Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
stinkfist Online
nuts zongo's in the house
*

Posts: 68,914
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 7036
I Root For: Mustard Buzzards
Location: who knows?
Post: #1
unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
01-28-2014 09:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


CalallenStang Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,056
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation: 446
I Root For: SMU Mustangs
Location: The Midwest
Post: #2
RE: unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
It is an interesting question. Putting aside legal definitions of an "employee," what is an employee at the most basic level?

An employee is someone who gives their time, talents, and efforts towards reaching their employer's goals in exchange for a tangible benefit from their employer.

Does that not fit a college athlete?

A college athlete is someone who gives their time, talents, and efforts toward reaching their institution's goals in exchange for a scholarship from their institution.
01-28-2014 09:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stinkfist Online
nuts zongo's in the house
*

Posts: 68,914
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 7036
I Root For: Mustard Buzzards
Location: who knows?
Post: #3
RE: unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
(01-28-2014 09:47 PM)CalallenStang Wrote:  It is an interesting question. Putting aside legal definitions of an "employee," what is an employee at the most basic level?

An employee is someone who gives their time, talents, and efforts towards reaching their employer's goals in exchange for a tangible benefit from their employer.

Does that not fit a college athlete?

A college athlete is someone who gives their time, talents, and efforts toward reaching their institution's goals in exchange for a scholarship from their institution.

XACLY!

just one quickie.....see LOI verbiage changing real soon.....lawyers are drooling right now.

...and they brought it on themselves
01-28-2014 09:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CalallenStang Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,056
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation: 446
I Root For: SMU Mustangs
Location: The Midwest
Post: #4
RE: unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
Hey stinkfist - can you show me the LOI verbiage change? Haven't seen that
01-28-2014 10:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stinkfist Online
nuts zongo's in the house
*

Posts: 68,914
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 7036
I Root For: Mustard Buzzards
Location: who knows?
Post: #5
RE: unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
(01-28-2014 10:04 PM)CalallenStang Wrote:  Hey stinkfist - can you show me the LOI verbiage change? Haven't seen that

...just joking to how big this could end up being by how it starts....so to continue the charade....

addendum: Upon receipt of signature, the author has now signed over his life for the next 4 to 6 years with the belief this an opportunity for exponential increased future earnings due to athletic ability. In reality, the provision of gaining a much larger opportunity through further education is being overlooked as you sign this document with starry eyes....you just became a sex slave of greed that serves our institutional interests and the media that drives those dollars..............okay, maybe that wouldn't work 03-wink

...some have alluded to litigation being an issue once stipends were thrust into the public domain....just sayin'

I'm gonna make fun of how this plays out all day, every day.

edit: the ones that don't make the 4-6 year period are the ones that we end up watching on sunday
(This post was last modified: 01-28-2014 10:22 PM by stinkfist.)
01-28-2014 10:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CalallenStang Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,056
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation: 446
I Root For: SMU Mustangs
Location: The Midwest
Post: #6
RE: unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
LOL. This will be fun to see where it ends up.
01-28-2014 10:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


stinkfist Online
nuts zongo's in the house
*

Posts: 68,914
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 7036
I Root For: Mustard Buzzards
Location: who knows?
Post: #7
RE: unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
(01-28-2014 10:24 PM)CalallenStang Wrote:  LOL. This will be fun to see where it ends up.

yessir, it veddy well will......and I'm going to laugh my arse off

just think of the baby daddy momma aspect.....

this is just too easy....
01-28-2014 10:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MinerInWisconsin Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,689
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 504
I Root For: UTEP, of course
Location: The Frozen Tundra
Post: #8
RE: unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
Just for the sake of discussion, I can see that the needs of almost full time football and basketball players need to be addressed but once a union is formed and most if not all college football and basketball players join, won't the ante be upped over time? What does a union ultimately do to get their way? That's right. They strike. Interesting times.
01-29-2014 09:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,846
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2880
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #9
RE: unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
(01-29-2014 09:18 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  Just for the sake of discussion, I can see that the needs of almost full time football and basketball players need to be addressed but once a union is formed and most if not all college football and basketball players join, won't the ante be upped over time? What does a union ultimately do to get their way? That's right. They strike. Interesting times.

Didn't tha already occur this last season at Grambling University?
01-29-2014 10:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BeliefBlazer Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 13,806
Joined: Jun 2004
Reputation: 295
I Root For: UAB
Location: Portal, GA

DonatorsDonators
Post: #10
RE: unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
You can also fire employees. And employees have to pay taxes on their wages.
01-29-2014 10:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
blazers9911 Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,822
Joined: Jan 2011
Reputation: 224
I Root For: UAB
Location:

Survivor Runner-up
Post: #11
RE: unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
(01-28-2014 09:47 PM)CalallenStang Wrote:  It is an interesting question. Putting aside legal definitions of an "employee," what is an employee at the most basic level?

An employee is someone who gives their time, talents, and efforts towards reaching their employer's goals in exchange for a tangible benefit from their employer.

Does that not fit a college athlete?

A college athlete is someone who gives their time, talents, and efforts toward reaching their institution's goals in exchange for a scholarship from their institution.

An employee is also compensated and pays taxes. These guys are looking at certain aspects, but not others. I don't see this ending well for anybody, but these guys in college will learn first hand what a tax burden really feels like if they succeed.
01-29-2014 10:46 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


CalallenStang Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,056
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation: 446
I Root For: SMU Mustangs
Location: The Midwest
Post: #12
RE: unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
(01-29-2014 10:39 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  You can also fire employees. And employees have to pay taxes on their wages.

You can fire (cut) players. And you are right that employees have to pay taxes on their wages - under current US legal construct. In the more basic theoretical definition of an employee, that isn't a requirement. The bottom line is that this will be going through the court system and we are a common law country so the "employees have to pay taxes on their wages" qualification will be challenged.
01-29-2014 11:07 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BeliefBlazer Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 13,806
Joined: Jun 2004
Reputation: 295
I Root For: UAB
Location: Portal, GA

DonatorsDonators
Post: #13
RE: unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
Players can have their scholarships not renewed for another year. It doesn't happen at an extreme level now. "Firing" someone is much easier and more socially acceptable.
01-29-2014 11:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MinerInWisconsin Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,689
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 504
I Root For: UTEP, of course
Location: The Frozen Tundra
Post: #14
RE: unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
The mantra of those getting this started appears to be that this is not about pay for play. Instead it's about taking care of health and education, including continuing education, needs. Stipends are likely involved also and input from athletes on scholarship restrictions such as renewable (or not) each year.

But does anyone believe that this will not evolve into pay for play? Will colleges not offer athletic scholarships but instead offer a salary? Which would be cheaper for the college or better for the athlete?

I don't see this ending either well or soon.
01-29-2014 11:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
blazers9911 Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,822
Joined: Jan 2011
Reputation: 224
I Root For: UAB
Location:

Survivor Runner-up
Post: #15
RE: unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
(01-29-2014 11:07 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  
(01-29-2014 10:39 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  You can also fire employees. And employees have to pay taxes on their wages.

You can fire (cut) players. And you are right that employees have to pay taxes on their wages - under current US legal construct. In the more basic theoretical definition of an employee, that isn't a requirement. The bottom line is that this will be going through the court system and we are a common law country so the "employees have to pay taxes on their wages" qualification will be challenged.

If they start getting paid, they damn well better have to pay taxes.(I'm not talking about a $2000 stipend either) At this point, with all the whining and bitching going on I say F*** it. Give them $50,000-100,000(find a number, I don't really care) a year. They are responsible for their room, board, food, tuition, fees, books, and taxes. They'll see how far that money goes then.
01-29-2014 11:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
blazers9911 Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,822
Joined: Jan 2011
Reputation: 224
I Root For: UAB
Location:

Survivor Runner-up
Post: #16
RE: unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
(01-29-2014 11:33 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  The mantra of those getting this started appears to be that this is not about pay for play. Instead it's about taking care of health and education, including continuing education, needs. Stipends are likely involved also and input from athletes on scholarship restrictions such as renewable (or not) each year.

But does anyone believe that this will not evolve into pay for play? Will colleges not offer athletic scholarships but instead offer a salary? Which would be cheaper for the college or better for the athlete?

I don't see this ending either well or soon.

At Northwestern, I might actually but the first paragraph. Most other places, no way. I also completely agree with your last sentence.
01-29-2014 11:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


CalallenStang Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,056
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation: 446
I Root For: SMU Mustangs
Location: The Midwest
Post: #17
RE: unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
(01-29-2014 11:35 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  
(01-29-2014 11:07 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  
(01-29-2014 10:39 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  You can also fire employees. And employees have to pay taxes on their wages.

You can fire (cut) players. And you are right that employees have to pay taxes on their wages - under current US legal construct. In the more basic theoretical definition of an employee, that isn't a requirement. The bottom line is that this will be going through the court system and we are a common law country so the "employees have to pay taxes on their wages" qualification will be challenged.

If they start getting paid, they damn well better have to pay taxes.(I'm not talking about a $2000 stipend either) At this point, with all the whining and bitching going on I say F*** it. Give them $50,000-100,000(find a number, I don't really care) a year. They are responsible for their room, board, food, tuition, fees, books, and taxes. They'll see how far that money goes then.

I don't disagree with you and I'm not saying that they won't have to pay taxes. I'm just saying that that's not a requirement to the definition of an employee at a theoretical level
01-29-2014 11:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CalallenStang Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,056
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation: 446
I Root For: SMU Mustangs
Location: The Midwest
Post: #18
RE: unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
(01-29-2014 11:18 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  Players can have their scholarships not renewed for another year. It doesn't happen at an extreme level now. "Firing" someone is much easier and more socially acceptable.

It's the same thing and players can get cut at any time. The only thing the scholarship is is a guaranteed severance package.
01-29-2014 12:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,936
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 264
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #19
RE: unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
this is only going to push schools to go back to focusing more on academics

I know many will not want to believe this, but the reality is the money stream is pretty much played out at this point

cable TV is on the brink right now and losing subscribers year over year for the first time in history and they really have no way to deal with it

the conference TV contracts are in place for the next decade for the major conferences with the exception of the Big 10 for their 1st tier only

the PAC 12 network is sucking wind and paying out nothing to the conference members......the LHN is sucking wind, but fortunately UT gets paid anyway and the SEC network will probably do OK, but I doubt it will be the home run most think or even a triple and the ACC screwed up and is in a difficult position to form a conference network so that is out

the playoffs are not going to be a big money maker over and above what they are paying now and it is doubtful they will be expanded beyond 4 teams and even if they did go to 8 it is not going to come with a great deal more money it will come with "access bowl" money slightly increased at best or chopped up a different way

the AAC and MWC have seen that "hey we would like at least a little money" results in "here is a lot less than you would have liked prove something to us" and everyone else is what they are

facility wars are winding down to a degree because most of the large schools are as big as they can get for a stajium, they have a practice facility, Tennessee is actually downsizing, Stanford downsized (back when they sucked a lot more) and others have either expanded or remodeled recently and really have nothing left to do or attempt especially with the limited eturn on that investment

jumbotrons litter the landscapes, naming rights deals are there, but still difficult to land especially with a quality sponsor......the money tree is tapped out and it not growing

the begging bowl holders from D1-AA are at the castle walls and beating on the doors and that will not get better unless something is done about it

now with the "pay us" from players and their poverty pimp advocates and flim flam artist, academic stories like FSU and UNC and players that are basically dead from the shoulders up and even the major programs seeing that they can spend double what they spend now and get zero return on athletics things are going to change

the NCAA is already putting in the graduation rate requirements for playoff and access bowl payout monies and the next step will be to put in place requirements for participation coming out of high school and that will send some of the mush mouths and future felons to community college or JuCo or possibly just out on the streets where they can start their jail career earlier

more than likely it will come in the form of a needed GPA like a 2.75 or higher out of high school and something like a 950/19 SAT/ACT (barely above having a pulse) and if you fail to have that then you cannot participate in NCAA athletics as a freshman and you have to take 12 hours of approved DEGREE PLAN courses each of two semesters to qualify for the next year with a 2.75+ GPA and passing all of those classes with at least a C

so you would basically be placed into your redshirt year immediately if you did not meet the NCAA min participation standards

and again they will make it 24 hours total of classes that count towards a degree plan and possible even mandate the classes.....so if a player needs remedial English or Math they can take that (and need to keep the 2.75 GPA including those classes), but they will then need to make those required DEGREE PLAN classes up in the summer before their second year

failure to have the 24 hours with the 2.75 GPA means you are again unable to play on the field, you can still practice, get a "scholarship", ect you just can't play and that next year counts as one of your 4 that you can play (and you have already burned the redshirt)......and again you will have to tack on another 24 hours towards a degree plan with a 2.75 GPA so going into your 3rd season you will need to have 48 hours with a 2.75 GPA that all count towards a degree or you cannot participate again

so if a school desired they could keep a guy on "scholarship" for 4 years and at the start of that 5th year if they managed to have 96 credit hours towards a degree plan with a 2.75 GPA they could play for their 5th year finally

and there will probably be a few teams at first that will try that and look at it like having someone at a JuCo only having control of them and paying the freight on them, but over time as they find these guys do not get it in 1-2 seasons and they go into their 3rd of 5 seasons still not able to participate and looking like they will never participate they will see it is a poor idea

along with that will be the stipulation that players that fail out, go to jail, or otherwise leave in bad academic standing you lose the ability to hand out that scholarship for the entirety of the time they would have been able to participate

so if Mush'Mouth McFelony gets arrested as a true freshman and has a 1.10 GPA with 6 hours that means instead of 85 scholarships for the next 4 years (+ the one he was there) you are only allowed to give 84 scholarships because the ghost of Mush'Mouth McFelony is still haunting you

and of Kaint-read Jefferson comes in with a 2.01 out of HS and a 713 SAT and stays around two years trying to become eligible and finally fails out that means for the remaining 3 years he would have been around you are down one more scholarship

so eventually when schools get down to 78 scholarships they can hand out and find themselves only able to sign 18 players some years because of how it worked out and the rest of those scholarships are doing nothing because they were used on non-qualifiers and known criminals they will adjust who they offer scholarships to and there will be "mid major" programs that will try and step in and take the risk, but they will be the ones that get hit even harder trying that because they will not have the "home runs" on a few risk that the majors have and the ones that do not pay off will be a bigger hit overall for programs that go with the "speed" and "coach them up" and "work them in slow" style (that works for many), but when your depth starts to suffer because of failed risk it limits who you can bring in as another project

over time they will bump up the entrance requirements and the overall GPA requirements for ALL athletes to be able to participate and up the losses for failing our or arrested or otherwise leaving in poor academic standing and that will wash out many of the smaller programs that can't take the risk, can't weather the bad press of shipping a non-performer out after a season of letting them try and that can't develop the JuCo contacts to get that transition program in place instead of running it through the 4 year university

again many will disagree, but there is a reason that Duke, Stanford (who has been terrible in football a lot more than they have been good) Duke, Wake, Northwestern, Vandy and on and on are allowed to stick around and it is not because Alabama, UT, OU, Tennessee, FSU and others do not want them around.....it is because they want them around and soon will be the time they become a benefit instead of a liability

because with academics in focus those schools will again be able to compete and others that have competed athletically more so that academically (that many toss out as getting a major conference invite because of football field performance even though that will NEVER happen) will get sent packing when it all weeds itself out
01-29-2014 12:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
olliebaba Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 28,207
Joined: Jul 2007
Reputation: 2173
I Root For: Christ
Location: El Paso
Post: #20
RE: unionization.....let the litigation wars begin
(01-29-2014 11:18 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  Players can have their scholarships not renewed for another year. It doesn't happen at an extreme level now. "Firing" someone is much easier and more socially acceptable.


That won't be so easy. Remember we're talking about unions here. All the player has to do is take the matter up with the union rep to try to get it reversed. It happens all the time, if you have a good and strong union like the cops, firefighters and emts do.

With that said recruiters better be sure that the player they want will be one that will produce for X number of years otherwise he'll just be playing the bench game and picking up his "stipend" with no chance for the coach to look for someone else because it would be expensive for the university to fight the appeal.
01-29-2014 03:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.