NLRB rules against NCAA | Page 2 | The Boneyard

NLRB rules against NCAA

Status
Not open for further replies.
Once college athletes are considered to be employees each institution will need to consider if they want to be employers or not. The rational used to justify employee status at Dartmouth will apply to all colleges and universities no matter the size or budget they have to work with. I suspect that most will opt to no longer officially have sports teams but instead allow various student sponsored club teams access to facilities and the local institution's students will organize various leagues. I believe a lot of athletic scholarships will be a thing of the past in the smaller schools as well as paid coaches.

The larger institutions will need to drop many sports to club status as well, since the union process will show no difference between an all american basketball player and a member of the swim team. Just as it showed no difference between Kevin Ollie and a janitor. Clearly the swim team, tennis team, golf team and many others will need to go.

If college students are employees then high school athletes must be as well. The child labor laws might stop younger students from participating. Certainly most high schools can't afford to pay students so sports would need to be eliminated.
 
TRUCONN76 said:
Once college athletes are considered to be employees each institution will need to consider if they want to be employers or not. The rational used to justify employee status at Dartmouth will apply to all colleges and universities no matter the size or budget they have to work with. I suspect that most will opt to no longer officially have sports teams but instead allow various student sponsored club teams access to facilities and the local institution's students will organize various leagues. I believe a lot of athletic scholarships will be a thing of the past in the smaller schools as well as paid coaches.

The larger institutions will need to drop many sports to club status as well, since the union process will show no difference between an all american basketball player and a member of the swim team. Just as it showed no difference between Kevin Ollie and a janitor. Clearly the swim team, tennis team, golf team and many others will need to go.

If college students are employees then high school athletes must be as well. The child labor laws might stop younger students from participating. Certainly most high schools can't afford to pay students so sports would need to be eliminated.
Expand ...
The doom posting is strong in this one
 
superjohn said:
Because they'll have to pay them as employees.
Expand ...
No, they'll have to compensate them. Compensation can take a lot of forms, including scholarships and stipends, which most schools already provide. If you want college sports to have a semblance of structure and rules, then unionizing and collective bargaining is one of the ways to get there. Otherwise you can wait for that antitrust protection that will never come.
 
How Sway?! said:
No, they'll have to compensate them. Compensation can take a lot of forms, including scholarships and stipends, which most schools already provide. If you want college sports to have a semblance of structure and rules, then unionizing and collective bargaining is one of the ways to get there. Otherwise you can wait for that antitrust protection that will never come.
Expand ...
And I'm saying if they "have to" compensate them as employees they won't do it. If this continues young athletes will find out their value and in most cases their lack of value.
 
superjohn said:
If you're fine with only football and basketball being played at the scholarhip level then good on you. There's going to be a lot of people freaking out when all the other scholarship sports are cut and thousands of kids who would be getting free college are no longer getting it.
Expand ...

Yes, you'd end up with fewer scholarship athletes at a university. Convert them to academic scholarships or just become more lean as a university.
 
superjohn said:
And I'm saying if they "have to" compensate them as employees they won't do it. If this continues young athletes will find out their value and in most cases their lack of value.
Expand ...
They already compensate them. All this would do is create a legal framework around it. Youre also assuming every college athlete will join a union, which as the real world has proven, is not the case
 
superjohn said:
And I'm saying if they "have to" compensate them as employees they won't do it. If this continues young athletes will find out their value and in most cases their lack of value.
Expand ...

As opposed to being lied to or deceived in to believing their athletic skills provide value beyond their education opportunity at the school??

The value and dollar amount of a 4-year education, room and board, and mostly free meals will soon look very appealing for more than 90% of current athletes on scholarship.
 
superjohn said:
It will be the end of non-revenue sports. The same people pushing for this will be crying if/when that happens.
Expand ...
It's honestly the end of revenue sports at most schools. It's amazing to me just how exaggerated the revenue associated with college sports is. Minus the university branding, these games have all the appeal of the G-League or minor league baseball. Probably less than AAA baseball. There's no revenue to build stadiums, hire coaches and pay these players + give them scholarships. Idiots have convinced themselves that somehow the athletes were being taken advantage of. The market value of well over 90% of them is far less than tuition + room and board.
 
How Sway?! said:
No, they'll have to compensate them. Compensation can take a lot of forms, including scholarships and stipends, which most schools already provide. If you want college sports to have a semblance of structure and rules, then unionizing and collective bargaining is one of the ways to get there. Otherwise you can wait for that antitrust protection that will never come.
Expand ...
Compensation as an employee means social security taxes, medicare taxes, income tax withholding on the value of that compensation. You think that's a win?
 
How Sway?! said:
They already compensate them. All this would do is create a legal framework around it. Youre also assuming every college athlete will join a union, which as the real world has proven, is not the case
Expand ...
They "compensate" them in the form of athletic scholarships and whatever small stipend for food/need based things. This is about paying them as employees and everything that goes along with that. Schools won't do it for sports that don't bring in money/lose money which is all of them except for football and basketball.
 
HuskyHawk said:
It's honestly the end of revenue sports at most schools. It's amazing to me just how exaggerated the revenue associated with college sports is. Minus the university branding, these games have all the appeal of the G-League or minor league baseball. Probably less than AAA baseball. There's no revenue to build stadiums, hire coaches and pay these players + give them scholarships. Idiots have convinced themselves that somehow the athletes were being taken advantage of. The market value of well over 90% of them is far less than tuition + room and board.
Expand ...
That's the best when some people say they should just be the minor leagues. Without the Universities behind them semi-pro/minor leage football and basketball would go the way of the XFL.
 
superjohn said:
That's the best when some people say they should just be the minor leagues. Without the Universities behind them semi-pro/minor leage football and basketball would go the way of the XFL.
Expand ...
I've said it for years. We root for the laundry. You put all of our players direct from HS on a minor league team unaffiliated with UConn and none of us would watch it.

People in the south watch HS football, so maybe you could pull off AAA level football and get some fans, but it would be 20,000 at best, not 60-100k we see at the biggest college programs. TV? Good luck with that.
 
How Sway?! said:
Disagree, this ruling will likely make college sports look more similar to what they were 10-15 years ago. Unionizing and collective bargaining will eliminate a lot of the issues with transfers and NIL
Expand ...
Northern Law and Southern law regarding unions is Very different. Alabama is a “ right to work” state which means no closed shops. Therefore, every player can opt out even if the team unionized. Who’s gonna get more money? The quarterback on NIL or the deep snapper on union wages?

But do really expect Ohio State or Alabama players to join a union?

Also, Southern federal Courts may disagree on “ employee.” Split the circuits? What a mess.

Don’t worry. The SEC and Big will save us
 
Last edited:
superjohn said:
They "compensate" them in the form of athletic scholarships and whatever small stipend for food/need based things. This is about paying them as employees and everything that goes along with that. Schools won't do it for sports that don't bring in money/lose money which is all of them except for football and basketball.
Expand ...
Not exactly. These schools already spend money on sports that don't generate money. This just becomes one more expense. Some schools will decide they can afford it. Though yes some schools will decide it's not worth it.
 
Interesting that athletes are being considered employees. What about members of clubs?

Not sure what's the distinction between say Ivy league swimming team and Ivy league radio station.
 
uconnfan68 said:
Dartmouth players ruled employees. Can unionize to negotiate travel, practice, etc. Expected to be appealed. Beginning of the end.
Expand ...
Can you change the thread title to NLRB instead of Courtx
?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
157
Guests online
2,688
Total visitors
2,845
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Share This Page

Forum statistics

Threads
164,231
Messages
4,388,298
Members
10,196
Latest member
ArtTheFan


.
..
Top Bottom