Mavric Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Samuel McKewon @swmckewonOWH 7m As this Q&A clearly points out, public universities can't benefit from this ruling. http://college-football.si.com/2014/03/26/northwestern-nlrb-union-kain-colter/#more-29261… Quote Link to comment
Mavric Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Samuel McKewon @swmckewonOWH 4m "Right-to-work" laws (like the one in Nebraska) would make unionizing very hard, since the players can't mandate new recruits join it. Quote Link to comment
hskrpwr13 Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 i blame the schools and ncaa for this. there was no middle ground offered to the "student"-athletes. they were either student or employees. they went the only way they could. i find it funny that so many fans begrudge the student athletes for fighting for their rights. the athletes are the ones making the schools incredible amounts of money, and just because fans enjoy a product produced by poorly compensated athletes, fans think they are entitled (?) to such a product because it is just they way they like it and the students get more than enough? i just do not understand the ire against the athletes. let us not kid ourselves, they are poorly compensated for what they produce. there are networks dedicated to and paid for by college football. pro athletes are making ridiculous amounts of money. but college kids should be happy with an education, food, and free clothing (which is just advertisement for the clothing makers and school)? how do people only see this from one side? the side that the athletes are greedy? everyone else involved in college athletes are disgustingly greedy, and the athletes ask for their share and it is "the biggest bs ever"? give me a break. I think it has to do more with why one watches/cares about college football. If you're in it strictly for fantasy purposes or just enjoy football, this probably isn't a big deal to you and you'd fall on the side of "sticking it to the man". However, if one roots for a SCHOOL to do well in sports because one takes pride in "their" athletes, and the community/state they represent as student-athletes; and donates money to ensure that the PROGRAM is in the best position to succeed, one may feel the opposite. IMO, the money generated should go to something (I'm not fully sure to where) that benefits everyone besides coaches, school administrators and ncaa management. In a perfect world, coaches would recruit for both playing ability and scholastic performance. They should be able to tell a poor kid with poor grades that they probably need to think about getting a job to support themselves or family, and worry about getting to the NFL when they are eligible. Ultimately, would you be a die-hard fan of minor league football? The reason college football is so popular is the "college" part, not the "football" part. If it was the other way around, someone or some entity (the NFL most likely) would have already determine how to profit from minor league football. There's not much of a market for it. Quote Link to comment
kchusker_chris Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Samuel McKewon @swmckewonOWH 4m "Right-to-work" laws (like the one in Nebraska) would make unionizing very hard, since the players can't mandate new recruits join it. Gotta disagree w/ him. Are there not teacher unions in Nebraska? There's is a situation of bullying in any unionized environment, from a middle school to a hospital. New recruits, regardless of their rights - would be easily persuaded by upper-classmen...regardless of how "legal" that is or isn't. Quote Link to comment
sd'sker Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 I think it has to do more with why one watches/cares about college football. If you're in it strictly for fantasy purposes or just enjoy football, this probably isn't a big deal to you and you'd fall on the side of "sticking it to the man". However, if one roots for a SCHOOL to do well in sports because one takes pride in "their" athletes, and the community/state they represent as student-athletes; and donates money to ensure that the PROGRAM is in the best position to succeed, one may feel the opposite. IMO, the money generated should go to something (I'm not fully sure to where) that benefits everyone besides coaches, school administrators and ncaa management. In a perfect world, coaches would recruit for both playing ability and scholastic performance. They should be able to tell a poor kid with poor grades that they probably need to think about getting a job to support themselves or family, and worry about getting to the NFL when they are eligible. Ultimately, would you be a die-hard fan of minor league football? The reason college football is so popular is the "college" part, not the "football" part. If it was the other way around, someone or some entity (the NFL most likely) would have already determine how to profit from minor league football. There's not much of a market for it. i'm sorry, but none of this really made sense to me. the money used to just mostly go to the school, which was good. now a lot of people are getting rich off of college athletics (predominantly football) that have nothing to do with any of the institutions. Quote Link to comment
QMany Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 I don't have a problem with the NCAA, their stand on amateurism, and the benefits student-athletes are currently getting. I have a problem with the (age) barriers to entry the NFL and NBA have implemented. Just because they don't want the risk doesn't mean the NCAA must change their amateurism model. Take out the one-and-done and three year rules. If these kids think they deserve to get paid, let them take on the risks and earn their keep. If they want to play for the NCAA, they will play by their amateur rules. Quote Link to comment
Mavric Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Samuel McKewon @swmckewonOWH 8m As Colter said, union's demands will be modest. Freedom to take certain classes. More rest periods. A removal of arbitrary pencil rolls. Samuel McKewon @swmckewonOWH 7m You'll see the media couple this ruling in with pay-for-play. Don't take that bait. They're not the same thing. Quote Link to comment
sd'sker Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 I don't have a problem with the NCAA, their stand on amateurism, and the benefits student-athletes are currently getting. I have a problem with the (age) barriers to entry the NFL and NBA have implemented. Just because they don't want the risk doesn't mean the NCAA must change their amateurism model. Take out the one-and-done and three year rules. If these kids think they deserve to get paid, let them take on the risks and earn their keep. If they want to play for the NCAA, they will play by their amateur rules. just did a quick google search for "college amateurs" and now i have to uninstall my work computer's browser. but, i get what you are saying. however, can you really call student athletes "amateurs" when they are making millions of dollars not only for their schools, but many networks? i wish it was not like this, but it is because so many have continually exploited the model and the popularity of college football has reached levels never imagined just a couple decades ago. (side note: wasn't TO in favor of paying athletes?) Quote Link to comment
StPaulHusker Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 I don't have a problem with the NCAA, their stand on amateurism, and the benefits student-athletes are currently getting. I have a problem with the (age) barriers to entry the NFL and NBA have implemented. Just because they don't want the risk doesn't mean the NCAA must change their amateurism model. Take out the one-and-done and three year rules. If these kids think they deserve to get paid, let them take on the risks and earn their keep. If they want to play for the NCAA, they will play by their amateur rules. They can still take on the risk if they want. The NBA and the NFL have a standard in place. If a kid feels like they are professionally ready out of high school, go to another country and play. Quote Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 i blame the schools and ncaa for this. there was no middle ground offered to the "student"-athletes. they were either student or employees. they went the only way they could. i find it funny that so many fans begrudge the student athletes for fighting for their rights. the athletes are the ones making the schools incredible amounts of money, and just because fans enjoy a product produced by poorly compensated athletes, fans think they are entitled (?) to such a product because it is just they way they like it and the students get more than enough? i just do not understand the ire against the athletes. let us not kid ourselves, they are poorly compensated for what they produce. there are networks dedicated to and paid for by college football. pro athletes are making ridiculous amounts of money. but college kids should be happy with an education, food, and free clothing (which is just advertisement for the clothing makers and school)? how do people only see this from one side? the side that the athletes are greedy? everyone else involved in college athletes are disgustingly greedy, and the athletes ask for their share and it is "the biggest bs ever"? give me a break. I blame everyone above the athlete for this. You have coaches making 5-8 million dollars with the ability to leave at the drop of the hat for a bigger pay day only to leave the athlete holding his wong and penalized if he leaves for a better program. You have huge TV networks literally making billions of dollars off of this product and (at least looking in from the outside) they don't give a crap about the athlete. You have product manufacturers that make huge amounts of money off of these athletes wearing their products. THEN...you have the NCAA who makes millions off of these sports only to turn around and penalize that athlete if he gets a free ham sandwich from someone or, God forbid, too many text books. The system is totally messed up because of greed at the top. I don't agree with paying the athletes a salary. I say that only because I honestly think that will destroy the product and there are other examples of professions where someone makes little to nothing for a few years while getting started in the profession or being educated to hopefully get a pay day in the future. I would be perfectly fine with this union if it were to guarantee the safety of the athlete, give the athlete a voice against the NCAA and give them some type of compensation if they are injured or harmed in a manner that affects them long term such as paralysis...etc. Athletes should have a voice in these issues. However, if this is only a matter of.....hey, I want to be payed big bucks to play college sports, then that will destroy college sports as we know it today and much of it will literally go away. 2 Quote Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Samuel McKewon @swmckewonOWH 8m As Colter said, union's demands will be modest. Freedom to take certain classes. More rest periods. A removal of arbitrary pencil rolls. Samuel McKewon @swmckewonOWH 7m You'll see the media couple this ruling in with pay-for-play. Don't take that bait. They're not the same thing. The problem with these statements is that this might be the goal of athletes like Colter who are pushing for this now. They have absolutely no control over what this union pushes for 10-15 years from now. 2 Quote Link to comment
commando Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Can anyone tell me if those athletic scholarships are taxed? found this at another sight..... The IRS code allows scholarships but taxes any amount of the assistance that is considered payment for services. Since players are now to be considered as employees as per the NLRB ruling, the amount of their scholarship that is considered payment for services would be fully taxable. http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc421.html 1 Quote Link to comment
sd'sker Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 I blame everyone above the athlete for this. You have coaches making 5-8 million dollars with the ability to leave at the drop of the hat for a bigger pay day only to leave the athlete holding his wong and penalized if he leaves for a better program. You have huge TV networks literally making billions of dollars off of this product and (at least looking in from the outside) they don't give a crap about the athlete. You have product manufacturers that make huge amounts of money off of these athletes wearing their products. THEN...you have the NCAA who makes millions off of these sports only to turn around and penalize that athlete if he gets a free ham sandwich from someone or, God forbid, too many text books. The system is totally messed up because of greed at the top. I don't agree with paying the athletes a salary. I say that only because I honestly think that will destroy the product and there are other examples of professions where someone makes little to nothing for a few years while getting started in the profession or being educated to hopefully get a pay day in the future. I would be perfectly fine with this union if it were to guarantee the safety of the athlete, give the athlete a voice against the NCAA and give them some type of compensation if they are injured or harmed in a manner that affects them long term such as paralysis...etc. Athletes should have a voice in these issues. However, if this is only a matter of.....hey, I want to be payed big bucks to play college sports, then that will destroy college sports as we know it today and much of it will literally go away. this. all of it. +1. Quote Link to comment
Morrison Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Rivals.com @Rivals 4m Northwestern players win its union battle against NU after @NLRB rules in their favor. What do you think about unions in college sports? As a former scholarship athlete (thankfully I am from a naturally-strong family), even I think this is ridiculous. I can confirm what was mentioned earlier in the thread regarding athlete compensation; it is not minimal. The amount of perks these guys get in terms of clothing, food, travel stipends, room and board stipends, gadgets (Ipads in every locker!), tutoring, and, let's be honest, notoriety, is considerable. Yes, the athletic departments and (NCAA) are making tons of cash, but I think people sometimes fail to consider that a significant amount of that cash is reinvested in the athletic facilities/programs at these schools (the much decried "athletic facilities arms race") - which is a benefit to the players that is not really quantifiable. Someone above me said that greed would bring down CFB before medical concerns did, and I think they might be right. Quote Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Can anyone tell me if those athletic scholarships are taxed? found this at another sight..... The IRS code allows scholarships but taxes any amount of the assistance that is considered payment for services. Since players are now to be considered as employees as per the NLRB ruling, the amount of their scholarship that is considered payment for services would be fully taxable. http://www.irs.gov/t...pics/tc421.html I get this knot in my stomach from the feeling of.....careful what you wish for....with this. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.