NLRB regional director: College football players are employees, not student athletes, and can unionize

posted at 5:21 pm on March 26, 2014 by Allahpundit

Look on the bright side: Employment is finally growing in one sector of Obama’s America.

The magical combination of unions, the NCAA, college football, and Chicago makes me think this can’t possibly lead to a bad outcome.

NLRB regional director Peter Sung Ohr cited the players’ time commitment to their sport and the fact their scholarships were tied directly to their performance as reasons for granting them union rights…

CAPA attorneys argued that college football is, for all practical purposes, a commercial enterprise that relies on players’ labor to generate billions of dollars in profits. That, they contend, makes the relationship of schools to players one of employers to employees.

In its endeavor to have college football players be recognized as essential workers, CAPA likened scholarships to employment pay — too little pay from its point of view. Northwestern balked at that claim, describing scholarship as grants.

Giving college athletes employee status and allowing them to unionize, critics have argued, could hurt college sports in numerous ways — including by raising the prospects of strikes by disgruntled players or lockouts by athletic departments.

Here’s the ruling, which is short to begin with and even shorter in pertinent part (pages 14 to 20). Key bit:

stu

The ruling distinguishes walk-ons, who receive no financial benefit from playing and are given more freedom by coaches to behave like normal students, from scholarship recipients, who receive $75,000 or so in tuition and other benefits each year and who are forced to follow employee-like rules set by their bosses/coaches. They’re recruited for football, they spend most of their time on football, and they answer chiefly to the athletic department, not the academic faculty. Put all that together with the fact that their activities generate tens of millions in revenue for the university and ta da — you’ve got an employment relationship. Can’t wait for the first strike during bowl season.

The union isn’t asking for salaries yet. They want better medical care for players, scholarships that cover the “full cost” of attending school, and a trust fund that players could use to help finish their education once their eligibility has expired. The ruling doesn’t affect the NCAA’s own rules, either: Employee or not, you’re still ineligible to play if you take money (that isn’t sufficiently disguised as part of your “scholarship,” that is). Maybe a players’ strike, one no doubt supported by schools with more cash to spend on talent, will change that. Given how short most players’ careers are in the NFL, the urgency monetizing one’s college years is sky high. Makes me wonder, in fact, why a rival for-profit league for players 21 and under hasn’t developed as a competitor to the college system. Maybe there simply isn’t enough infrastructure for it, but if they signed a bunch of top high-school talent, they’d drum up some interest. At the very least, if you want to put pressure on the NCAA to allow salaries in the name of retaining the talent it has, that’d do it.

Ah well, doesn’t matter. Football will be defunct in a few decades anyway. Exit question via Lis Meinecke: If college scholarship students are employees, are high-school scholarship students also employees?

Update: Hmmmmm.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

More hopenchange from this the regime’s cronies. Does it ever end with theses people?

Whitey Ford on March 26, 2014 at 5:24 PM

cancel the scholarships and programs.

dmacleo on March 26, 2014 at 5:25 PM

This comes in under the heading Reaping What You Sow.

M240H on March 26, 2014 at 5:25 PM

Solution:

NCAA ends sports scholarships; colleges and universities forced to return to educating.

BobMbx on March 26, 2014 at 5:26 PM

and NLRB members are progressive thugs, not public servants.

MTF on March 26, 2014 at 5:26 PM

So that union is open to all scholarship recipients with stipulations on their money, correct?

rogerb on March 26, 2014 at 5:27 PM

When the coach out-earns the dean by a factor of two, or three, or five, or more … this is inevitable.

M240H on March 26, 2014 at 5:28 PM

education
1mo
NCAA says ‘union-backed attempt to turn student-athletes into employees undermines the purpose of college: an education. Student-athletes are not employees, and their participation in college sports is voluntary’ – statement via @NBCNews
end of alert

canopfor on March 26, 2014 at 5:28 PM


http://www.breakingnews.com/topic/northwestern-football-players-attempt-to-join-union/

football
55m
NCAA on union decision: ‘While not a party to the proceeding, the NCAA is disappointed that the NLRB Region 13 determined the Northwestern football team may vote to be considered university employees. We strongly disagree with the notion that student-athletes are employees’ – @SBNationCFB
end of alert
==============

football
2h
Former Northwestern quarterback Kain Colter on NLRB ruling: ‘This is a huge win for all college athletes’ – @KainColter_2

football
2h
Northwestern University on NLRB ruling: ‘While we respect the NLRB process and the regional director’s opinion, we disagree with it. Northwestern believes strongly that our student-athletes are not employees, but students’ – via @Rohan_NU
end of alert

canopfor on March 26, 2014 at 5:29 PM

Does this go for ANY student who scores a scholarship through the college, say for dance or band or debate or something? If not, why not?

UnderstandingisPower on March 26, 2014 at 5:30 PM

So doesn’t mean the scholarships are income and should be taxed? Shouldn’t FICA be withheld from the scholarship?

NoFanofLibs on March 26, 2014 at 5:31 PM

Does this go for ANY student who scores a scholarship through the college, say for dance or band or debate or something? If not, why not?
 
UnderstandingisPower on March 26, 2014 at 5:30 PM

 
Because shut up racist.
 
Seriously.
 

Between 2007 and 2010, Black men were 2.8% of full-time,
degree-seeking undergraduate students, but 57.1% of football
teams and 64.3% of basketball teams.

rogerb on March 26, 2014 at 5:33 PM

Since they’re employees now, they get free rubbers.

BobMbx on March 26, 2014 at 5:33 PM

So the cost of a college education is about to jump?

birdwatcher on March 26, 2014 at 5:33 PM

I heard the other day, that the salary for big-time college football coaches is $3-6 million per year. Woody Hayes (“Praise the Lord”) made $42,000 his last year coaching the Buckeyes.

AcidReflux on March 26, 2014 at 5:34 PM

rogerb on March 26, 2014 at 5:33 PM

Man, thats as racist as using skin color when describing a suspect in a crime.

Good lord.

BobMbx on March 26, 2014 at 5:34 PM

The union isn’t asking for salaries yet. They want better medical care for players, scholarships that cover the “full cost” of attending school, and a trust fund that players could use to help finish their education once their eligibility has expired.

I wonder how college student-athletes will pay their union dues.

I imagine the unions will try to collect dues directly from the bloated university budgets.

Alopen on March 26, 2014 at 5:35 PM

Look for the games to be shorter, the quality of play to decline and the teams to get 12 times out per quarter…

bimmcorp on March 26, 2014 at 5:36 PM

Good news! Make college football teams into profit centers, ignore the idea that you’re ever going to educate these stupid thugs, and recruit the best damned team you can afford.

More seriously, no scholarships or grants. Hire your college’s football team like any other college employee (who has access of going to classes for free) and be done with it. Let’s end the pretense that our nation’s winning football teams are still pumping out educated men afterward. That model has long been dead. For example, how many Catholics are starters at Notre Dame?

Happy Nomad on March 26, 2014 at 5:36 PM

Does this mean the students need to maintain a passing grade?

birdwatcher on March 26, 2014 at 5:37 PM

On the bright side maybe the unions will run colleges financially into the ground? Oh, but then comes the bailouts……nevermind.

tommer74 on March 26, 2014 at 5:38 PM

I hope it all fails. I won’t pay 1 minutes attention to college athletics.

Murphy9 on March 26, 2014 at 5:38 PM

You have to admit, there are a lot of Obamacare sign ups in that group.

birdwatcher on March 26, 2014 at 5:38 PM

Just eliminate the scholarships and problem is solved. Most players I know like playing the game enough to go to school and play anyway. If not, they can see if they can get a pro contract straight out of high school or better yet just major in a subject for which there is a non-entertainment market.

KW64 on March 26, 2014 at 5:38 PM

The big problem is what do we watch on Saturdays in the fall when baseball is over? And what happens to all those university stadiums that are no longer needed? The left “logic” continues to amaze me at every turn. If they keep it up, we will be back to that civil war thing. I hope the right side requires passports to enter and keeps track of visitors from the left.

teejk on March 26, 2014 at 5:38 PM

So, call it “soccer” instead.

spd rdr on March 26, 2014 at 5:38 PM

As an alum of that fine, OVERpriced, and wildly profitable endowed institution: Fun to watch.

Looking forward to great wailing and gnashing of teeth on all sides. Of course, some of us like watching films of train accidents and tornados, so: No accounting for personal tastes.

orangemtl on March 26, 2014 at 5:38 PM

And Bear Bryant kept his salary $1 below the university president.

AcidReflux on March 26, 2014 at 5:39 PM

Look for the games to be shorter, the quality of play to decline and the teams to get 12 times out per quarter…

bimmcorp on March 26, 2014 at 5:36 PM

HAH! Well played! But you missed an obvious point. The teams are going to be much bigger. College teams will have to field teams with players that only go from home side to visitor side and vice-versa.

Happy Nomad on March 26, 2014 at 5:40 PM

Hahaha

Another nail in the coffin of “higher education”…

CrazyGene on March 26, 2014 at 5:43 PM

Peter Sung Ohr

Heh. NLRB is such a pathetic joke it’s hard to know where to start. If you’re a college, you cancel football the instant a Federal judge agrees with this dope, right?

Jaibones on March 26, 2014 at 5:43 PM

Another nail in the coffin for football. How long before they move on to basketball, and other sports? As much as I love football, I think it will be gone within 20 years, or maybe even less.

Ward Cleaver on March 26, 2014 at 5:44 PM

a trust fund that players could use to help finish their education once their eligibility has expired.

The final nail in that sad idea that they get an education while playing.

WitchDoctor on March 26, 2014 at 5:44 PM

So doesn’t mean the scholarships are income and should be taxed? Shouldn’t FICA be withheld from the scholarship?

NoFanofLibs on March 26, 2014 at 5:31 PM

Yes everybody wants a cut of that sweet pie that colleges have been hording for decades. It’s past time they busted this racket up.

DFCtomm on March 26, 2014 at 5:44 PM

cancel the scholarships and programs.

dmacleo on March 26, 2014 at 5:25 PM

Dream on. NCAA football is a cash cow.

Just look at all the corruption involved with it, not just with the NCAA itself, but with the colleges that participate in it. Penn State was more than happy to cover up an ex-coach pumpin little boys in the shower just to keep the $$$ rolling in.

Then there’s the pretense these scholarships provide educations to disadvantaged youths with great football talent. Maybe it provides an opportunity, but a lot of NFL players are like Michael Vick: practically illiterate.

- which is why I always laugh at people who say they like college football more than NFL football because it’s “pure.”

Give me a break. If anything, it’s more stained and more corrupt. At least NFL players get huge contracts everyone can see.

DRayRaven on March 26, 2014 at 5:45 PM

Does this mean the students need to maintain a passing grade?

birdwatcher on March 26, 2014 at 5:37 PM

Probably but they get a union rep to go in as their rep when “the man” gives them a “D” in English 101.

Happy Nomad on March 26, 2014 at 5:45 PM

Now that they are employees it should be about 5 minutes before legislatures and taxing authorities begin to tax their wages. The value of that scholarship at NW is about $75,000. What a recruiting nightmare this sets up for the program. This could be the beginning of the end of football at Northwestern and other private universities that are not in right to work states.

Ellis on March 26, 2014 at 5:46 PM

…More seriously, no scholarships or grants. Hire your college’s football team like any other college employee (who has access of going to classes for free) and be done with it…

Happy Nomad on March 26, 2014 at 5:36 PM

Exactly right.

WitchDoctor on March 26, 2014 at 5:47 PM

What about research departments that generate $$$ based on students?

This is a sad joke.

I am tired of hearing about students getting shafted – when it is a small minority of those who both perform well, generate money, get injured – and decide to not continue their degree programs. The majority get a free education, stipend, treated like rock stars and a huge opportunity to make pros… or get a friggin degree for free and go and earn a career.

Should colleges make no money at all in any and all departments? The amount of funding for the entire school and conference – including Title 9 women programs, buildings, dorms, student centers, etc due to sports would disappear.

If you don’t like a college making money off of you – don’t go to college. Specifically NFL and football – each NFL team has 3-5 non D1 scholar players who made it in other ways.

Odie1941 on March 26, 2014 at 5:47 PM

If the students are employees, does this change the understanding of balance in regards to Title IX? Will we see a decrease in women’s sports because the football program will become a for-profit partnership with the school?

dcman98 on March 26, 2014 at 5:47 PM

I played football at TCU from 2007-2011. I am one of those “exploited student athletes” that people like to go all bleeding heart over.

I wasn’t a scholarship player but I was a walk on. And I could make a case that I had to do MORE than the scholarship players. Not only did I have to do all the workouts and practices and film meetings and such that the scholarship players did, but I also had to maintain a certain GPA and play scout team. Scout team its putting myself in harms way just as much as the guys who played on Saturday did.

During my time at TCU I got 3 concussions and still suffer from a back injury that I still need surgery for. And not once did I ever complain that I should get paid, or was being exploited, or that I have “rights”. I knew what I was getting into.

This is why it ticks me off that these guys who are getting full rides and scholarship money are complaining that they aren’t getting enough. They don’t realize how lucky they are. Maybe they would get it if they graduated with student debt they had to repay like I did. I would have been completely grateful for a scholarship.

I hope the Northwestern players go down in flames here in their union attempts. It’s not practical and it just shows they are greedy.

tcufrog on March 26, 2014 at 5:48 PM

Rush. Was. Right.

Whatever happened about those illegal recess appointments made by BlowBama?

/Oh, that’s right. NO INVESTIGATIONS because that would be racist.

Key West Reader on March 26, 2014 at 5:48 PM

So doesn’t mean the scholarships are income and should be taxed? Shouldn’t FICA be withheld from the scholarship?

NoFanofLibs on March 26, 2014 at 5:31 PM

This was my first thought. If you follow the logic here scholarships should be taxed as income.

Mark1971 on March 26, 2014 at 5:48 PM

If the students are employees, does this change the understanding of balance in regards to Title IX?

The more dangerous proposition is that employees are now students, and employers are now subject to Title IX.

BobMbx on March 26, 2014 at 5:51 PM

Does this go for ANY student who scores a scholarship through the college, say for dance or band or debate or something? If not, why not?

UnderstandingisPower on March 26, 2014 at 5:30 PM

The big money – also to be known in the future as the basis for UNION DUES – is in sports, and not anywhere else. The rest of it is relatively insignificant in comparison.

There are very few dance or band students getting $75k/year scholarships, I would imagine. And certainly not in the numbers of students that get sports scholarships.

Midas on March 26, 2014 at 5:51 PM

Why do we keep the pretense that these are college kids playing a sporting game in their free time? It is minor league football. Wouldn’t it be easier for everyone if we took the university out of the mix?

tdarrington on March 26, 2014 at 5:52 PM

Should colleges make no money at all in any and all departments?
Odie1941 on March 26, 2014 at 5:47 PM

I’m sorry but you apparently have no idea what we are talking about. They are flush with cash, and they offer less and less return for the bounty they reap. Hell, even the studies they are producing are nearly %50 garbage.

DFCtomm on March 26, 2014 at 5:53 PM

If they are employees, they become subject to hiring regulations. Cut from the team? Sue for discrimination.

redshirt on March 26, 2014 at 5:53 PM

The end of college football. Hey, it was good while it lasted.

Pork-Chop on March 26, 2014 at 5:53 PM

Does this mean the total number of scholarships will be kept below 49 for the entire athletic department to avoid providing them with healthcare, too?

TexasDan on March 26, 2014 at 5:54 PM

Greedy unions desperate for new members, that’s all this is.

slickwillie2001 on March 26, 2014 at 5:54 PM

Here is a scenario that shows why this is a bad idea.

Football players are unionized, so the 85 scholarship players now get paid.

The 35 non scholarship players are mad. They still have to practice and workout, and be the scout teams for upcoming games. The non scholarship players band together and say “Pay us the same as the starters/scholarship players because we are just as important as the starters and scholarship players! If you don’t pay us, we will walk out and you will have to use game day contributors for your scout teams”

Then the walk ons start getting paid. Now the student managers want a piece of the pie. “We wash the players uniforms and clothes, distribute and maintain their equipment, and help run practices among other things. You can not operate without us!”

The student managers are now getting paid, and the student trainers see what they did. “We tape ankles, distribute water and Gatorade, and do other essential tasks for the football program. Pay us or your players will die of dehydration at practice”

So now the student trainers are getting paid. The student video staff who films practices and games now want in. “We film all your practices and games, cut up the video and organize it all. Without us, how can you critique practices and games?”

See where this is going?

tcufrog on March 26, 2014 at 5:54 PM

It is all very simple. If these athletes do not want a free education, they don’t have to go to college on a football scholarship.

birdwatcher on March 26, 2014 at 5:55 PM

The end of college football. Hey, it was good while it lasted.

Pork-Chop on March 26, 2014 at 5:53 PM

Why only football? Why not basketball too?

slickwillie2001 on March 26, 2014 at 5:56 PM

I hope the right side requires passports to enter and keeps track of visitors from the left OUT.

teejk on March 26, 2014 at 5:38 PM

Better.

pannw on March 26, 2014 at 5:57 PM

Can’t wait for the fall out. I despise the NCAA, and I despise unions in general. Prefect storm coming for me.

guido911 on March 26, 2014 at 5:59 PM

This is — admittedly — not on point but, for those who follow basketball, the Harvard team that just made a name for itself in this year’s NCAA tournament had NO scholarship athletes.

More on point, here’s an idea that is downright devious and could be fun:

There are no athletic scholarships. Financial aid is what it is today — totally need-based (for example, the admission departments and aid departments don’t communicate regarding applicants). A kid who can afford to pay Alabama’s tuition goes to Alabama, if they want to play football there and the coaches want them. A kid who can’t afford it goes through the financial aid office and ends up with a college loan instead of an athletic scholarship to pay off down the road, and possibly works a campus job as well, to pay for tuition (congratulations, union organizers).

The athletic department makes an annual contribution of X% of it’s net income to the general scholarship fund of the school. That money boosts the school’s endowment and helps to fund the need-based financial aid to students (all students).

It could make for some very interesting team configurations but, hey, it could be fun to watch. With a side benefit — the best coaches might tend to have the best teams, rather than the purchasers of the best talent through athletic grants.

Won’t happen but, while we’re playing with scenarios, this one seemed like fun to imagine.

IndieDogg on March 26, 2014 at 6:00 PM

Should colleges make no money at all in any and all departments?
Odie1941 on March 26, 2014 at 5:47 PM

I’m sorry but you apparently have no idea what we are talking about. They are flush with cash, and they offer less and less return for the bounty they reap. Hell, even the studies they are producing are nearly %50 garbage.

DFCtomm on March 26, 2014 at 5:53 PM

WTF are YOU talking about? Less in return? Yeah – top NCAA programs aren’t breeding grounds for over paid pros. Have you ever watched recruiting days? They are televised due to kids wanting to make a program that will put them in the spotlight. And last time I checked – the programs that generate $$$ put it back into the university’s. Say – I don’t recall rabid fans who pay thousands a year for season tickets, merchandise, etc upset about anything.

Its an eyes wide open scenario for everyone involved. don’t want to “make a U money” – go to a small program or one without scholarship athletes like IVY for football.

Sports is a well compensated avenue for kids who choose to not go for academics, but for the very sport itself, with a tremendous opportunity to not only go pro – but make huge alumni contacts and get handed a lucrative job or career.

Odie1941 on March 26, 2014 at 6:01 PM

Why only football? Why not basketball too?

slickwillie2001 on March 26, 2014 at 5:56 PM

Sure – why not?

Sports are just too dangerous, and usually lead to people getting their feelings hurt :(

Pork-Chop on March 26, 2014 at 6:02 PM

One year, when I was a kid, OSU declined their invitation to the Rose Bowl. You see, it would be the 2nd year in a row and it just wouldn’t be fair. Nobody under 40 believes me when I tell them that.

Fenris on March 26, 2014 at 6:03 PM

And by the way kids, once all athletes have been unionized…..

Next up interns and TAs. Minimum wage at a minimum with no recognition that part of the exchange has always been given an opportunity for gaining experience. The courts are going have to put a value on opportunity and experience.

Happy Nomad on March 26, 2014 at 6:05 PM

This sounds like a job creation program for lawyers.

birdwatcher on March 26, 2014 at 6:06 PM

WTF are YOU talking about?

Odie1941 on March 26, 2014 at 6:01 PM

You are the one who said all departments, and then can’t understand when I make a statement about universities in general. The product(education) is returning(jobs) less and less every year. The academic studies they produce are nearly %50 bogus with made up results. With that kind of record why do they deserve more and more profit? They are becoming sports teams with a side line in education, and they are worse and worse in that side line every year, but they don’t want to pay their athletes?

DFCtomm on March 26, 2014 at 6:08 PM

See where this is going?

tcufrog on March 26, 2014 at 5:54 PM

Um …toward a business model where people get paid if they are valuable to the enterprise? Trivially few of these people end up in the pros, but the colleges make millions off of people paid in momentary glory and a diploma worth as little as the time they were able to devote learning anything.

Fenris on March 26, 2014 at 6:10 PM

So doesn’t mean the scholarships are income and should be taxed? Shouldn’t FICA be withheld from the scholarship?

NoFanofLibs on March 26, 2014 at 5:31 PM

As is basketball players now…and any other sport.

Yes, it should be taxed, and figure a Stanford player at about 50 grand per year, taxes, actually more including travel expenses and other, closer to 75 grand per year.

Basketball players the same…50-75 grand per year, and many have tutors supplied to them…

Yowza, this makes scholarships not worth much…alone with FICA is insurance ObamaCare!!

right2bright on March 26, 2014 at 6:10 PM

The final nail in that sad idea that they get an education while playing.

WitchDoctor on March 26, 2014 at 5:44 PM

I’ve always wondered when the colleges would stop pretending their sports had anything to do with education. The players think this is great but how great will they feel about it when they have to pay taxes and union dues and insurance.

crankyoldlady on March 26, 2014 at 6:11 PM

One year, when I was a kid, OSU declined their invitation to the Rose Bowl. You see, it would be the 2nd year in a row and it just wouldn’t be fair. Nobody under 40 believes me when I tell them that.

Fenris on March 26, 2014 at 6:03 PM

I’m guessing this wasn’t a year with a “2″ as the first digit.

A couple of years ago, my school’s mediocre and 1A team got a chance to play on television if they dumped one school on the schedule and picked up this opportunity (no clue as to why the original schedule fell apart) it meant a significant influx of cash for the school. Nobody, including the originally scheduled opponent of my school complained.

It’s all about the money in NCAA football these days. No scholar-athletes. No pretense that they are producing educated men to society.

Happy Nomad on March 26, 2014 at 6:11 PM

Happy Nomad on March 26, 2014 at 6:05 PM

TAs are there to actually learn something. If universities’ dalliance with sports ends up infecting their original mission, they have nobody but themselves to blame.

Interns is a whole other issue, one that is abused sometimes.

Fenris on March 26, 2014 at 6:14 PM

It’s all about the money in NCAA football these days. No scholar-athletes. No pretense that they are producing educated men to society.

Happy Nomad on March 26, 2014 at 6:11 PM

Yep.

Fenris on March 26, 2014 at 6:16 PM

You are the one who said all departments, and then can’t understand when I make a statement about universities in general. The product(education) is returning(jobs) less and less every year. The academic studies they produce are nearly %50 bogus with made up results. With that kind of record why do they deserve more and more profit? They are becoming sports teams with a side line in education, and they are worse and worse in that side line every year, but they don’t want to pay their athletes?

DFCtomm on March 26, 2014 at 6:08 PM

Nonsense. So because Alabama is a Top Tier football team, making top dollar off of their football team – my wife’s Sum Cum Laude degree is worth less and grads aren’t finding jobs.. due to the football program?

Find me a top NCAA sport school that has bogus academics. The fact is when more money is generated from sports – it expands the student experience and degree programs across the board.

How about Notre Dame? Standford? Vandy? Duke? Wake Forest? – who seem to manage both sides really well – good sports programs and stellar academics.

I think your commentary is misguided.

Odie1941 on March 26, 2014 at 6:18 PM

What a joke…free education, potential to make money as a professional athlete isn’t enough?!?

Guess the unions need to find a way to stop the bleeding from sane people leaving their ranks. So public universities will now have to pay union dues? More of my tax dollars going to the pockets of unions who then pass that money off to Democrats who don’t represent me? Awesome…

nextgen_repub on March 26, 2014 at 6:18 PM

There are very few dance or band students getting $75k/year scholarships, I would imagine. And certainly not in the numbers of students that get sports scholarships.

Midas on March 26, 2014 at 5:51 PM

I am not so sure about that…music scholarships, math, engineering, language, some are not full ride, but are 50% or 25%…but still, at a private adds up to tens of thousands per student.

When you have a University with 30,000 students, if 2 or 3% have scholarships.

The point being, if they unionize, it becomes “pay”, and income for one group is income for all groups so everyone starts paying taxes on their scholarships, even if it is a $1000 language.

Politicians are not the brightest, and they tend to react rather than plan…I think this is going to backfire on them big time.

right2bright on March 26, 2014 at 6:20 PM

So a handful of huge schools will pay the best players the highest salaries and have the awesomest teams.

Akzed on March 26, 2014 at 6:22 PM

How about Notre Dame? Standford? Vandy? Duke? Wake Forest? – who seem to manage both sides really well – good sports programs and stellar academics.

I think your commentary is misguided.

Odie1941 on March 26, 2014 at 6:18 PM

Well, Florida, Colorado, Alabama, all Universities, but not known for their academics, Texas…you have some like Cal Tech, MIT, Claremont Colleges, hardly “bad” universities, but not known for there (if any) athletics…

Of course the great bar bet is: What university/college has appeared in the Rose Bowl more than any other? Cal Tech…line up the pitchers of beer for that one.

right2bright on March 26, 2014 at 6:24 PM

This is something the NCAA brought upon itself. When the compliance rule book is 500 pages long and you can’t buy a kid a candy bar or give them a ride in a car without breaking the rules, you’ve asked for it.

CTSherman on March 26, 2014 at 6:26 PM

Yakoff Smirnoff came 30 years too soon.

Murphy9 on March 26, 2014 at 6:26 PM

Odie1941 on March 26, 2014 at 6:18 PM

Grade inflation exists. Unverifiable, non-repeatable results from academic studies exist, and we have millions of students with worthless degrees and six figure debt that can’t find a job. It’s becoming a racket.

DFCtomm on March 26, 2014 at 6:28 PM

So if you’re now cutting into those large programs profits, and those profits fund a lot of the other sports…well then bye bye other sports/programs.

And because of Title IX you’ll lose equal mens and womens sports. But when those womens sports get cut the government will scream, forcing the schools to still keep those open. So the school will attempt to shut down programs like “women’s studies” and other degrees that provide little job opportunities outside of college. Women’s groups will freak out forcing the school to keep those ope, so instead they’ll just raise tuition. Minority special interest groups will say that minorities are now even more limited in paying for college, so the college will increase minority based scholarships and just raise tuition for everyone else. Middle to upper class, white, non-athlete males will then be forced to pay 5x their previous tuition costs. And no one will care…

nextgen_repub on March 26, 2014 at 6:35 PM

Who would pay them, the schools themselves? And would there be a pay scale or would they be able to negotiate contracts individually? If they do receive pay, would they then have to pay for their tuition? And ultimately, wouldn’t this drive up tuition for everyone else?

BKeyser on March 26, 2014 at 6:36 PM

Wait, this is a ruling? Sounds like something that would come from a judge, not a bureaucrat.

There are lots of scholarships out there that require maintaining a certain GPA and doing some other tasks for the college. Should these also be classified as “employment” based on the time commitment and the receiving of benefits?

There Goes the Neighborhood on March 26, 2014 at 6:42 PM

the urgency monetizing one’s college years is sky high

Um, maybe thats why you should spend more time on the COLLEGE part so when your abnormally short football career ends you have something else to fall back on.

Nutstuyu on March 26, 2014 at 6:42 PM

Since they’re employees now, they get free rubbers.

BobMbx on March 26, 2014 at 5:33 PM

If they’re employees, then drug test them. If they’re paid, then let them pay for their own education.
Are they salaried and get paid for none field work, or are they hourly and only get paid for the work they do when playing? What is the base rate and how was it arrived at? They shouldn’t be forced to wear uniforms..workers in other fields of work don’t. Is there going to be age discrimination? Gender discrimination? Will “differently abled” people be rejected? Who is going to be paying them? Certainly no tax dollars should go for pay or equipment etc.
Sounds like a well thought out idea!

Mimzey on March 26, 2014 at 6:43 PM

I hope the Northwestern players go down in flames here in their union attempts. It’s not practical and it just shows they are greedy.

tcufrog on March 26, 2014 at 5:48 PM

Has anyone asked the question of why Northwestern? I can see this happening at a state school but a private one?

Nutstuyu on March 26, 2014 at 6:47 PM

This is a really bad idea..Since most of the NLRB board is\was “unconstitutionaly appointed” (assuming the SCOTUS rules it is) should the NLRB even make this call??..:)

Dire Straits on March 26, 2014 at 6:49 PM

Is this ruling even legit since 0′s recess appointments are in limbo?

Nutstuyu on March 26, 2014 at 6:53 PM

So if the scholarships are now employment compensation, do the players now owe taxes on that income?

RadClown on March 26, 2014 at 6:53 PM

Well, Florida, Colorado, Alabama, all Universities, but not known for their academics, Texas…you have some like Cal Tech, MIT, Claremont Colleges, hardly “bad” universities, but not known for there (if any) athletics…

Of course the great bar bet is: What university/college has appeared in the Rose Bowl more than any other? Cal Tech…line up the pitchers of beer for that one.

right2bright on March 26, 2014 at 6:24 PM

Colorado??? Now you owe me a pitcher…

Academics are just fine at these schools, and as I mentioned – alumni connections alone can get you into the right doors. These are huge universities, with a hefty amount of alumni who are loaded, business owners, influencers, etc. Many go on to prestigious post grad/law schools – but stay true to their alma mater – and reward other grads.

The fact a kid gets a sport opportunity at a university – who never would have a chance due to HS scores, intelligence, etc aside from that sport – its a huge opportunity.

Lets now forget the “dual gifted” kids who excel at sports and academics. And BTW – McElroy was a Rhodes finalist, who played his last year while getting his Masters. Rolle from FSU… etc.

To say thee schools “aren’t known for their academics” is silly. To say Colorado is good at any sport…

Odie1941 on March 26, 2014 at 6:54 PM

They need to take the scholorships and pay the players, as employees. The employees at the huge football school I went to got 10 hours free for CE. Let them have this, if they want more, they pay for it like everyone else. If they want a degree, they pay for it out of the money paid them to play. The football players today can’t even spell football, for the most part. Or make it like minor league baseball. I’m tired of these people getting free education and p@SS@ng it away.

megthered on March 26, 2014 at 6:58 PM

Odie1941 on March 26, 2014 at 6:18 PM

Grade inflation exists. Unverifiable, non-repeatable results from academic studies exist, and we have millions of students with worthless degrees and six figure debt that can’t find a job. It’s becoming a racket.

DFCtomm on March 26, 2014 at 6:28 PM

So a kid who goes to Stanford, gets a Womyns Study Masters cant get a job… its because of Stanford’s Football team or crappy research department?

Again – I think your commentary is reserved for a completely different argument.

Odie1941 on March 26, 2014 at 6:59 PM

And to the core issue – all NW’s conference has to do is… throw them out. Good luck being an Indy or just have the NCAA not sanction your University or sport.

If the NRLB thinks they are going to win against the NCAA… hahaha good luck with that one.

Odie1941 on March 26, 2014 at 7:02 PM

as I mentioned – alumni connections alone can get you into the right doors. These are huge universities, with a hefty amount of alumni who are loaded, business owners, influencers, etc. Many go on to prestigious post grad/law schools – but stay true to their alma mater – and reward other grads.

The fact a kid gets a sport opportunity at a university – who never would have a chance due to HS scores, intelligence, etc aside from that sport – its a huge opportunity.

Odie1941 on March 26, 2014 at 6:54 PM

I’m getting the feeling that you and your, Sum Cum Laude, wife have done just fine with the current system, you know, opening the right doors, so not, terribly, surprised that you fully support it, and gloss over all it’s flaws. By any chance, are either you or Mrs. Sum Cum Laude academics?

DFCtomm on March 26, 2014 at 7:03 PM

Having taught at a University for over 20 years, I can tell you the idea that these athletes get a free education is a fat joke.

The athletic Depts are only loosely associated with the University. They are independent cash cows where the coaches are paid $4 million while the athletes get sanctioned for selling an autographed shirt for $50. And don’t think the ADs help out the univ financially. The money only flows one way, from student tuition dollars into building luxury skyboxes, ticket sales for which stay in the AD.

Clark1 on March 26, 2014 at 7:04 PM

One year, when I was a kid, OSU declined their invitation to the Rose Bowl. You see, it would be the 2nd year in a row and it just wouldn’t be fair. Nobody under 40 believes me when I tell them that.

Fenris on March 26, 2014 at 6:03 PM

It was a Big Ten rule that kept the same team from representing them for 2 years in a row. If I remember right it was changed in the mid to late 70′s.

RickB on March 26, 2014 at 7:06 PM

So a kid who goes to Stanford, gets a Womyns Study Masters cant get a job… its because of Stanford’s Football team or crappy research department?

Again – I think your commentary is reserved for a completely different argument.

Odie1941 on March 26, 2014 at 6:59 PM

You are actually right to an extent. I’m unhappy with the system so the judgement doesn’t bother me all that much. It’s my personal bias.

DFCtomm on March 26, 2014 at 7:06 PM

I’d like to be able to say that once the SCOTUS rules that the Obama recess appointments to the NLRB are reversed because they were not done when the Senate was in recess, all of their subsequent decisions would be reversed. But thanks to John McCain and the usual other collection of GOP Senate morons who cut a deal with Dingy Harry Reid, they got confirmed by the Senate even though Obama and Reid promised those losers that they wouldn’t re-appoint the same diehard labor fascists.

As much as the labor fascists want this to be – I doubt this will win out over the NCAA – and the schools themselves might find themselves just eliminating many of the sports programs.

The ‘unintended consequences’ are never at the forefront of thought with the fascists, unless those ‘unintended consequences’ are intended.

Athos on March 26, 2014 at 7:08 PM

Hey, I’d like to see the big-money college sports dry up and blow away completely, so as far as I’m concerned this is a GREAT result.

JEM on March 26, 2014 at 7:11 PM

How about the Lou Holtz School of Football?

“The only book on our campus is the play book”

BobMbx on March 26, 2014 at 7:15 PM

Do away with athletic scholarships.

huckleberryfriend on March 26, 2014 at 7:17 PM

I’m getting the feeling that you and your, Sum Cum Laude, wife have done just fine with the current system, you know, opening the right doors, so not, terribly, surprised that you fully support it, and gloss over all it’s flaws. By any chance, are either you or Mrs. Sum Cum Laude academics?

DFCtomm on March 26, 2014 at 7:03 PM

My wife works part time for a Non Profit Women’s Domestic Violence Group.

And I am in Sales, with a degree from a no name SUNY school.

On a side note, I did play 4 years of Club Rugby – paid my way for both my degree and Rugby – with zero dollars from our school (roughly 12-14 games a year = about $2,000 out of pocket a year). I did this unique thing called “work, study and play” to earn my way in life.

So there goes your theory…

Odie1941 on March 26, 2014 at 7:21 PM

I did this unique antique thing called “work, study and play” to earn my way in life.

So there goes your theory…

Odie1941 on March 26, 2014 at 7:21 PM

FIFY. I think you liked the way the system was when you went through, and it’s colored your perception of what it has become, so the theory isn’t totally blown.

DFCtomm on March 26, 2014 at 7:29 PM

Comment pages: 1 2