Contracts for Players

[Dr. Strangelove]

On 5/3/2024 at 5:38 PM, runningblind said:

I've always thought the Men's and Women's teams should have the same base salary. They then could earn performance incentives and extra endorsement type things based on the revenue generating aspect of the sport.  To me, that is the only way it is fair. Equal at the core while acknowledging that some teams generate more revenue.

The Women's soccer team was offered the exact same deal as the men's team. The women rejected it.

 

Instead they negotiated a deal that offered less money, but included certain items the men for not get: pay for injuries, maternity leave, and better Healthcare. Their total package was better than the men. 

 

Still they sued and their case was thrown out of court almost immediately because their argument was nonexistent. USA soccer gave them a new and better deal to avoid backlash, not because of any legal reasons. 

On 5/3/2024 at 3:15 PM, RedDenver said:

 

I talked to a lawyer (she's a corporate contracts lawyer, not a in sports or labor law though) that said Title IX only applies to equality of participation for players, she thinks that the universities can pay the players as a separate entity and not as employees to avoid Title IX salary issues. It's a new area of the law though, so no one really knows what will happen.

I think being employees is where this is heading. While still a lot, $20 million is nowhere near what they can collectively bargain for. If CFB players negotiate similar to the NFL (a 48-52% revenue split), their compensation is probably ~$70 million.

 

Unfortunately, the NCAA is in no hurry to get to this point so we have another 5-10 years of a lawless sport while the courts ultimately handle the question on if they're employees - where SCOTUS has strongly indicated that they are. 

[Dr. Strangelove]

It looks like they're going to attempt to collectively bargain but not as employees. They need Congress to act. 

 

Additionally, it remains to be seen is courts declare athletes employees anyway. I think the endgame is still employee unionization, but this is interesting nonetheless!

 

[Red Five]

1 hour ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

It looks like they're going to attempt to collectively bargain but not as employees. They need Congress to act. 

 

Additionally, it remains to be seen is courts declare athletes employees anyway. I think the endgame is still employee unionization, but this is interesting nonetheless!

 

 

At this point in time, The College Football Players Association isn't a "real" thing.  They have no legal authority over anything going on with college athletes.  The NCAA (or whoever) has no reason to negotiate with them.

[Dr. Strangelove]

45 minutes ago, Red Five said:

 

At this point in time, The College Football Players Association isn't a "real" thing.  They have no legal authority over anything going on with college athletes.  The NCAA (or whoever) has no reason to negotiate with them.

In addition, it requires congress to create a new class of "nonemployee" but can unionize and negotiate a CBA. It seems strange.