NLRB expanded the definition of "employee". it is really, now, just a matter of time until players are considered employees, unify (unionize) and negotiate a CBA with the NCAA.
One step closer to players being "employees"
- Thread starter Obliviax
- Start date
Perhaps, just perhaps we’ll get to see:
1. Wildcat player strikes just before game time.
2. Work stoppages at practice because coaches yelled at players.
3. Nothing changes, boosters pay all union dues.
4. Who starts and playing time strictly regulated by union length of service.
Actually, I’m not really opposed to the idea, just hoping for the above because I love chaos.
1. Wildcat player strikes just before game time.
2. Work stoppages at practice because coaches yelled at players.
3. Nothing changes, boosters pay all union dues.
4. Who starts and playing time strictly regulated by union length of service.
Actually, I’m not really opposed to the idea, just hoping for the above because I love chaos.
A couple of years too late for Clifford. With his seniority he could have been the Jimmy Hoffa of college athletics.
The easy and best solution if that happens is to disband all college sports. Yes, I am serious.
They should just let them be employees and remove the requirement of having to enroll as students.
That's basically what Mary says and what will occur if this goes down.
How do you have employees which must meet academic standards and be admitted to the University. Makes no sense and would be discrimination against football players.
Entitlement has erased a sense of gratitude. Gratitude that God has gifted you with exceptional athleticism. Gratitude at receiving a $200,000 college experience gratis. Gratitude for the already enormous earning potential of NIL.
Nothing enhances a person's life experience more than having an attitude of gratitude.
I agree. And feel, for the most part, these kids do have gratitude. But if I am a kid, getting up at 5am to lift and have a single mother at home working two jobs, I am wondering why my university enjoys $70m in annual revenues and much of it is going to a gal on a full 'ship for the rowing team.
The system grew up in the 40s, 50s and 60s and has largely never changed. I love college football but if it goes away, or the kids become pros, it won't make any difference in my life. I won't try to wear their shoes so will leave their lives to them. I think you can be gratuitous in what you have yet strive for more.
Agreed, this is where it is heading. As a retired educator and coach, I can tell you that sports were once "extracurricular activities". They existed to enrich and supplement the regular academic curriculum. What then would be the point to having sports on college campuses? $$$$, which is why they aren't going anywhere.
Then, having removed the facade that the teams are anything other than minor league sports with vague associations to the schools, we can see if fans will continue to respond in a manner unlike all other minor league sports.
yep and it ain't gonna happen for basketball and football because the universities make too much money and PR.
I think we'll see college players become pro or semi-pro employees but will be required to take and pass 12 hours to be eligible. Where it gets interesting is in the other sports that don't make any money and how this affects Title IX requirements for women's sports.
Actually, my question is whether or not fans will respond to what will be more or less officially minor league football where the role of the university is largely that of sponsor with the same enthusiasm they do when the tie to the school at least seems closer. Is the PR still good when the separation seems wider? Does having a good football team still bring alumni donations and student applications when the team has little to do with the school other than the name?
As for the money, how good will it be when you have player salaries, benefits, and additional admin costs for a large number of employees you could formerly treat as part of the student body? Is the money worth going full on into the professional sports business?
I don't know the answers. I can only say that part of my interest in college football is that it has some aspects that make it different from the NFL or the real minor leagues such as the XFL/USFL. If the primary difference between what's on TV of Saturday and what's on Sunday is quality of play, I'm don't think I'm all that interested, certainly not like I am now. I can't see making a 4-hour drive and paying a few hundred dollars to watch the Nittany Lions sponsored by Penn State. I might drive 2 hours and pay much less than that to watch a team of players in the Steelers feeder system, but I'm not going to be a big fan visiting message boards to talk about them. That's me, and I may be alone in that.
Last edited:
all good questions. I agree, the passion for college football is that the group supports that "community". People are passionate about Purdue or Rutgers because of the common bond. But today, we see kids go from program to program. I saw an interview with Penix who simply followed a coach (Tenn, Indiana, Washington). I can't complain that he's doing the best thing for himself but he really doesn't give a squat about Washington. While that erodes some of the passion, it hasn't been a problem for college football. My guess is that it slowly erodes. I don't "boo" college kids but will certainly boo the Browns or Steelers. The big schools make their money on TV contracts so they really don't care except for TV eyeballs.
Also, BTW, I went to see Ohio U play Miami. At a fraction of the cost, I had a good time. Maybe 85% of a good time versus going to see PSU. But if I go see PSU play UMass or Indiana, I'd say this experience was better (traffic, food, cost).
This is what I've been saying for some time. Amateurism has appeal. The Olympics have lost appeal as they've admitted professionals. Why do we want to watch the same Tennis players play for Wimbledon this week and a gold medal the next. Meh. Nobody cares about the NBA G-league or knows who the AAA baseball champ is. The more college athletics becomes professionalized, the less interest there will be.
(Caveat: I do feel there could be one remaining CFB league comprised of schools with fanbases that don't have a natural NFL affiliation (think SEC schools like Bama & Auburn, and perhaps FSU) and/or alums that are willing to write checks (USC? maybe). FWIW, I don't think PSU is part of this group.)
The US is the only nation with top athletes competing in college athletics. The rest of the world has serious developmental leagues for major sports (soccer, rugby, etc). Most of this is town/club based. It is the way.
-------------------------------
My prediction has been:
Major college basketball goes away relatively quickly as the structure already largely exists. The AAU expands upward in age. The G-league potentially adds a 2nd tier development league. Lets be real. Most NBA bound players don't get their degree anyway...
Football is harder due to the cost and infrastructure required, but the NFL prints money and the pool of youth players is shrinking due to health concerns so the NFL will need to invest. This could be a new D-League, or perhaps a partnership with the XFL if it still exists. And as I mentioned above, there could be a much smaller (perhaps 15-20 Top "SEC-Type" college teams that remain in a "super league").
From there, I see college revenue sports returning to what they were perhaps 40-50 years ago...college students looking for an education participating in extra-curricular activities. Think FCS football.
For better or for worse, we are at/approaching peak college sports and I think the bubble is going to deflate. Then, what happens to non-revenue/olympic sports that are funded by football/basketball? Do teams go away? do we revert back to modest facilities and programs with reduced budgets and more limited schollies, like wrestling? It will be interesting to watch.
My son is a freshman at James Madison, and I could have purchased season tickets for the cost of a single PSU game. I didn't do that, but I have already gone to a game and will try to get tickets for the App State game. It's smaller, but it's fun, the facilities are solid, the enthusiasm is high, there's a strong sense of community, and the quality of football is pretty good.
Interesting post - in a positive way. I agree with you on where PSU would be in a CFB "super league" world, and I wouldn't dismiss any of your predictions as "not possible."
The teams could still remain on campus. I would still root for "Penn State" in that scenario. And I suspect that many of the players would attend Penn State. Especially the ones with limited NFL potential. They could still get scholarships, and the schools could still make money from it. I just hate the charade of taking a great football player who isn't college ready and pretending he's a college student. This would allow him to prepare for the NFL without the charade.
I'm with you on the highlighted part and have long thought that it made no sense that the only practical path to the NFL was college football. If a kid has no interest in pursuing a college degree and isn't prepared to be a college student, why make him do it and why get the colleges involved at all? If you go to a low A minor league baseball game, you're going to watch two teams with a lot college-aged players who didn't want to go the college route and weren't forced to. There's no reason football players shouldn't have the same option.
Similar threads
