk across the stage.
Or the other option could be to simply let them take their ball and go home. While I agree that they're making a ton of money for their schools, the school is also giving them the publicity and exposure to help them in the future. If a kid doesn't feel that he's benefitting from the free education, facilities, professional coaching and exposure then let them put together their own league where they can achieve the things they have now.
I played at the competitive club level against other college programs while in college and I did it because I loved to play. Its not easy balancing athletics and education, but people do it year in and year out. If its too hard for them or they're bitter about being exploited by their university thats on them. The industry has been like this since they were being recruited.
Or the other option could be to simply let them take their ball and go home. While I agree that they're making a ton of money for their schools, the school is also giving them the publicity and exposure to help them in the future. If a kid doesn't feel that he's benefitting from the free education, facilities, professional coaching and exposure then let them put together their own league where they can achieve the things they have now.
I played at the competitive club level against other college programs while in college and I did it because I loved to play. Its not easy balancing athletics and education, but people do it year in and year out. If its too hard for them or they're bitter about being exploited by their university thats on them. The industry has been like this since they were being recruited.
okeefe4prez
Well-Known Member
You can't end the low revenue sports, though, because of Title IX. If you have about 100 scholarships for male athletes, you better have some form of reasonably equivalent opportunity for female athletes or you'll get your whole athletic department will be shut down. If you pay the men, you'll have to pay the women. The number of athletic departments that could reasonably pay anything more than a token sum to athletes without going deep into the red is probably less than 20. Iowa would be on the very fringe of that group. Iowa State would be toast.
kicker22
Well-Known Member
In addition to getting rid of their scholarships we could charge them league fees/participation fees for playing. Charge them for their state of the art facilities as well as room and board their meals etc...We could also charge them for their time with the trainers, medical facilities, transportation, tutors and whatever else they have access to that regular students don't. Lets give them a $200,000 stipend and let theem pay the difference once the benefits are deducted. I'm sure if they knew how much money they're costing the universities to be there, for the average athlete, it would probably amount to less than they are grossing for the institution.
okeefe4prez
Well-Known Member
For the average athlete, absolutely. It's guys like Manziel who make a ton for the whole system. For the average guy, which most of them are, it is a pretty darn good deal.
