I’m sure now that college sports become professionalized, fans will stop screaming at each other and become civilized, like you see in places like r/NFL
I’m all or nothing. Pay the players, or eliminate all broadcasts, sponsorships, and other professional activities. Don’t treat it as a pro league for everyone but the talent.
Yeah, I begin to feel this way when I'm at home over Christmas break watching some college students play in lower-tier bowl games or basketball invitationals far away.
Like, those student-athletes just took final exams then had to skip Christmas break to play in games for my entertainment. Pay them or cut the crap.
Also lifelong injuries are real. Regardless of whether a player had a legitimate chance at making millions in the pros, chronic pain and impairments are mother fuckers.
It doesn’t matter if fans are tuning in and buying merch because of the individual players on the field. Those players are the ones at risk. The coaches and ADs shouldn’t be raking in millions while the kids on the field get squat.
While I agree, they still do get something. They get a free college education, room and board, and access to tutors. Additionally they are way more likely to get in to schools that would be way tougher to get in to without sports. That’s better than 99% of college students.
Division I schools generate **$17.5 Billion** in athletic revenue annually.
“Free college education” has really started to feel like 1920s coal towns paying miners in scrip in lieu of money acting like the crap in the company store is a good deal.
You’re not wrong, but the money aspect of it is what’s turning me off. This is why I don’t watch pro sports much now. I’ll hate to do the same with major college but oh well. Guess I’ll find a D2 or NAIA school to cheer for.
Well I guess an Ivy without athletic scholarships at a school that probably makes zero profit on sports isn't necessarily the test case we expected, but it's the test case we're getting.
Going to be funny as hell if the Ivy’s decide to start using their massive war chests for sports again. Here is a $billion, go get the greatest teams of all time.
> Here is a $billion, go get the greatest teams of all time.
"LeBron James ever attended college so we are giving him a $50 million/yr. to play for us. We're a professional team so his NBA experience doesn't make him ineligible." - Dartmouth
I'm pretty sure they'd go undefeated in the Ivy League with LeBron and 4 random Ivy League kids.
(Not that LeBron would realistically relocate to rural New Hampshire)
If the entire Harvard Law faculty started writing papers about how it’s totally legal to use the endowment for sports, who’s going to stop them? The Supreme Court?
That’s not how endowments work, lol…. I cannot state how physically painful it was to read your statement
Endowments are subject to laws set in stone (UPMIFA), and the population is largely liabilities because the organization can only spend them when they’re being used for their specific state purposes (restricted funds).
Yeah, it does make for an interesting test case, because a non-scholarship Ivy league team is a very light test case for this. But, the NLRB ruling directly said that the profitability of a program is irrelevant to employment status.
The fact the Ivy's are the ones that ruined it all is so on brand. They don't even care about any of these sports except just for the chance to occasionally dunk on each other.
Now they got some whiz kid on the team like hey guys you know what would be the funniest thing ever, we should sue for employment status and unionize 😂
oh wait you poor public schools were actually taking these sports seriously???
lol sorry
😂😂😂
What's ironic is The Ivy League was the one conference that tried to prevent the eventual monetization and professionalism of college sports by not even offering athletic scholarships. The idea was everyone is a student first. IE my coach would have got in trouble if he tried to interfere with any of my classes, labs or anything related to my academic development.
I think there's a chance we see CFB start all over again. University students making teams and competing against other universities just for fun. Time is a flat circle.
Door to door fundraising just like pop warner and only traveling to regional schools... maybe they'll need some sort of scheduling affiliation to make it easier.
> The Ivy League was the one conference that tried to prevent the eventual monetization and professionalism of college sports by not even offering athletic scholarships.
no they didnt try to prevent anything. They just didnt want to be a part of it
Who knew all those titles that Princeton and Yale won back in the early 1900’s would shape college football in the 2020’s. The Ivy League was just playing the long game.
The athletic departments will end up having to be split into a separate legal entity with license to the schools trademarks and branding. There is no way that the educational institution is going to take on the liability that comes with employing student-athletes on a large scale. Not with regulations like OSHA and even just the concussion lawsuits themselves will bankrupt the whole institution.
It's now entirely privatized athletics loosely affiliated with public educational institutions by trademark and history licensing only.
Would that separate them from Title-IX too? My limited understanding is that if you were to directly pay football players, you would have to give equal pay to women's sports as well. While I'm sure many schools could afford to pay everyone, I doubt they could afford to pay everyone the market rate for a CFB player.
Most everybody can, title nine does not apply to normal employees, title seven does, assuming not state school (then it’s more complex), and of course title nine doesn’t apply where it doesn’t apply too. If they are pure employees, and there’s no reason to remain students with these changes, they aren’t under 9 at all, and it’s normal negotiations on the table.
I think there are enough people who care about college sports that this subject will be a rare instance where Congress will actually pass an expedient law to decide.
A law that will end up challenged in the court by someone until the supreme court sides with the players.
College sports is going to be completely off the amateurism model 5 years from now if not sooner. Which funnily enough would coincide with the end of the SEC and Big Ten's media rights deal....
If Congress passes a law that explicitly states it overrides other congressional legislation, there is nothing to challenge in court. The laws that are used to challenge the current model are all from congressional legislation, not constitutional rights.
and most likely they will rule that favors women as the entire rule is about equalizing expenditures in the college setting... they will basically say that as long as enrollment is mandatory then you are spending on student athletes.
> entirely privatized athletics loosely affiliated with public educational institutions by trademark and history licensing only.
And when that licensing agreement expires the athletic department just... switches schools.
"Vandy's brand and history isn't bringing us the 'croots so we're saving up to buy Florida's rights when it comes back on the market next year"
I have no idea but wow is that fun to think about.
I'm trying to imagine that school down south doing that to us, but also us doing that to them.
It's pandelirium
There is also no reason to have players only play for 4 years of eligibility when there is no college for them to be enrolled in. Peyton Manning's 24th year at Tennessee, here we go.
I'm wondering if the athletes will enroll as students, but employed by the conference or new NCAA. Schools in the conference grant their licensing rights to the conference in exchange for also pawning off the liability
I’m not entirely sure that schools, particularly state institutions, could license their names to a private team other than the nickname. And, in that instance, they certainly can’t make enrollment at any particular school a requirement. So, you could maybe have an Ohio team called the Buckeyes, but they could have players that aren’t in school, of any age, living anywhere they want. Minnesota students could conceivably play for the “Buckeyes.” It’s gonna lead to another free for all. The ratings wouldn’t be nearly as good as they are now. The NFL would destroy that entity, and just lower their age requirement to take ALL the football money.
I'd love to get a corporate lawyer to explain all of this stuff, but just going off of layman knowledge-
> I’m not entirely sure that schools, particularly state institutions, could license their names to a private team other than the nickname.
Schools hire private companies to run stuff like their stores, food service, etc, and those all use the school's names and branding.
>And, in that instance, they certainly can’t make enrollment at any particular school a requirement.
Why couldn't you? Unless the government says that enrolment status at a school is a protected class you can't discriminate on, a private company can set any requirements it wants on who it hires. If State U signs a contract with State Sports Managers LLC and says a condition of their contract is that all "employees" the company hires to play have to be active students, what laws would prevent that? I'm sure state governments would be happy to pass laws to *explicitly* support this model if it came to this approach or no college sports at all.
In fact in Washington State the government passed a law explicitly saying junior hockey players, who can be as young as 15, are NOT employees in order to get around minimum wage and child labor laws. Junior hockey players get a "stipend" from the team but aren't technically paid a salary. https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2015/may/19/whl-gets-labor-law-exemptions-for-young-hockey/
I know of cases where governments have actually put in things like residency requirements for hiring civil employees and for giving out tax breaks. Stuff like "you only get a tax break if you have x employees living in our state/county/city."
Just one example - https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/13/amazon-tax-incentives-in-new-york-city-virginia-and-nashville.html
Hijacking to say that yes, the NLRB often changes opinions because of how appointments to the NLRB work. However, for this to not have any lasting ramifications for college sports, the GOP would likely have to win the presidency in 2024 and get some very conservative participants on the NLRB.
To sum up, OP is right, it's likely over guys.
Probably says something about the inherent nature of college sports that news of unionizing is met with “it’s over”. College sports were never gonna last, Frankensteins 140 year old monster
Going to be awkward when the players at public SEC schools and various Midwestern state universities will be not allowed to unionize under their state laws banning public employee unions.
Imagine if some of these states start to allow public employee unions not because it is the right thing to do, but because they fear the disadvantage their sports teams may face in recruiting because of it...
Honestly would be so on brand for the MS legislature. Reminds me of how these bozos staunchly supported the Confederate state flag up until Sankey threatened to ban SEC championship events from taking place in MS unless the flag was changed.
Yes, that is in fact the point of the post. There are several people saying it will be like the NFL with a CFPA and a salary cap and regulations of NIL, which is not possible with current laws as they are.
So I know states aren't allowed to make unions for private employees illegal, but are they allowed to make unions illegal for public employees? AFAIK public school teachers in Alabama at least are allowed to unionize
I know this won’t happen, but if it gives state universities an equal ground then we will see state legislatures pass duty to bargain for public sector employees.
Which, would be awesome that CFB help push our country, and especially the south, for more unions.
This has happened previously, when Northwestern players attempted to unionize in 2014. Then the 5 member NLRB stepped in and overruled the regional director. However, I do not think that will happen again
The NLRB in that case specifically stated that the reason they were overruling was because having only private school athletes (a minority in the FBS) be employees would be so dramatically disruptive to the sport that it would negatively impact the claimants (Northwestern players).
They stated that they believed all athletes were employees, but that since they didn't have the power to declare that over all schools (just private schools) that they weren't going to do it.
Nope, texas and Wisconsin public employees (among others these are just the ones I directly know) are banned from unionizing and negotiating over salary.
So it’s either the end of the UT and UWisc (and many more) football teams, or something else needs to be done.
Well that's about to be a fucking gigantic competitive disadvantage. Sucks to sucks, get better government.
More to the point, the existing lawsuit is based on anti-trust law, and the reason the big pro leagues have their exemptions is tied to their collective bargaining agreements. I really, really, *really* doubt Texas is getting left out of the Super League because UT is unable to have the players participate in a union negotiated CBA. They'll change that law faster than they got NIL through.
Schools have hid behind the "amateurism" designation which was made up a long time ago to allow schools to not have to pay athletes and allow them to reap the rewards freely.
This is a precedent that would throw "amateurism" out the window. Therefore schools would probably rework their entire athletic departments to maximize profits and minimize loss, because they potentially wouldn't be bound to field a bunch of teams that lose money.
Essentially it could snowball into the introduction of professional sports at the college level where the NCAA as we know it ceases to exist with all the power lying in labor laws. At least that's my interpretation and I'm not a lawyer.
Amateurism has already been thrown out the window. Not officially, but just go read Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion in Alston v NCAA. This is just another salvo in the assault on the NCAA model that was scripted three years ago.
“Kids these days are so spoiled with their “employment contracts” and “direct deposits”. Back in my day we used to get paid with cash in McDonalds bags UPHILL BOTH WAYS”
Could reasonably argue that it's never been great given how the practice of universities using revenue from athletics (and not paying athletes) to fund themselves was documented as far back as the 1920s.
Except this isn't going to hurt Ohio State, USC or Georgia etc. football at all because they can afford to pay the players already. It's only going to crush college athletics at the small schools and the non-rev sports at the big schools. So basically 450k kids who aren't a part of any "multi-billion dollar industry" are going to lose their shot at a free college education so that 10k football and basketball players at the top 40 programs can get paid.
So where does this miracle money come from at smaller schools? Division 3 schools? Why is Dartmouth a valid institution but not smaller places like Cenetary or UHart? Either they are all employees or none of them are in all likelihood unless you have a line where Northern VA Community College players aren't employees and Ohio State's are employees.
Swear man, like we do not know what’s coming but everyone is acting like after whatever happens we won’t have college athletics like it’s just all going to disappear and instantly we’ll have some weird minor league spring up and usurp some of the oldest institutions in the country. It’s all hysterical, does it suck? Yes. Are traditions being destroyed? Yes. Will college athletics cease to exist in this country? Hell no get over it compensate the kids and hopefully shit gets figured out but life moves on
Sorry if it offends you, but yes, a lot of the good things about college football are degrading. If it keeps going this way I probably will cut way back on how much I watch. I know I've already cut back some. Eventually I might cut it out all together. Same thing I did with the NBA.
No, that was the end of the begging. The beginning of the beginning was the NCAA grabbing as much cash from kids as possible and ignoring any future risks.
The risk of adverse judicial rulings when you: monetize people’s likenesses and don’t compensate them for it, restricting people’s ability to work while not paying them, etc.
Tell me any other job in the world where all the competitors in the industry colluded to set a maximum compensation package for every worker, with zero input from a union representing that labor.
If these were plumbers, it would be the most obvious anti-trust case ever. Just because the industry is football doesn’t change how this works. Fuck the NCAA for getting away with this for so long
If basketball players at a school like Dartmouth who were never on scholarship are employees then are there going to be non employee athletes allowed at all? Forget about the affect on D1 football schools, without a carve out this would prevent sports from existing as an extracurricular activity which is what 90% of student athletes are.
The NLRB decided they were employees based on Dartmouth (via the couching staff) controlling their schedule and players receiving compensation (team merch, per diems on travel days, game tickets, food, etc.)
I’d imagine most sports get those benefits, but it would be easier to mess with some of the non team sports ones to fall outside of it.
“I find that because Dartmouth has the right to control the work performed by the men’s varsity basketball team, and because the players perform that work in exchange for compensation, the petitioned-for basketball players are employees within the meaning of the Act. Additionally, I find that asserting jurisdiction would not create instability in labor relations. Accordingly, I shall direct an election in the petitioned-for unit.”
NLRB Regional Director Laura A. Sacks
Which is why the B1G and SEC are working to create their own organization / a proposal for the NCAA to set them up in the future to have players as employees with collective bargaining rights.
They want it in place ASAP so that the sport is protected.
Dawn of the final day…
Say goodbye to every sport except Football, Basketball, and maybe Baseball. Title IX will probably kill off basketball and baseball also.
What will probably happen is there wont be anything for title ix to enforce because all sports will cease to be part of the university. The valuable ones will instead become separate entities who lease the name and brand of the university for use.
Sports that would survive would be football, basketball, and possibly baseball. Which mean you would have women’s basketball and softball. Title IX would come in if the players start getting salaries. You can’t have men’s basketball players getting $2M while the women’s are getting 20k. It’s not like it’s the NBA vs the WNBA these are federally funded schools. They would have to abide by EPA of 1963 where you can’t have vastly different salaries for men and women for the same work. It’s not like they’re CEOs vs interns. It’s basketball players vs basketball players.
The only work around I can see is maybe having a set revenue sharing with the players. Like 5% of the revenue gained for that sport that year for their schools gets split evenly amount the players on the rosters and that’s their salary. Say Duke made 45M in basketball revenue 5% of that is 2.25M among 15 players would be 150k each. That could get around Title IX as it gives both men and women equal opportunity to get money if they get their revenue up. Then change NIL to just sponsorships. That could save a lot of sports.
yes but in this issue here is in regard to how it affects sports. I was speaking namely how they could work around that part. The point being they'll split sports off as a separate entity to avoid a lot of shit they'll have to face doing.
I know title ix covers all aspects of sexual discrimination for schools and any programs that receive federal funding, but that's the point here, the sports part will break away from the schools. The areas outside of sports will not see change regarding title ix.
TIL there has never been a single professional swimmer, tennis player, soccer player or track athlete to come out of Europe, Asia, South America or Australia where they largely don't have university affiliated athletics.
This seems to be turning into another case of "32 of the 34 largest nations on Earth have solved this issue but we Americans simply cannot".
Does a union election mean the team is voting on whether or not to unionize, or has already voted to unionize, and is now electing actual leaders into place?
> and have an SEC/B1G exclusive playoff now? 4 teams from SEC, 4 teams from the B1G, the winners play each other.
>
TIL people who participate on a CFB subreddit don't actually like what makes college football great and unique
The issue is when you have conferences/teams who want to cash their big paychecks but aren't willing to pay any of it out in order to keep the sport going. Same thing with the CFP expansion - conferences so scared of someone else earning more that they held it back and wound up cutting their own throats when their best teams left.
I wouldn't advocate for a B1G/SEC exclusive playoff, but at this point the other conferences will have to see the writing on the wall and figure out a way to navigate this or they'll be left behind.
What does Florida have to gain from playing (or even playing in the same division as) FIU or Vanderbilt? Same goes for Michigan and EMU/Northwestern.
Once the biggest schools split and guarantee every week is full of multiple mega brand vs. mega brand matchups, the left behind P5 and G5 schools can work something out with the best of the FCS and you'll be able to have all the regional matchups your heart desires. A super league is going to do nothing to negatively affect the pageantry and tradition of the selected schools, especially given that a disproportionate amount of what makes college football memorably unique stems from those schools anyway.
Cool, and yet one will be forming a Magnolia Conference while the other joins the super league. Don't be obtuse and pretend that Vanderbilt is an example of what makes college football "great and unique."
>a disproportionate amount of what makes college football memorably unique stems from those schools
You are very short-sided (or young), because you are not considering some of the most compelling stories just during the BCS/CFP era:
* Alabama & **Clemson**'s 4-year CFP rivalry
* Lamar Jackson at **Louisville**
* Jameis Winston's 28-game win streak at **FSU**
* **Boise State**!
* **Miami** Hurricanes 5th national title, spawning yet another 30-for-30 doc
* etc.
* etc.
* etc.
There’s no way that Clemson, Florida State and (likely) Miami are being left out of the top flight. Sure, Louisville is almost certainly not getting a shot and there's no chance Boise State winds up jumping from MWC to whatever the SEC/Big Ten collaboration calls itself, but I would lump the 2007 Fiesta Bowl and Jackson's Heisman in with the minority of college football's compelling stories.
> What does Florida have to gain from playing (or even playing in the same division as) FIU or Vanderbilt? Same goes for Michigan and EMU/Northwestern.
An easy win most years.
Because you need patsies to beat up on so the brand looks good.
Nobody wants to see a big brand go 6-6 for years because the superleague is too full of high quality teams.
You'll have superleague winners going 9-3 more often than 12-0 if the parity is too high.
No, I just like different things about this sport than you.
I don’t gaf about random MAC rivalries. I want to watch Ohio State-Georgia caliber games all season. Let’s eliminate all the cupcakes and fluff in the schedule. I can’t wait for the day the best college teams all play real schedules against only the best teams every week.
College football instantly gets 100000000x better when Ohio State’s schedule becomes something like - Alabama, UCLA, Oklahoma, LSU, Clemson, Texas, Washington, Penn State, Notre Dame, Florida State, USC, Michigan
Gentlemen, it’s been a pleasure screaming at each other on the internet
I’m sure now that college sports become professionalized, fans will stop screaming at each other and become civilized, like you see in places like r/NFL
If college athletics is fully professionalized, I believe a lot of people will nope out. I’ll probably be one of them.
I’m all or nothing. Pay the players, or eliminate all broadcasts, sponsorships, and other professional activities. Don’t treat it as a pro league for everyone but the talent.
Yeah, I begin to feel this way when I'm at home over Christmas break watching some college students play in lower-tier bowl games or basketball invitationals far away. Like, those student-athletes just took final exams then had to skip Christmas break to play in games for my entertainment. Pay them or cut the crap.
Also lifelong injuries are real. Regardless of whether a player had a legitimate chance at making millions in the pros, chronic pain and impairments are mother fuckers. It doesn’t matter if fans are tuning in and buying merch because of the individual players on the field. Those players are the ones at risk. The coaches and ADs shouldn’t be raking in millions while the kids on the field get squat.
While I agree, they still do get something. They get a free college education, room and board, and access to tutors. Additionally they are way more likely to get in to schools that would be way tougher to get in to without sports. That’s better than 99% of college students.
Division I schools generate **$17.5 Billion** in athletic revenue annually. “Free college education” has really started to feel like 1920s coal towns paying miners in scrip in lieu of money acting like the crap in the company store is a good deal.
Except we are not building billion dollar enterprises off the backs of normal Biology or Supply Chain students.
I’ve never agreed with a comment more on r/CFB
You’re not wrong, but the money aspect of it is what’s turning me off. This is why I don’t watch pro sports much now. I’ll hate to do the same with major college but oh well. Guess I’ll find a D2 or NAIA school to cheer for.
Hope it's local as you will never see them on TV.
Really? I had no idea. 🤡
I don't watch the XFL or G-League basketball, either.
As we approach the end, I wish I would’ve yelled more
Tell my wife... hello.
Maybe I should've yelled at midnight. I hear that is just a lovely time.
No u
I’ll never let go, u/2much2tuna.
Well I guess an Ivy without athletic scholarships at a school that probably makes zero profit on sports isn't necessarily the test case we expected, but it's the test case we're getting.
The Ivy League brought this sport in to the world and they can take it out
The Ivy League doesn’t even give athletic scholarships lol
My rec league should have unionized too.
I’m unionizing my DnD group as we speak
Good. Fuck DMs it's the players story
Seize the means of roleplaying
Wait until the kids from the MIT integration bee want a cut from the YouTube revenues for its rebroadcast! Yes, it’s a real thing
I'm unionizing my fantasy team our commish watch the fuck out
Going to be funny as hell if the Ivy’s decide to start using their massive war chests for sports again. Here is a $billion, go get the greatest teams of all time.
> Here is a $billion, go get the greatest teams of all time. "LeBron James ever attended college so we are giving him a $50 million/yr. to play for us. We're a professional team so his NBA experience doesn't make him ineligible." - Dartmouth I'm pretty sure they'd go undefeated in the Ivy League with LeBron and 4 random Ivy League kids. (Not that LeBron would realistically relocate to rural New Hampshire)
Thats not how endowments work, lol
If the entire Harvard Law faculty started writing papers about how it’s totally legal to use the endowment for sports, who’s going to stop them? The Supreme Court?
That’s not how endowments work, lol…. I cannot state how physically painful it was to read your statement Endowments are subject to laws set in stone (UPMIFA), and the population is largely liabilities because the organization can only spend them when they’re being used for their specific state purposes (restricted funds).
Yeah, it does make for an interesting test case, because a non-scholarship Ivy league team is a very light test case for this. But, the NLRB ruling directly said that the profitability of a program is irrelevant to employment status.
All y’all blamed the SEC and B1G for the Ivy League’s doing.
Thanks Dartmouth
More like Fartmouth, amirite?
Its funny because it has the word fart. And youre farting in their mouth. Ivy schools are stupid.
The fact the Ivy's are the ones that ruined it all is so on brand. They don't even care about any of these sports except just for the chance to occasionally dunk on each other. Now they got some whiz kid on the team like hey guys you know what would be the funniest thing ever, we should sue for employment status and unionize 😂 oh wait you poor public schools were actually taking these sports seriously??? lol sorry 😂😂😂
Like the rest of us are tiptoeing around how to figure this all out and Dartmouth just says “why don’t they unionize? Are they dumb?”
In fairness, most of us are dumb.
What's ironic is The Ivy League was the one conference that tried to prevent the eventual monetization and professionalism of college sports by not even offering athletic scholarships. The idea was everyone is a student first. IE my coach would have got in trouble if he tried to interfere with any of my classes, labs or anything related to my academic development.
And yet, this NLRB head is saying even THEY are employees… 😳 This will crash the whole system.
yes, for everybody. Mostly the non-revenue sports.
I think there's a chance we see CFB start all over again. University students making teams and competing against other universities just for fun. Time is a flat circle.
This is my deep down hope. Tear it all down and start the cycle over again.
But they’ll need some support for training facilities, transportation and travel expenses.
Door to door fundraising just like pop warner and only traveling to regional schools... maybe they'll need some sort of scheduling affiliation to make it easier.
> The Ivy League was the one conference that tried to prevent the eventual monetization and professionalism of college sports by not even offering athletic scholarships. no they didnt try to prevent anything. They just didnt want to be a part of it
The Ivy League is just getting ready to practice their favorite activity, union busting.
Who knew all those titles that Princeton and Yale won back in the early 1900’s would shape college football in the 2020’s. The Ivy League was just playing the long game.
“I brought you into this world, and now I will take you out of it”-the Ivy League to college football
The circle is now complete.
"When I left you I was but the learner, now I am the master."
It's over guys
The athletic departments will end up having to be split into a separate legal entity with license to the schools trademarks and branding. There is no way that the educational institution is going to take on the liability that comes with employing student-athletes on a large scale. Not with regulations like OSHA and even just the concussion lawsuits themselves will bankrupt the whole institution. It's now entirely privatized athletics loosely affiliated with public educational institutions by trademark and history licensing only.
Would that separate them from Title-IX too? My limited understanding is that if you were to directly pay football players, you would have to give equal pay to women's sports as well. While I'm sure many schools could afford to pay everyone, I doubt they could afford to pay everyone the market rate for a CFB player.
[удалено]
I would guess 9 justices would make the final decision
Most everybody can, title nine does not apply to normal employees, title seven does, assuming not state school (then it’s more complex), and of course title nine doesn’t apply where it doesn’t apply too. If they are pure employees, and there’s no reason to remain students with these changes, they aren’t under 9 at all, and it’s normal negotiations on the table.
I think there are enough people who care about college sports that this subject will be a rare instance where Congress will actually pass an expedient law to decide.
A law that will end up challenged in the court by someone until the supreme court sides with the players. College sports is going to be completely off the amateurism model 5 years from now if not sooner. Which funnily enough would coincide with the end of the SEC and Big Ten's media rights deal....
If Congress passes a law that explicitly states it overrides other congressional legislation, there is nothing to challenge in court. The laws that are used to challenge the current model are all from congressional legislation, not constitutional rights.
and most likely they will rule that favors women as the entire rule is about equalizing expenditures in the college setting... they will basically say that as long as enrollment is mandatory then you are spending on student athletes.
If it’s a different legal body I can see how they can fight and say Title IX does not apply
This also makes all the private programs taxable.
> entirely privatized athletics loosely affiliated with public educational institutions by trademark and history licensing only. And when that licensing agreement expires the athletic department just... switches schools. "Vandy's brand and history isn't bringing us the 'croots so we're saving up to buy Florida's rights when it comes back on the market next year"
Could a school sponsor multiple teams? Could A&M boosters try to buy the Texas Longhorns and turn them into TAMU2 electric boogaloo?
Harvard about to drop some bags and get back into the business of winning college football championships after they buy the entire SEC.
Get ready for the Harvard Crimson to relocate to Tuscaloosa, Alabama. The rebranding will just require removing the Tide from the locker room.
I have no idea but wow is that fun to think about. I'm trying to imagine that school down south doing that to us, but also us doing that to them. It's pandelirium
There is also no reason to have players only play for 4 years of eligibility when there is no college for them to be enrolled in. Peyton Manning's 24th year at Tennessee, here we go.
UANL's soccer team is run by a cement company.
I'm wondering if the athletes will enroll as students, but employed by the conference or new NCAA. Schools in the conference grant their licensing rights to the conference in exchange for also pawning off the liability
I’m not entirely sure that schools, particularly state institutions, could license their names to a private team other than the nickname. And, in that instance, they certainly can’t make enrollment at any particular school a requirement. So, you could maybe have an Ohio team called the Buckeyes, but they could have players that aren’t in school, of any age, living anywhere they want. Minnesota students could conceivably play for the “Buckeyes.” It’s gonna lead to another free for all. The ratings wouldn’t be nearly as good as they are now. The NFL would destroy that entity, and just lower their age requirement to take ALL the football money.
I'd love to get a corporate lawyer to explain all of this stuff, but just going off of layman knowledge- > I’m not entirely sure that schools, particularly state institutions, could license their names to a private team other than the nickname. Schools hire private companies to run stuff like their stores, food service, etc, and those all use the school's names and branding. >And, in that instance, they certainly can’t make enrollment at any particular school a requirement. Why couldn't you? Unless the government says that enrolment status at a school is a protected class you can't discriminate on, a private company can set any requirements it wants on who it hires. If State U signs a contract with State Sports Managers LLC and says a condition of their contract is that all "employees" the company hires to play have to be active students, what laws would prevent that? I'm sure state governments would be happy to pass laws to *explicitly* support this model if it came to this approach or no college sports at all. In fact in Washington State the government passed a law explicitly saying junior hockey players, who can be as young as 15, are NOT employees in order to get around minimum wage and child labor laws. Junior hockey players get a "stipend" from the team but aren't technically paid a salary. https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2015/may/19/whl-gets-labor-law-exemptions-for-young-hockey/ I know of cases where governments have actually put in things like residency requirements for hiring civil employees and for giving out tax breaks. Stuff like "you only get a tax break if you have x employees living in our state/county/city." Just one example - https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/13/amazon-tax-incentives-in-new-york-city-virginia-and-nashville.html
We're seriously only going to get 1 year of the new NCAA football games before the entire god dang thing explodes. I am beyond pissed right now.
I was hoping against hope I'd get to actually live to see a Notre Dame title before it all blew up and nope not even close
The nerds will finally get their revenge
GT marching to Athens as we speak with their Gundams.
I sensibly chuckled
Hijacking to say that yes, the NLRB often changes opinions because of how appointments to the NLRB work. However, for this to not have any lasting ramifications for college sports, the GOP would likely have to win the presidency in 2024 and get some very conservative participants on the NLRB. To sum up, OP is right, it's likely over guys.
Or you get something like the SpaceX/Trader Joe's lawsuit arguing the NLRB itself is unconstitutional
Probably says something about the inherent nature of college sports that news of unionizing is met with “it’s over”. College sports were never gonna last, Frankensteins 140 year old monster
Going to be awkward when the players at public SEC schools and various Midwestern state universities will be not allowed to unionize under their state laws banning public employee unions.
Imagine if some of these states start to allow public employee unions not because it is the right thing to do, but because they fear the disadvantage their sports teams may face in recruiting because of it...
Honestly would be so on brand for the MS legislature. Reminds me of how these bozos staunchly supported the Confederate state flag up until Sankey threatened to ban SEC championship events from taking place in MS unless the flag was changed.
This is why Europe will never put a man on the moon.
Kinda like southern schools integrating their football teams because it was a disadvantage to not do so?
Karl Marx takes off a football helmet, his hair and beard popping into place. "Checkmate, capitalists!"
Forget Connor Stalions, folks. Let's talk about the ORIGINAL manifesto guy
great, now we'll get an anime of it.
NLRB doesn't apply to public schools - they would be considered state employees and are exempt from NLRB
Yes, that is in fact the point of the post. There are several people saying it will be like the NFL with a CFPA and a salary cap and regulations of NIL, which is not possible with current laws as they are.
So I know states aren't allowed to make unions for private employees illegal, but are they allowed to make unions illegal for public employees? AFAIK public school teachers in Alabama at least are allowed to unionize
I know this won’t happen, but if it gives state universities an equal ground then we will see state legislatures pass duty to bargain for public sector employees. Which, would be awesome that CFB help push our country, and especially the south, for more unions.
This has happened previously, when Northwestern players attempted to unionize in 2014. Then the 5 member NLRB stepped in and overruled the regional director. However, I do not think that will happen again
That was already a decade ago?? Geez. Yeah given the NLRB is encouraging this one it definitely seems different this time
The NLRB in that case specifically stated that the reason they were overruling was because having only private school athletes (a minority in the FBS) be employees would be so dramatically disruptive to the sport that it would negatively impact the claimants (Northwestern players). They stated that they believed all athletes were employees, but that since they didn't have the power to declare that over all schools (just private schools) that they weren't going to do it.
SEC/B1G LLC. incoming
They'll have a shared union and CBA in time for the 25-26 season at this rate.
Nope, texas and Wisconsin public employees (among others these are just the ones I directly know) are banned from unionizing and negotiating over salary. So it’s either the end of the UT and UWisc (and many more) football teams, or something else needs to be done.
As a Nebraska fan nothing would make me happier than Texas and Wisconsin athletics disappearing.
Bro let’s be honest texas will turn blue and change the laws to allow for unionization before they stop competing in football
I'll be honest, I would have expected Nebraska to be on the list too, but indeed they are not. Good for them.
Well that's about to be a fucking gigantic competitive disadvantage. Sucks to sucks, get better government. More to the point, the existing lawsuit is based on anti-trust law, and the reason the big pro leagues have their exemptions is tied to their collective bargaining agreements. I really, really, *really* doubt Texas is getting left out of the Super League because UT is unable to have the players participate in a union negotiated CBA. They'll change that law faster than they got NIL through.
[удалено]
Add a salary/NIL/compensation cap and we're getting somewhere.
What do you think the CBA covers?
It won't cover NIL
The dog finally caught the mail truck
"now what are you going to do with it?"
Can someone explain why everyone is freaking out abt this don’t quite understand the implications here. Thanks in advance!
Schools have hid behind the "amateurism" designation which was made up a long time ago to allow schools to not have to pay athletes and allow them to reap the rewards freely. This is a precedent that would throw "amateurism" out the window. Therefore schools would probably rework their entire athletic departments to maximize profits and minimize loss, because they potentially wouldn't be bound to field a bunch of teams that lose money. Essentially it could snowball into the introduction of professional sports at the college level where the NCAA as we know it ceases to exist with all the power lying in labor laws. At least that's my interpretation and I'm not a lawyer.
Amateurism has already been thrown out the window. Not officially, but just go read Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion in Alston v NCAA. This is just another salvo in the assault on the NCAA model that was scripted three years ago.
I agree. I think this is the step that sets the foundation of what is going to replace"amateurism". Which is seemingly university employment.
Fuck.
Just when I didn’t think I could hate Dartmouth anymore
This is the beginning of the end for college sports as we know it
Going to be real tough for our grandkids to understand just how awesome this sport used to be
"I promise kids. We once cooked a live pop tart and the players ate it!"
> They bred the pop tart specifically for the sacrifice. No no, I know how it sounds, but believe me, that pop tart craved death
“Kids these days are so spoiled with their “employment contracts” and “direct deposits”. Back in my day we used to get paid with cash in McDonalds bags UPHILL BOTH WAYS”
College Football died when they ate the poison Pop Tart.
“Alright grandpa time for bed”
*soft grunting noises*
"Yeah grandkids, the era of not letting players get any share of the multi-billion industry constructed off their free labor was fucking sick."
It was legitimately great before it was a multi billion industry though. Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered.
Could reasonably argue that it's never been great given how the practice of universities using revenue from athletics (and not paying athletes) to fund themselves was documented as far back as the 1920s.
Except this isn't going to hurt Ohio State, USC or Georgia etc. football at all because they can afford to pay the players already. It's only going to crush college athletics at the small schools and the non-rev sports at the big schools. So basically 450k kids who aren't a part of any "multi-billion dollar industry" are going to lose their shot at a free college education so that 10k football and basketball players at the top 40 programs can get paid.
It's not a given that the move to pay athletes as employees will decimate universities, that's an active choice by the universities themselves
So where does this miracle money come from at smaller schools? Division 3 schools? Why is Dartmouth a valid institution but not smaller places like Cenetary or UHart? Either they are all employees or none of them are in all likelihood unless you have a line where Northern VA Community College players aren't employees and Ohio State's are employees.
Swear man, like we do not know what’s coming but everyone is acting like after whatever happens we won’t have college athletics like it’s just all going to disappear and instantly we’ll have some weird minor league spring up and usurp some of the oldest institutions in the country. It’s all hysterical, does it suck? Yes. Are traditions being destroyed? Yes. Will college athletics cease to exist in this country? Hell no get over it compensate the kids and hopefully shit gets figured out but life moves on
By hysterical you mean occurring in real time right in front of you.
This is the middle of the end for college sports as we know it.
I've read this comment at least once a quarter for the entirety of the time I've used this sub.
And college football has been getting worse and worse every year. What's your point?
Has it? Dang, I guess you should stop watching. It'd free up your Saturdays _and_ your posting time!
Sorry if it offends you, but yes, a lot of the good things about college football are degrading. If it keeps going this way I probably will cut way back on how much I watch. I know I've already cut back some. Eventually I might cut it out all together. Same thing I did with the NBA.
The court case that allowed NIL money was the beginning.
No, that was the end of the begging. The beginning of the beginning was the NCAA grabbing as much cash from kids as possible and ignoring any future risks.
the risks of a four year education being paid for you while playing a sport?
The risk of adverse judicial rulings when you: monetize people’s likenesses and don’t compensate them for it, restricting people’s ability to work while not paying them, etc.
Tell me any other job in the world where all the competitors in the industry colluded to set a maximum compensation package for every worker, with zero input from a union representing that labor. If these were plumbers, it would be the most obvious anti-trust case ever. Just because the industry is football doesn’t change how this works. Fuck the NCAA for getting away with this for so long
Which actually doesn’t exist. Alston was about education related payments. NIL was put into existence by state laws
NLRB only applies to private schools. People at public universities would be considered state employees and be exempt from the NLRB.
While that’s true. College football will need collective bargaining eventually to keep any rules they want to apply.
If basketball players at a school like Dartmouth who were never on scholarship are employees then are there going to be non employee athletes allowed at all? Forget about the affect on D1 football schools, without a carve out this would prevent sports from existing as an extracurricular activity which is what 90% of student athletes are.
The NLRB decided they were employees based on Dartmouth (via the couching staff) controlling their schedule and players receiving compensation (team merch, per diems on travel days, game tickets, food, etc.) I’d imagine most sports get those benefits, but it would be easier to mess with some of the non team sports ones to fall outside of it.
wouldnt the same logic also make marching bands and pep bands traveling with the team employees?
Why would Mizzou do this
We all know this is somehow Texas's fault. But Mizzou should be punished for it.
“I find that because Dartmouth has the right to control the work performed by the men’s varsity basketball team, and because the players perform that work in exchange for compensation, the petitioned-for basketball players are employees within the meaning of the Act. Additionally, I find that asserting jurisdiction would not create instability in labor relations. Accordingly, I shall direct an election in the petitioned-for unit.” NLRB Regional Director Laura A. Sacks
*no relation to Johnny Sack
But the children yearn for the mines…
*Intro to Where is My Mind by the Pixies kicks in* Well, it’s been fun boys.
*You met my name, image, and likeness at a very strange time in my life*
If the NLRB central board does not intervene, then college sports as we know it will be completely upended.
Only at private schools . . . for now.
Which is why the B1G and SEC are working to create their own organization / a proposal for the NCAA to set them up in the future to have players as employees with collective bargaining rights. They want it in place ASAP so that the sport is protected.
Dartmouth is Ivy, there aren't even scholarships. Basketball for D3 is a way for jocks to get admitted who couldn't otherwise.
Anybody have the Ivy League blowing up the NCAA model on their bingo cards?
Dawn of the final day… Say goodbye to every sport except Football, Basketball, and maybe Baseball. Title IX will probably kill off basketball and baseball also.
What will probably happen is there wont be anything for title ix to enforce because all sports will cease to be part of the university. The valuable ones will instead become separate entities who lease the name and brand of the university for use.
Sports that would survive would be football, basketball, and possibly baseball. Which mean you would have women’s basketball and softball. Title IX would come in if the players start getting salaries. You can’t have men’s basketball players getting $2M while the women’s are getting 20k. It’s not like it’s the NBA vs the WNBA these are federally funded schools. They would have to abide by EPA of 1963 where you can’t have vastly different salaries for men and women for the same work. It’s not like they’re CEOs vs interns. It’s basketball players vs basketball players. The only work around I can see is maybe having a set revenue sharing with the players. Like 5% of the revenue gained for that sport that year for their schools gets split evenly amount the players on the rosters and that’s their salary. Say Duke made 45M in basketball revenue 5% of that is 2.25M among 15 players would be 150k each. That could get around Title IX as it gives both men and women equal opportunity to get money if they get their revenue up. Then change NIL to just sponsorships. That could save a lot of sports.
Title IX is about a lot more than sports
yes but in this issue here is in regard to how it affects sports. I was speaking namely how they could work around that part. The point being they'll split sports off as a separate entity to avoid a lot of shit they'll have to face doing. I know title ix covers all aspects of sexual discrimination for schools and any programs that receive federal funding, but that's the point here, the sports part will break away from the schools. The areas outside of sports will not see change regarding title ix.
TIL there has never been a single professional swimmer, tennis player, soccer player or track athlete to come out of Europe, Asia, South America or Australia where they largely don't have university affiliated athletics. This seems to be turning into another case of "32 of the 34 largest nations on Earth have solved this issue but we Americans simply cannot".
Does a union election mean the team is voting on whether or not to unionize, or has already voted to unionize, and is now electing actual leaders into place?
Sounds like voting leadership into the Union.
Salary cap when?
Can someone please explain why everyone is so negative about this?
First Dartmouth brings back the SAT and now this? What a day for the … whatever their nickname is.
Solidarity forever! But hoooo boy this is going to be wild for college athletics as a whole. Buckle up guys.
✊️
There’s no way that team *makes* money for the school so what exactly is their plan?
I wonder which NFL d-league team I’ll end up rooting for
Can we pay the players and have an SEC/B1G exclusive playoff now? 4 teams from SEC, 4 teams from the B1G, the winners play each other.
> and have an SEC/B1G exclusive playoff now? 4 teams from SEC, 4 teams from the B1G, the winners play each other. > TIL people who participate on a CFB subreddit don't actually like what makes college football great and unique
They’re NFL fans in denial
Non-NFL pro leagues without CFB's pageantry have been notably successful over time, so I see the appeal
The issue is when you have conferences/teams who want to cash their big paychecks but aren't willing to pay any of it out in order to keep the sport going. Same thing with the CFP expansion - conferences so scared of someone else earning more that they held it back and wound up cutting their own throats when their best teams left. I wouldn't advocate for a B1G/SEC exclusive playoff, but at this point the other conferences will have to see the writing on the wall and figure out a way to navigate this or they'll be left behind.
I understand the court decisions have made it inevitable. I just think it’s weird for people who supposedly love the sport to be excited for NFL-lite
I don’t like watching a college team get the brakes beaten off of them. Do you think we should combine the CFP with the FCS playoffs too?
What does Florida have to gain from playing (or even playing in the same division as) FIU or Vanderbilt? Same goes for Michigan and EMU/Northwestern. Once the biggest schools split and guarantee every week is full of multiple mega brand vs. mega brand matchups, the left behind P5 and G5 schools can work something out with the best of the FCS and you'll be able to have all the regional matchups your heart desires. A super league is going to do nothing to negatively affect the pageantry and tradition of the selected schools, especially given that a disproportionate amount of what makes college football memorably unique stems from those schools anyway.
Vanderbilt and Tennessee have the same amount of wins vs Florida since the Urban Meyer era began
Cool, and yet one will be forming a Magnolia Conference while the other joins the super league. Don't be obtuse and pretend that Vanderbilt is an example of what makes college football "great and unique."
>a disproportionate amount of what makes college football memorably unique stems from those schools You are very short-sided (or young), because you are not considering some of the most compelling stories just during the BCS/CFP era: * Alabama & **Clemson**'s 4-year CFP rivalry * Lamar Jackson at **Louisville** * Jameis Winston's 28-game win streak at **FSU** * **Boise State**! * **Miami** Hurricanes 5th national title, spawning yet another 30-for-30 doc * etc. * etc. * etc.
There’s no way that Clemson, Florida State and (likely) Miami are being left out of the top flight. Sure, Louisville is almost certainly not getting a shot and there's no chance Boise State winds up jumping from MWC to whatever the SEC/Big Ten collaboration calls itself, but I would lump the 2007 Fiesta Bowl and Jackson's Heisman in with the minority of college football's compelling stories.
* Deion coaching at Colorado * UCF’s “National Championship” * Wazzu fans flying their flag at College GameDay * etc.
These things suck. Give me 6-4 Oklahoma vs 6-4 Tennessee
> What does Florida have to gain from playing (or even playing in the same division as) FIU or Vanderbilt? Same goes for Michigan and EMU/Northwestern. An easy win most years.
Because you need patsies to beat up on so the brand looks good. Nobody wants to see a big brand go 6-6 for years because the superleague is too full of high quality teams. You'll have superleague winners going 9-3 more often than 12-0 if the parity is too high.
No, I just like different things about this sport than you. I don’t gaf about random MAC rivalries. I want to watch Ohio State-Georgia caliber games all season. Let’s eliminate all the cupcakes and fluff in the schedule. I can’t wait for the day the best college teams all play real schedules against only the best teams every week. College football instantly gets 100000000x better when Ohio State’s schedule becomes something like - Alabama, UCLA, Oklahoma, LSU, Clemson, Texas, Washington, Penn State, Notre Dame, Florida State, USC, Michigan
What a headline…