Northwestern Players Want a Union

Donate To GopherHole
GopherinPhilly said:
Oh lord...this again. My take hasn't changed...when schools are paying head coaches millions per year because the football team turns a $30 million dollar profit, how long do you think it will be before the kids who work for that money start to ask for a piece?

I don't know if a "union" is going to work, but it is inevitable...like free agency and the players unions finally brought revenue sharing to major sports...the NCAA is not far behind.

And same arguments being used on this forum about nobody is forcing them to play or they should start another league or whatever where the exact same arguments used by MLB to fight free agency and it didn't work for them.

Scholarships are compensation for playing football. The students athletes have rights that go beyond regular college students and the courts will prove that out...how much rights? The courts will decide this.
Click to expand...

Are you really saying free agency and the players unions brought revenue sharing to 'the major sports'?
 

I can understand how a union could be used to maybe set standards regarding full contact practices, conditions of facilities in lower tier schools and such. I see both sides of the argument to pay players - but as dpo has said many times: the players agree to be part of the system and no competition has emerged to go toe-to-toe with the NCAA.

Personally, if I were given a full ride to play football I would consider that an amazing opportunity and think that was enough. Sure, players come from different backgrounds that shape different perspectives. But when does this spiral out of control and the Volleyball team starts demanding a cut? Where does it stop?
 

Another alternative is to drop scholarships and have try-outs.
 

First, employees do not have to get paid, they merely need to receive some form of compensation (room, board, tuition) in return for work (attend meetings, lift weights, conform to standards of behavior [plays], attend scheduled work). An employee must also conform to the employers desire for work to be performed under their direction and control and direct how it will be performed.

There are 3 basic tests with a whole bunch of laws that apply. Here is the list of laws that apply.

Federal Insurance Contributions Act
Federal Unemployment Tax Act
Income Tax Withholding
Employment Retirement and Income Security Act
National Labor Relations Act
Immigration and Reform Control Act
Fair Labor Relations Act
Title VII (Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Age Discrimination in Employment Act
Americans with Disabilities Act
Family and Medical Leave Act (Untested at the Surpreme Court level)

The tests are: common law, Economic Realities test, and the Hybrid test (combination of the first two).

I would think that since the NCAA pays all health insurance, except except for a 90,000 deductible, which the colleges will cover to some extent or another at their determination. There are cases where athletes or their parents pay for the injuries sustained on the field of play (see requirement to attend and perform on the field as per the requirements of the scholarship). So, the first test is whether or not the school pays for insurance (yes). The second test is whether or not the school economically benefits from the performance of the player. Minnesota benefits because there are definable revenue streams that result from the student performing on the field. That satisfies the economic performance test. Does the athlete receive any definable benefits and must he meet some behavior standard in order to receive those benefits? Absolutely. See above. Have their been cases where students have their scholarship pulled for non performance? Yes.

That covers just the test of the Federal Insurance Contributions Act and I would think it has a chance at succeeding. Maybe 30%. Maybe better than 50/50 if more than one school organizes and applies for certification.

The cost of health care per athlete ran between 3 - 5 thousand. Not a small bill.




Why would the students want to organize? High deductibles that they pay when they get injured, even after the University's insurance kicks in to pay the NCAA high deductible. There are documented cases of students paying tens of thousands out of pocket for injuries related to football.

If anyone knows if the U has a deductible limit on its coverage, I certainly would like to know how we compare to other schools. Maybe as the paying sporting public we could pressure the U to cover it 100% and have zero out of pocket costs for the athletes. If we do pay 100% of the NCAA deductible of 90,000, that would be a nice recruiting talking point.

Some of the details come from http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2012/02/college_athletes_rights_ncaa_r.html and http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2002/01/art1full.pdf.
 

Gopherdrummer said:
I can understand how a union could be used to maybe set standards regarding full contact practices, conditions of facilities in lower tier schools and such. I see both sides of the argument to pay players - but as dpo has said many times: the players agree to be part of the system and no competition has emerged to go toe-to-toe with the NCAA.

Personally, if I were given a full ride to play football I would consider that an amazing opportunity and think that was enough. Sure, players come from different backgrounds that shape different perspectives. But when does this spiral out of control and the Volleyball team starts demanding a cut? Where does it stop?
Click to expand...

Agreeing to be part of a cartel does not make the cartel's practices ok. You and I can make an agreement between the two of us about many things that aren't legal. If you and I agree to a contract or practice that is illegal, then that contract is void or that practice will have to end regardless of what you and I think about them.
 


die hard gopher said:
the argument isn't should student athletes be compensated. The argument is are college athletes fairly compensated as many football and basketball players bring in a lot more revenue for their school then their scholarship gives them
Click to expand...

Every employee everywhere should be generating more revenue than they are paid. Otherwise owners/shareholders would not make any money and nobody would ever start a business.
 

Gopherguy0723 said:
Agreeing to be part of a cartel does not make the cartel's practices ok. You and I can make an agreement between the two of us about many things that aren't legal. If you and I agree to a contract or practice that is illegal, then that contract is void or that practice will have to end regardless of what you and I think about them.
Click to expand...

What does the NCAA do that is illegal?

P.S. The NCAA isn't a cartel. You need cooperation and multiple parties in order to form a cartel. You earlier in this thread called the NCAA a monopoly - but oh, wait, now it's part of a cartel. You can't be both a monopoly and part of a cartel at the same time, as those two things are in direct competition with each other. You can't even keep your ridiculous sensationalistic rhetoric straight.
 

bleedsmaroonandgold said:
Every employee everywhere should be generating more revenue than they are paid. Otherwise owners/shareholders would not make any money and nobody would ever start a business.
Click to expand...

That's not exactly true, but pretty close. Many or even most entry level employees cost their business money for the first year or two. If you have an expectation that even entry level employees should make more money than what they cost, then most people never would have gotten a job.
 

DLguy said:
And how are they going to pay union dues to run the union? Will the school have to pay that expense for them as well?
Click to expand...

In our ever evolving liberal society, yes, the school will pay your dues for u. The motto for most from now on is "ask not what I can do for my country, but what can my country give me."

So sad...
 



I bet Fitzgerald is very happy to see that over 1/3 of his team believes that they are being asked to do too much for what they are getting in return. This is can't end well for northwestern.
 

Gopherguy0723 said:
That's not exactly true, but pretty close. Many or even most entry level employees cost their business money for the first year or two. If you have an expectation that even entry level employees should make more money than what they cost, then most people never would have gotten a job.
Click to expand...

Good catch. That's what I get for speaking in absolutes. For those entry level employees, the expectation is that in the long run, they will have brought in more revenue that they cost (including their training).
 

Clark W. Griswold said:
I bet Fitzgerald is very happy to see that over 1/3 of his team believes that they are being asked to do too much for what they are getting in return. This is can't end well for northwestern.
Click to expand...

It is amusing that his players think they are under-compensated for going 1-7.
 

GopherinPhilly said:
I don't know if a "union" is going to work, but it is inevitable...like free agency and the players unions finally brought revenue sharing to major sports...the NCAA is not far behind.
Click to expand...

Since the large majority of public universities lose money on their athletics programs it is also inevitable that big time college sports will go away at public universities if players are allowed to unionize, get paid for their services, and collect worker's compensation for their injuries. Taxpayers will never go along with it and students and their families have many alternatives for higher education rather than to pay part of their tuition to subsidize the lifestyles and professional aspirations of athletes and coaches.
 



Sparlimb said:
word. If you think the union will be so much better, get a job playing football. I'm not sure how you can unionize in a non-job.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It's an extracurricular activity!
 

UpnorthGo4 said:
Since the large majority of public universities lose money on their athletics programs it is also inevitable that big time college sports will go away at public universities if players are allowed to unionize, get paid for their services, and collect worker's compensation for their injuries. Taxpayers will never go along with it and students and their families have many alternatives for higher education rather than to pay part of their tuition to subsidize the lifestyles and professional aspirations of athletes and coaches.
Click to expand...

Really?

You don't think these football/basketball programs make enough money to pay for themselves? You're crazy if you think tax payers would subsidizing these athletes.
 

DLguy said:
If they want to be employees, make them employees. Take away their scholarships, room and board, and everything else they are given. Pay them the same as other student workers. Heck, pay them twice as much. But you can only pay them for the hours actually worked. 1 hour lifting in the morning, 2-3 hour practice in the afternoon. When they are only working 6 months out of the year, getting taxed, paying for their own school/housing/food they will realize how sweet the actually have it.

If I could go to school again and get my entire schooling paid for AND my room, board AND spending money instead of paying for everything on my own and working my student job, I would do it in a heartbeat. No brainer. It just amazes me how some cannot grasp the concept of how great these kids have it. And those complaining that some aren't getting an education, that is the student-athletes' fault.
Click to expand...

The last thing the NCAA wants to do is treat these kids like employees.

The student-athletes should be allowed to bargain for their own salary. I have a feeling the SEC might be willing to pay a 5 star RB a bit more than $10.75 per hour. It's nonsense to say "treat them like employees" but that we will set the price of their salary.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
Really?

You don't think these football/basketball programs make enough money to pay for themselves? You're crazy if you think tax payers would subsidizing these athletes.
Click to expand...

I don't have time to educate you so you will have to do it yourself (if you have the interest). Most college athletics programs at taxpayer subsidized universities are money losers . There is going to be a day of reckoning about the out-of-control costs of big time intercollegiate sports. And it is going to happen sooner rather than later. Taxpayers in some states may want to continue to subsidize their college sports factories but Minnesota will not be one of them.

NCAA report shows many college programs in the red

Posted by NBC Sports on August 25, 2010, 10:00 PM EST

If college football is treated as a big time business, then business is bad right now.

A recent NCAA report done by professor Dan Fulks of Transylvania University in Kentucky shows that only 14 of the 120 FBS schools profited from campus athletics during the 2009 fiscal year.

The NCAA reports only 14 athletics departments from the Football Bowl Subdivision (formerly Division I-A) made more money than they spent in 2008-09, down from 25 in each of the previous two years. The average institutional subsidy for athletics in the FBS rose from $8 million in 2007-08 to $10.2 million in 2008-09, the most currently available year of data.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/college-athletics-losing-money/


The High Cost of Intercollegiate Athletics

March 9, 2011

Intercollegiate athletics (ICA) are becoming an increasingly expensive venture at America's colleges and universities, and threaten to crowd out other higher education activities, including the core mission of teaching and research. Some big-time athletic powers have athletic budgets exceeding $100 million annually, according to a study by Matthew Denhart, a research associate, and David Ridpath, a senior fellow, at the Center for College Affordability and Productivity.

As institutions dig into their own pockets to fund ICA programs not supported by ticket, logo, concession, broadcasting, parking revenues or private gifts, they are increasingly forced to rely directly on funds provided by student fees.

In other cases, institutional subsidies implicitly drain resources that could otherwise support the core academic missions of teaching and research.

General tuition fees may be raised to cover academic costs that would have been fundable from other revenues were it not for rising athletic costs.

The funding of ICA has historically been mired by secrecy and, arguably, deception. Schools have fought to keep the public from knowing the subsidy students pay, the salary of the football coach, some of the less than optimal practices used to maintain player eligibility, say Denhart and Ridpath.

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=20416


Athletics cost colleges, students millions

Cliff Peale, The Cincinnati Enquirer 12:02 a.m. EDT September 15, 2013

As colleges and students face exploding spending, tuition and student debt, many question all of the money spent on sports.

College sports create undeniable campus pride and identity, but spending has increased so fast it's taking money from academics and student services.

The University of Cincinnati and Miami University in Oxford, Ohio, for example, added $6 million and $1.2 million, respectively, this year to prop up their already heavily subsidized sports programs and keep up in the national arms race.

"There's always a ripple effect. They say, 'We've got to keep up to be competitive,'" said Brit Kirwan, chancellor of the University System of Maryland and co-chairman of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics. "When we reach the breaking point, I don't know."

The Knight Commission says Division I schools with football spent $91,936 per athlete in 2010, seven times the spending per student of $13,628. Division I universities without football spent $39,201 per athlete, more than triple the average student spending.

Nearly every university loses money on sports. Even after private donations and ticket sales, they fill the gap by tapping students paying tuition or state taxpayers.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...tics-cost-colleges-students-millions/2814455/
 

If they pay the players salaries, I think it would be a good time to cut all academic ties to the athletic department and make it a minor league team sponsored by a partner University. No entrance requirements, no classes, no scholarships.
 

UpnorthGo4 said:
I don't have time to educate you so you will have to do it yourself (if you have the interest). Most college football programs at taxpayer subsidized universities are money losers . There is going to be a day of reckoning about the out-of-control costs of big time intercollegiate sports. And it is going to happen sooner rather than later.
Click to expand...
You also apparently don't have time to find relevant articles to answer the question of which programs are profitable.
http://businessofcollegesports.com/2011/12/21/big-ten-financials-10-11/
 

DLguy said:
If they want to be employees, make them employees. Take away their scholarships, room and board, and everything else they are given. Pay them the same as other student workers. Heck, pay them twice as much. But you can only pay them for the hours actually worked. 1 hour lifting in the morning, 2-3 hour practice in the afternoon. When they are only working 6 months out of the year, getting taxed, paying for their own school/housing/food they will realize how sweet the actually have it.

If I could go to school again and get my entire schooling paid for AND my room, board AND spending money instead of paying for everything on my own and working my student job, I would do it in a heartbeat. No brainer. It just amazes me how some cannot grasp the concept of how great these kids have it. And those complaining that some aren't getting an education, that is the student-athletes' fault.
Click to expand...

Easy for you to say. You aren't out there risking your health and your body to the hits that end that promising career of yours before you ever get the chance to sign an nfl multi-million-dollar contract the way some of the FIVE **** fantasy high school football recruits are. And, not all players are created equal. Some of the potential super stars will need to get paid a hell of a lot more than the back-up players and 3 deeps on the squad. And just WAIT until some real hot-shot demands to be paid MORE than the coach. Just how is that big buck coach going to impose his will on that bigger buck super star player? But, man: this IS America! Laws of supply and demand will have to rule. At least, if the young super stars have a chance to go out and shop their services to colleges all across the country to sign contracts with the HIGHEST BIDDERS, the SEC boosters won't be able to fund as many Heisman trophy type players for their schools any longer...

IF the colleges think they can make outrageous profits on the backs of the young student athletes, somebody is going to take those prexys out to the wood shed, kick their butts and teach them the facts of life about why the huge tv contracts are signed to broadcast the games that are TOTALLY focused upon the play of the student athletes and the iron-willed, brilliant coaching game plans of the head coach. Note to the athletic directors and the prexys: NOBODY watches college football because of the administrators at the college. The cash cow that college football has become is about to be forced to SHARE THE WEALTH with the players. And, if it happens with football...can HOOPS be far behind? March Madness is NOT about student athletes taking final exams so that they can stay on track to get that degree so that they can go out and scramble to see IF they can even find a job in their field of study. The NCAA is only on life-support now. And, the athletic directors and prexy;s "...ain't seen nothing yet..."

"You can't scare me I'm sticking to the union..." will be the cheer coming from every stadium locker room on every college campus across this great land!

; 0 )
 

New to the board, but I thought I would share my 2 cents, w/o re-reading all the previous posts, I would just say that the real issue in this argument is revenue sports vs. non revenue sports. The pressure the income producing sports are under has lead to this situation with revenue athletes feeling exploited and used (not saying this is true). As well as agents being cut off from income in the professional leagues due to rookie wage scales in the professionals, it is not surprising to see them work on the college athletes to form unions. That all being said, if it comes to college players being paid I will let go and move on to professional sports. The reason I enjoy following college sports is that they are NOT being paid, but so be it, if the scum bag agents win the battle, they will lose the war.
 

UpnorthGo4 said:
I don't have time to educate you so you will have to do it yourself (if you have the interest). Most college football programs at taxpayer subsidized universities are money losers . There is going to be a day of reckoning about the out-of-control costs of big time intercollegiate sports. And it is going to happen sooner rather than later. Taxpayers in some states may want to continue to subsidize their college football factories but Minnesota will not be one of them.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...tics-cost-colleges-students-millions/2814455/
Click to expand...


If the U had Men's Hockey, Football and Basketball only would this blow your theory apart? Mr. Wilf would think so.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
If the U had Men's Hockey, Football and Basketball only would this blow your theory apart? Mr. Wilf would think so.
Click to expand...

I am sure there a few states that would allow their taxpayer subsidized universities to eliminate their non-revenue producing sports. I don't think Minnesota is one of them. If that day ever happens that will be the day I get off the college sports train, give up my season tickets, and stop donating to the U.
 

Rostovgold said:
New to the board, but I thought I would share my 2 cents, w/o re-reading all the previous posts, I would just say that the real issue in this argument is revenue sports vs. non revenue sports. The pressure the income producing sports are under has lead to this situation with revenue athletes feeling exploited and used (not saying this is true). As well as agents being cut off from income in the professional leagues due to rookie wage scales in the professionals, it is not surprising to see them work on the college athletes to form unions. That all being said, if it comes to college players being paid I will let go and move on to professional sports. The reason I enjoy following college sports is that they are NOT being paid, but so be it, if the scum bag agents win the battle, they will lose the war.
Click to expand...

Agree completely. This could likely kill college revenue sports as we know and love it.

This is about some people seeing the outlier major schools that make incredible amounts of money and applying that theory to all schools. Not all schools make incredible money on sports. Sorry, they won't be able to afford to have football or basketball anymore.
 

A union would kill college football by turning it into an NFL adjunct business - essentially a campus-located farm club operation for the NFL. "Wages" would skyrocket to the level that most division 1 schools couldn't afford participation. The U of M, after dropping out, would end up being at or below the level of Mankato State. It's a very bad idea - players now get scholarships worth big bucks and get the training they need for the NFL (those who go on), plus an education and maybe a degree. Football brings in a lot of money, but costs a lot, too. TV is the big revenue-maker now, but that could change with changing U.S. demographics. Football may not be in the future the popular sport it is now.
 

16FeetUnder said:
Agree completely. This could likely kill college revenue sports as we know and love it.

This is about some people seeing the outlier major schools that make incredible amounts of money and applying that theory to all schools. Not all schools make incredible money on sports. Sorry, they won't be able to afford to have football or basketball anymore.
Click to expand...
every single big ten football and men's basketball program makes millions in profit very year, what outlier schools are you talking about?
 

Stop the whining!! It's time somebody start up a Major Junior Football league. It's pretty simple.
 

The football and basketball teams may make money. The athletic departments and schools don't.
 

I need a union. You need a union. We all need a union. I will be your union president. I will be buried in the concrete of the new Vikings' stadium.

I hope they have heating coils.
 

Once they start paying FB and BB players, how long before the first Title IX lawsuit is filed?
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom