Athletes are employees...

[Dave85]

I think student athletes should get paid as employees based on the same rate of pay as work-study financial aid benefits. All student athletes should get paid. The number of hours is based on what is required attendance by the athlete for each sport. I think it's good student athletes learn lessons in getting a paycheck and managing their money.

National Labor Relations Board reaffirms athletes are employees, opens door for possible payment

At first I wasn't going to start this thread. I could just see the smirking faces and moans because we've beaten this horse to death so many times. And then I thought why not. We are here to have good heart'd conversations where we respect each other's opinions but try our hardest to convince the other person they are a complete blithering moron. So what if there is an occasional ad hominem attack. It's all good.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

Come and join the discussion on the "dark side" (aka the Football Board).

NLRB, Private School FBS Ruling

 

[Dave85]

Come and join the discussion on the "dark side" (aka the Football Board).

NLRB, Private School FBS Ruling

It's too dark. Orange football fans scare me.

 

[Townie72]

I'm sympathetic to the concept.

Of course, scholarship athletes already get "paid" for their efforts. All we are talking about here is paying them more.

The great problem is what happens to the whole thing if you do it. What are the "unintended or never-considered consequences". Too many good ideas done for noble reasons have had counter-productive outcomes.

Of course, there are those who see it as a "fairness" thing and are unconcerned about any changes this might bring about. That seems to me to be a legitimate position, but not necessarily the one I would adopt.

 

[sutomcat]

The vast majority of colleges lose money with their athletic programs. Even some P5 schools, like say Syracuse.

If what you propose became law, it would inevitably lead to reductions in the number of sports scholarships colleges offer. There isn't an infinite giant pot of gold out there all schools get a cut out of. This money would have to come from somewhere. So colleges might reduce the number of scholarships they offer in various sports from the current level to a lower number. Heck, some might end up cancelling some sports completely.

Is that in the best interests of most college athletes? I suspect it is not.

 

[Townie72]

I'm not sure I agree with Tomcat's point above that this is unaffordable. It depends on how much they are paid. But clearly, one way to reduce costs is to drop non-revenue sports.

One thing for sure, is that everybody is going to get paid. Fencers. Lady Equestrians, Cheerleaders, etc. are all going to get what starters on the BB team get. If you don't believe that, consider what Title IX was supposed to do and how it was actually implemented.

And if this is the NCAA there won't be a two-tiered system. So Alabama or Texas --- which could afford almost any level of compensation --- are going to suffer less than a school like SU.

 

[Hoo's That]

What I see happening is the eventual adoption of the Jay Bilas formula. P-5 football and basketball will be for the NFL and NBA minor leagues closer to the system used in baseball. The fig leaf we have now will be gone. Players will be paid and will not have to go to class. Schools will have to be all-in; no one will be allowed to follow the formula for one sport but not the other.

Now, the messy part comes in. There will be a goodly number of present P-5 schools who will opt out of the P-5 under those conditions, either because they honestly feel that system would not be in line with the true purpose of a university, they can't afford it, or some combination of both. Duke will have to make a choice and I think they will not adopt the formula. I think once the Vicious Little Ferret, Coach Kourageous, retires, Duke will be out of the OAD business. That's not to say that no one will be allowed to leave Duke early; they just won't recruit the players that have OAD "written all over them". They will require their players to go to class, especially if they still can go to North Carolina Central across town for a bunch of them. The Pre-Father Hesburgh ND would have done whatever it took to stay competitive with the P-5 since it was a football team that also had a university. The Post-Father Hesburgh ND will drop to whatever level that requires players in all sports to class. Even the hardest of the hard core supporters of the Bilas formula on the hard core ND board acknowledge that their administration would drop down levels. ND won't be alone. A lot of private schools will follow suit and a significant number of public schools will as well, either because the academicians take full control back from the athletic departments or their state governments will not allow them adopt the formula. The Ivy League is D-3's financial aid rules being used in D-1. There'll be a lot more of that.

I'm sure a lot of cynics will label me a Pollyanna, but the academicians want sports to return to being the "front porch" of a school (if that) and not its identity. Demographics are also adverse. Not as big a percentage of Millennials care about team sports as previous generations did. And not caring means less money. Right now, there are more female college students at major universities than male students. How many of those future Sugar Mommas will be willing to give to the athletic department as a whole, let alone to football? Football is going to have to change because of the health issues or face losing a significant chunk of potential players as affluent and recent immigrant parents refuse to allow their children to participate or have their children play soccer. While other sports can have players get concussions, they don't have the constant head contact that is seen in the lineplay of football.

 

[Townie72]

Hoos That's vision of the likely future of football may take a very long time.

There are 1,000,000 kids in 2016 playing 11-Man football in US high schools.

US University Presidents are in a love-hate relationship with football and basketball. Some might want to get off the Merry-Go-Round, but cannot. There is too much money, too much visibility, and too much alumni support.

They realize that many of the kids who they bring in to play these sports don't really belong on campus. They can't do the work and they bring along with them all sorts of other problems.

They'd very much like some way to tamp the thing down without giving up the goodies. I think then U of Miami did this when the FB program really got out of control.

 

[Briancuse]

It's too dark. Orange football fans scare me.

Right now Orange football scares me.

 

[texascpa]

Sure, and tax them on the value of their education they receive as well. Hope they are ready for that bill.

 

[AlaskaSU]

1. Hillary gets elected
2. Activist Supreme Court Justices are appointed
3. They rule that athletes must get paid
4. The ncaa establishes a fixed low wage
5. Schools will begin to eliminate non-revenue sports
6. Athletes will sue and strike for higher wages
7. They will win
8. Universities will try to sell team management to the pro teams with some sort of revenue sharing deal.
9. Schools will essentially become landlords that own the facilities but contract out for operation and management.
10. Minor sports will become intramural activities

 

[Dave85]

1. Hillary gets elected
2. Activist Supreme Court Justices are appointed
3. They rule that athletes must get paid
4. The ncaa establishes a fixed low wage
5. Schools will begin to eliminate non-revenue sports
6. Athletes will sue and strike for higher wages
7. They will win
8. Universities will try to sell team management to the pro teams with some sort of revenue sharing deal.
9. Schools will essentially become landlords that own the facilities but contract out for operation and management.
10. Minor sports will become intramural activities

I am so done with politics. Right now I'm completely ignoring the election and concentrating on NFL football. That said, I want to say one thing about #2. If you don't think Republicans appoint "activist" judges are you deluding yourself. If you are liberal you think conservative judges are activists. If you are conservative then you think liberal judges are activists. For example, from a liberal point of view, you can't have a greater degree of activist judges than the Supreme's deciding the 2000 election and the Citizen's United ruling. Those two are so over the top activism it's hard to imagine anything worse. Which is one of the reasons why I've completely given up on thinking about our government. There is no joy in thinking about government and it is a complete waste of my time.

In terms of athletes, it would be nice if they were paid for the amount of time they are spending making the Universities bundles of money. My hope is we should value and reward hard work. Nobody should work for free. I would like to see athletes at least get paid as much as someone receiving work-study financial aid. By my calculation it would cost Syracuse around $2,000,000 to pay all the athletes a work-study rate of pay (it's probably less because I'm guessing the number athletes that would qualify and I think I had too many in my estimate). University sports would still be very profitable.

 

[Hoo's That]

1. Hillary gets elected
2. Activist Supreme Court Justices are appointed
3. They rule that athletes must get paid
4. The ncaa establishes a fixed low wage
5. Schools will begin to eliminate non-revenue sports
6. Athletes will sue and strike for higher wages
7. They will win
8. Universities will try to sell team management to the pro teams with some sort of revenue sharing deal.
9. Schools will essentially become landlords that own the facilities but contract out for operation and management.
10. Minor sports will become intramural activities

The NLRB's ruling only applies to private schools. If we assume that, by extension, athletes at public schools are also employees, present labor law does not permit the extension of the rights (or whatever the exact legal term is) granted to the athletes at private schools by the NLRB to state employees unless the state agrees by enacting its own laws. And, no that law will not be changed regardless of who is President or which part controls Congress.

OT political comment - It's going to be a long 8 years for you; you'd better start pacing yourself on outrage.

 

[Dave85]

Sure, and tax them on the value of their education they receive as well. Hope they are ready for that bill.

You are just being mean spirited.

 

[AlaskaSU]

I am so done with politics. Right now I'm completely ignoring the election and concentrating on NFL football. That said, I want to say one thing about #2. If you don't think Republicans appoint "activist" judges are you deluding yourself. If you are liberal you think conservative judges are activists. If you are conservative then you think liberal judges are activists. For example, from a liberal point of view, you can't have a greater degree of activist judges than the Supreme's deciding the 2000 election and the Citizen's United ruling. Those two are so over the top activism it's hard to imagine anything worse. Which is one of the reasons why I've completely given up on thinking about our government. There is no joy in thinking about government and it is a complete waste of my time.

In terms of athletes, it would be nice if they were paid for the amount of time they are spending making the Universities bundles of money. My hope is we should value and reward hard work. Nobody should work for free. I would like to see athletes at least get paid as much as someone receiving work-study financial aid. By my calculation it would cost Syracuse around $2,000,000 to pay all the athletes a work-study rate of pay (it's probably less because I'm guessing the number athletes that would qualify and I think I had too many in my estimate). University sports would still be very profitable.

This is probably the most frustrating thing about liberals - they cannot conceive that conservatives are not activists. They just want to adhere to the Constitution. They do not want to change it. he Constitution is a document designed to enhance individual freedom and restrain gvt. Liberals cannot accept this fact. Therefore, they think that conservatives are activists trying to reinterpret the Constitution to make it a conservative document. It is a conservative document. You are the ones that want a living, ie a meaningless Constitution.

 

[Fly Rodder]

The vast majority of colleges lose money with their athletic programs.

I'm just throwing this out there, but since schools don't have to pay on-field talent that revenue doesn't just disappear. It goes somewhere.

Coaches in the college game are WAY overpaid because the market is rigged. If schools were allowed to acquire talent based on how much they are willing to spend, guys like Nick Saban wouldn't be such massive difference makers and worth the extra scratch for the additional wins he generates. In pro sports, you can have the greatest coach in the world and it doesn't matter nearly as much.

Bill Belichek is arguably the greatest modern NFL coach and he makes $7.5m a year with the same restrictions on talent acquistion as the rest of the league. Nick Saban, a poor NFL coach, makes $7m a year for college where the talent acquisition is incredibly lopsided for reasons not related to talent cost.

College lose money on athletics through accounting like how major movies rarely show an official profit.

 

[Dave85]

This is probably the most frustrating thing about liberals - they cannot conceive that conservatives are not activists. They just want to adhere to the Constitution. They do not want to change it. he Constitution is a document designed to enhance individual freedom and restrain gvt. Liberals cannot accept this fact. Therefore, they think that conservatives are activists trying to reinterpret the Constitution to make it a conservative document. It is a conservative document. You are the ones that want a living, ie a meaningless Constitution.

Well, it doesn't seem as simple as you are making it. You claim liberals cannot conceive conservatives are not activists. It works both ways is my very point. A skunk can't smell his own stink. Everyone is blind to their own prejudices and bigotries. All language is imprecise. All language is interpretative. Our founding fathers knew this which is why we have a judicial branch in the first place.

Let's just accept human imperfections are being constant and the we will never stop striving towards forming "a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity" which is a work that will never be done, completed, or "RIGHT". What this means is very different for conservatives and liberals. You claim there is an absolute "RIGHT". Liberals do not believe in absolutes.

 

[sutomcat]

This is just categorically wrong.

Athletics departments that make more than they spend still a minority

Only 24 FBS schools generated more revenue than they spent in 2014, according to the NCAA Revenues and Expenses of Division I Intercollegiate Athletics Programs Report. That figure jumped from 20 schools in 2013, but it has remained relatively consistent through the past decade.

Though the number of athletics departments reporting positive net generated revenues has increased slightly, the average of their net generated revenue has dipped in the past year. Those 24 schools, at the median, generated about $6 million in net revenue, compared to just over $8 million in 2013 and a little more than $2 million a decade ago.

But those 24 schools are a minority. Many more schools saw their expenses exceed their revenue, requiring their colleges and universities to cover the shortfall. The median FBS school spent $14.7 million to help subsidize its athletics department in 2014, up from a little more than $11 million in 2013. That level of spending isn’t unique to FBS schools – median Football Championship Subdivision and non-football schools spent roughly $11 million to help fund athletics in 2014.

"There is still a misperception that most schools are generating more money than they spend on college athletics," said NCAA Chief Financial Officer Kathleen McNeely. "These data show once again that the truth is just the opposite.

"The overwhelming majority of colleges and universities in the NCAA across all three divisions subsidize part or all of athletics. The reason they invest is because sports provide educational value to student-athletes while enhancing overall campus life and building life-long connections with alumni and other supporters. Those are all important outcomes from athletic programs that are worth celebrating, sharing and investing in wisely.”

There isn't a pot of gold to finance all these great ideas to help college athletes. And with the ongoing arms race regarding the building of facilities and hiring of support staff, and the rule changes to extend benefits to athletes (College athletes cashing in with millions in new benefits), things aren't going to get better anytime soon.

 

[Townie72]

Like in chess, you can't view putting college athletes on a salary as a single step. Although it may not be the intent, it will lead to other things. Some of which no one will be able to predict.

I have no idea the extent to which I am typical, but the professionalism of big time college athletics is already close to the line for me. I laugh every time I hear the oft-repeated "student-athlete" term.

The money, the TV coverage, the spectacle is way down the path towards being a professional league with little connection to the schools they are supposed to represent. If you keep moving in this direction --- and putting athletes on the payroll is certainly a step --- then eventually the whole sham becomes obvious to everyone.

Which is fine, I guess.

But if the Syracuse team was disassociated from the University, than I would have little interest in the semi-pro or minor league team based in Central New York.

 

[Oráiste]

if college athletes are employees, then will the full dollar value of their tuition waivers become part of their taxable compensation? If so, this "win" could become a net negative for some players.

 

[texascpa]

The NLRB's ruling only applies to private schools. If we assume that, by extension, athletes at public schools are also employees, present labor law does not permit the extension of the rights (or whatever the exact legal term is) granted to the athletes at private schools by the NLRB to state employees unless the state agrees by enacting its own laws. And, no that law will not be changed regardless of who is President or which part controls Congress.

OT political comment - It's going to be a long 8 years for you; you'd better start pacing yourself on outrage.

The problem with your foresight is that it doesn't include A) the continuous and egregious extension of Federal government in state issues, and 2) the fact that public universities get Federal money. All the Feds need to do is say "do it or we pull your funds". why do think the state speed limits were 55 mph for so many decades?

 

[texascpa]

if college athletes are employees, then will the full dollar value of their tuition waivers become part of their taxable compensation? If so, this "win" could become a net negative for some players.

In short, it should. The IRS considers taxable income any form of compensation that can be feasibly calculated to an individual. Tuition - yes, pizza party for employees - no.

 

[NYCSUGrad]

What I see happening is the eventual adoption of the Jay Bilas formula. P-5 football and basketball will be for the NFL and NBA minor leagues closer to the system used in baseball. The fig leaf we have now will be gone. Players will be paid and will not have to go to class. Schools will have to be all-in; no one will be allowed to follow the formula for one sport but not the other.

Now, the messy part comes in. There will be a goodly number of present P-5 schools who will opt out of the P-5 under those conditions, either because they honestly feel that system would not be in line with the true purpose of a university, they can't afford it, or some combination of both. Duke will have to make a choice and I think they will not adopt the formula. I think once the Vicious Little Ferret, Coach Kourageous, retires, Duke will be out of the OAD business. That's not to say that no one will be allowed to leave Duke early; they just won't recruit the players that have OAD "written all over them". They will require their players to go to class, especially if they still can go to North Carolina Central across town for a bunch of them. The Pre-Father Hesburgh ND would have done whatever it took to stay competitive with the P-5 since it was a football team that also had a university. The Post-Father Hesburgh ND will drop to whatever level that requires players in all sports to class. Even the hardest of the hard core supporters of the Bilas formula on the hard core ND board acknowledge that their administration would drop down levels. ND won't be alone. A lot of private schools will follow suit and a significant number of public schools will as well, either because the academicians take full control back from the athletic departments or their state governments will not allow them adopt the formula. The Ivy League is D-3's financial aid rules being used in D-1. There'll be a lot more of that.

I'm sure a lot of cynics will label me a Pollyanna, but the academicians want sports to return to being the "front porch" of a school (if that) and not its identity. Demographics are also adverse. Not as big a percentage of Millennials care about team sports as previous generations did. And not caring means less money. Right now, there are more female college students at major universities than male students. How many of those future Sugar Mommas will be willing to give to the athletic department as a whole, let alone to football? Football is going to have to change because of the health issues or face losing a significant chunk of potential players as affluent and recent immigrant parents refuse to allow their children to participate or have their children play soccer. While other sports can have players get concussions, they don't have the constant head contact that is seen in the lineplay of football.

So very well said and nice to see you Hoo at the start of another basketball season. May Virginia do well but not TOO well ifyaknowwhatImean ; )

 

[NYCSUGrad]

The NLRB's ruling only applies to private schools. If we assume that, by extension, athletes at public schools are also employees, present labor law does not permit the extension of the rights (or whatever the exact legal term is) granted to the athletes at private schools by the NLRB to state employees unless the state agrees by enacting its own laws. And, no that law will not be changed regardless of who is President or which part controls Congress.

OT political comment - It's going to be a long 8 years for you; you'd better start pacing yourself on outrage.

Heh. Knew there was a reason I liked you so much Hoo.

 

[NYCSUGrad]

I am so done with politics. Right now I'm completely ignoring the election and concentrating on NFL football. That said, I want to say one thing about #2. If you don't think Republicans appoint "activist" judges are you deluding yourself. If you are liberal you think conservative judges are activists. If you are conservative then you think liberal judges are activists. For example, from a liberal point of view, you can't have a greater degree of activist judges than the Supreme's deciding the 2000 election and the Citizen's United ruling. Those two are so over the top activism it's hard to imagine anything worse. Which is one of the reasons why I've completely given up on thinking about our government. There is no joy in thinking about government and it is a complete waste of my time.

In terms of athletes, it would be nice if they were paid for the amount of time they are spending making the Universities bundles of money. My hope is we should value and reward hard work. Nobody should work for free. I would like to see athletes at least get paid as much as someone receiving work-study financial aid. By my calculation it would cost Syracuse around $2,000,000 to pay all the athletes a work-study rate of pay (it's probably less because I'm guessing the number athletes that would qualify and I think I had too many in my estimate). University sports would still be very profitable.

Absolutely Dave. Both the late Scalia and Thomas had close relatives working FOR the Bush campaign (Scalia's son, Thomas' wife) yet NEITHER recused themselves from the case. Contrast that with numerous cases my HS classmate Elena Kagan has recused herself from when she served as Solicitor General in the Obama administration prior to the SC appointment. I am sure other justices have recused themselves at appropriate times in the past.

The problem is there is no MANDATORY recusal system, or indeed ANY system of checks and balances for Supreme Court justices as there is in the rest of the federal judiciary. There is some talk about reforming this, though. I don't know if an act of congress is needed or it is done within the judiciary system.