College football players union

The claim is they are making the schools all this money and you can't quantify it?

And, you want an open bidding war on every player?

What a friggen disaster and if you can't see that this discussion is a waste of time.
Based on the 30 for 30 "Pony Excess" I think bidding wars have already happened.

Most message board discussion just idle talk but I've read some good and far out ideas today. What if NFL teams sponsored players in college? What if players were allowed do endorsement deals on the side? What if there was some type of selection process where the same top schools didn't get to sign all of the highly rated players?

Most likely the Feds would step in to make sure the football players get something but not a very big piece, but at least the brainstorming will be fun.


Then every other college sport besides a select few basketball programs will be left in the dust and we will be left with no such thing as amateur football except at the high school level and below.

 
my concern with all of this is. If they are allowed to unionize and then be paid by the Universities. Will they then lose all scholorships and programs currently available for free to them. if they want to use them have to pay like a normal student? Plus if football is allowed to do it why not basketball, volleyball, wrestling and any other sport out there in the NCAA. If all student athletes do it. But only at the private schools. Then the recruits would flock to them instead of public schools. Or if all athletes for any school is allowed to do it. Then smaller schools could end up losing their sports teams as they can no longer affoard it.

 
“Let me put it this way,” Fahleson said. “Kain Colter will be an old man before this decision is sealed.”
Bingo. Probably Kain Colter son will be an old man before this decision is sealed. Or grandson.

For example: Missouri Case

25 years death row?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What would happen is a cap on compensation to the point that it is basically just a stipend. Something we have discussed many times.

If a football player is paid $5,000 in real money plus his scholarship valued at 30-55k, plus health are, books, clothing then it adds up to a decent middle class wage for an 18 year old.

What really scares the Unis is workman's comp. They might be footing the bill for a lifetime of health are issues related to permanent injuries suffered on the job. That would have to be legislated away.

 
BigRedBuster said:
Notre Dame Joe said:
I just don't see the problem with it, no one disputes that the players are doing work, hard dangerous work.

The only argument is that yong adults should pay their dues by contributing into the community pot before they take. Fine but there is a tipping point when they are producing too much but seeing too little.
then don't play and go do something else you feel you are being compensated better for.
or, unionize so you can get fairly compensated for your contribution to the university.

i just can not get over that people would begrudge athletes for trying to get compensated for their contributions when there are literally television networks dedicated to their product. the can of worms was opened long ago, everyone except the athletes got paid, the business model adjusted for everyone except the athletes, now the athletes are trying to catch up.

everyone is worried what this will do to college football. what will happen if the best talent does not get paid and goes elsewhere? are we going to enjoy the product so much with inferior talent? no one sees that as a threat to college football?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
everyone is worried what this will do to college football. what will happen if the best talent does not get paid and goes elsewhere? are we going to enjoy the product so much with inferior talent? no one sees that as a threat to college football?
I see this as a possible threat. Cause I see this happening in 4 different scenarios.

1. It is only approved for student athletes in private colleges. With this I see the elite athletes trying to get into those schools. With the public schools getting the left overs. Because of that the athletes going to the publics schools could end up getting lawyers to make it fair so they get paid. Or bigger schools start paying the athletes under the table and get busted for it.

2. The NCAA makes it fair for all student athletes. So that all student athletes would get a stippend checks. This would shift even more power to the athletic departments with higher budgets. As they can affoard more higher caliber athletes. The smaller schools would now have no ability to get the higher caliber athletes. Cause of that they would be forever a bottom dweller or close the program.

3. The NCAA makes it fair as in scenario 2. Now to compensate for the extra costs. Each university and conference starts demanding more money from the networks. Causing them to drop some conferences and only keep the ones that make them money.

4. The NCAA laughs at this and rules against it. Everything continues on as it is now.

Out of the scenarios that I see. Three of them are bad for college football mainly for the lower level schools.

 
Out of the scenarios that I see. Three of them are bad for college football mainly for the lower level schools.
i think college football has been headed down a road for a long time that leads to the major teams and conferences splitting from the ncaa and doing their own thing and becoming basically minor league football. this may expedite that.

 
Does anyone wonder if Kain Colter started this whole thing because he knew he wasn't going to play in the NFL and was looking for a job?

 
Alabama coach Nick Saban said he's always been an advocate of players rights.
Saban commented on the topic of compensation for college athletes on Monday after Alabama's spring practice in the wake of the NLRB ruling in favor of Northwestern's players.

"I've always been an advocate of players' rights. I've always been an advocate of players being compensated the best that we can to help them," Saban said via AL.com. "Whatever the NCAA rule is and whatever they decide to do, I've always been an advocate of the player and the quality of life that a player has. I think that having a voice in what happens, I think, is something that the players probably ought to have."

"And I'm really not opposed to that at all. I do think that it's not what it seems."

Those against the practice of oversigning would likely be quick to point out some perceived hypocrisy in Saban's comments. And with good reason. Though Saban is near the target with his comment that the movement isn't what it seems. Having a union doesn't guarantee players any benefits they currently don't have. It just guarantees them the right to bargain collectively.
Yahoo

 
This whole argument of "this movement is not what it seems" is flat out bull. I've said it earlier, if this was entirely about giving the players a voice in terms of not losing their scholarships due to injuries, then something could have been done that didn't involve unionizing.

 
This whole argument of "this movement is not what it seems" is flat out bull. I've said it earlier, if this was entirely about giving the players a voice in terms of not losing their scholarships due to injuries, then something could have been done that didn't involve unionizing.
Yep. If Colter and co. were truly only concerned with having fair rights as far as scholarships and medical care, there are SO many easier ways to accomplish that end. This is all about money.

Notre Dame Joe said:
If a football player is paid $5,000 in real money plus his scholarship valued at 30-55k, plus health are, books, clothing then it adds up to a decent middle class wage for an 18 year old.
Football players already receive enough compensation to make them the top 1% in their age demographics.

 
Back
Top