Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
A lil blog piece I wrote on what unionizing impacts could be like
Author Message
ClairtonPanther Offline
people need to wake up
*

Posts: 25,056
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 777
I Root For: Pitt/Navy
Location: Portland, Oregon

Donators
Post: #1
A lil blog piece I wrote on what unionizing impacts could be like
04-05-2014 12:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


OrangeCrush22 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,426
Joined: Feb 2011
Reputation: 267
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:
Post: #2
RE: A lil blog piece I wrote on what unionizing impacts could be like
That all seems pretty reasonable. I wonder what will become of Title IX. The women's, and some men's, teams will be a huge drain on universities.
04-05-2014 01:26 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ClairtonPanther Offline
people need to wake up
*

Posts: 25,056
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 777
I Root For: Pitt/Navy
Location: Portland, Oregon

Donators
Post: #3
RE: A lil blog piece I wrote on what unionizing impacts could be like
I thought about the minor sports the second after I wrote this piece. I see 0 way in hell colleges are going to pay athletes that play minor sports like track and field. I could easily see football and basketball (M/W) as the only sports in an average athletic department, going forward.
04-05-2014 01:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
lew240z Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 699
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 23
I Root For: Wyoming
Location: Saint Louis, MO
Post: #4
RE: A lil blog piece I wrote on what unionizing impacts could be like
If the schools would actually enforce the 20 hours per week rule, the athletes become part time workers and the rules change somewhat. At 50 hours per week, overtime rules may apply.

The schools could remove the athletes' names from their jerseys and only sell apparel with numbers not assigned to any athlete. Could be a way around O'Bannon's suit.
04-05-2014 06:09 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #5
RE: A lil blog piece I wrote on what unionizing impacts could be like
C.P., I don't disagree with any of your conclusions about what happens in the utilization of players with regard to their service to the university obligations as per their contracts, or with the elimination of red shirt and grey shirt status, but I would make one observation. While scholarship limits would be at an end a cap would have to be set on the number of players a school could have under contract for each major sport. Otherwise we go back to the old system of stockpiling players to gain an advantage, even though market forces would be somewhat of a natural governor.

When this first came out I stated that Title IX would be dead and it will be. If things are handled for profit only, you can't legally force an entity into a failing business model. Women's sports would have to stand on their own. In many places women's basketball could work, but in many less institutions than it is in currently. Women's gymnastics and Swimming and Diving and Track and Field would have to be subsidized corporately like the Olympic team to be able to survive.

I'm not sure where soccer fits in here.

IMO here are the sports that survive as profit sports: Football (but in much fewer numbers of teams), Basketball (about the same as today), Baseball (in the Southeast, West, and Southwest and in spots everywhere else), Hockey (in the North and Northeast).

Corporately sponsored sports would be Swimming and Diving, Track & Field, Wrestling, Golf, Tennis, and perhaps Rodeo and Equestrian and Lacrosse. Where there was no sponsorship these sports would cease to exist. I could see corporate sponsorship at P5 schools, but not all, and at very few schools below that level.

The distinction between large wealthy schools and the others would be like the distinction between the wealthiest 5% of the population and the rest of us.

You wrote a good article that will force some people to think about the changes to come.
(This post was last modified: 04-05-2014 07:19 AM by JRsec.)
04-05-2014 07:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,335
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #6
RE: A lil blog piece I wrote on what unionizing impacts could be like
(04-05-2014 06:09 AM)lew240z Wrote:  If the schools would actually enforce the 20 hours per week rule, the athletes become part time workers and the rules change somewhat. At 50 hours per week, overtime rules may apply.

The schools could remove the athletes' names from their jerseys and only sell apparel with numbers not assigned to any athlete. Could be a way around O'Bannon's suit.

I have argued for years that football players - all scholarship athletes, actually - are paid employees. And part of my argument is that you should not only count the hours the players devote to their sport, but also the hours they are required by the terms of their employment contract to put in on classwork. One of the conditions of employment for any athlete is that he/she remain academically eligible. If you become ineligible, you don't get paid any more.

Because, despite the fiction of the "student-athlete", these are athletes first and students second. Nobody is paying them to do well in a chemistry class. They are getting paid to perform, first and foremost. Schools don't mind if an athlete also gets an education along the way, but neither would they mind if he didn't if public pressure didn't force the NCAA to enforce GSR and APR standards.
04-05-2014 10:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,335
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #7
RE: A lil blog piece I wrote on what unionizing impacts could be like
The first thing that would have to happen if football players are allowed to unionize is that schools would have to figure out exactly who the employer is that players will bargain with.

Somehow, I doubt the schools will agree to be that employer. The potential for crippling lawsuits is just too great. Liable for the lifetime effects of debilitating injuries, including concussions? I don't think so. Instead, I would imagine that at the very least schools would set up a separate legal entity - like Buckeye Sports, Inc. - to be the employer and negotiating partner.

Another question to be answered is whether there would be a national union, or whether each school would have its own union, independent of every other. Such a union wouldn't have much power, given the transitory nature of students, and the small number of athletes involved. Assuming it's a national union, who do they negotiate with? The NFLPA bargains with the league, not individual NFL franchises. So does that means the CFPA (College Football Players Association) negotiates with the NCAA? Or with each conference?

One thing the NCAA has going for it in all this is time - it's going to take years to sort out these questions before any changes will be necessary. None of the current athletes will even be students by then. In the meantime, who's paying the legal bills?
04-05-2014 10:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Captain Bearcat Offline
All-American in Everything
*

Posts: 9,478
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 766
I Root For: UC
Location: IL & Cincinnati, USA
Post: #8
RE: A lil blog piece I wrote on what unionizing impacts could be like
You guys aren't really thinking this through. Think like a university president, not a sports fan.

You really think that a lifelong academic is going to cheapen the brand that they've built their academic reputation by licensing it to a minor league football/basketball franchise that is identical in structure to minor league baseball? Of course not. The very idea is absurd. The only reason they allow the current funding system to continue is that they can cling to the student-athlete concept. The moment that football/basketball players start being paid differently than the members of the chess club, the tennis team, or IEEE competitions, many presidents will no longer allow their universities to participate.

If the D-1 model of compensating college athletes gets outlawed, then I guarantee that the Big 10 and Pac 10 will switch to the D-3 model of funding college athletics. If the bulk of D-1 schools follow their lead (which they probably will), then there will be a lot of pressure for the ACC, SEC, and Big 12 to do the same.
04-05-2014 12:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,335
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #9
RE: A lil blog piece I wrote on what unionizing impacts could be like
(04-05-2014 12:17 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  You guys aren't really thinking this through. Think like a university president, not a sports fan.

You really think that a lifelong academic is going to cheapen the brand that they've built their academic reputation by licensing it to a minor league football/basketball franchise that is identical in structure to minor league baseball? Of course not. The very idea is absurd. The only reason they allow the current funding system to continue is that they can cling to the student-athlete concept. The moment that football/basketball players start being paid differently than the members of the chess club, the tennis team, or IEEE competitions, many presidents will no longer allow their universities to participate.

If the D-1 model of compensating college athletes gets outlawed, then I guarantee that the Big 10 and Pac 10 will switch to the D-3 model of funding college athletics. If the bulk of D-1 schools follow their lead (which they probably will), then there will be a lot of pressure for the ACC, SEC, and Big 12 to do the same.

I agree that many presidents would feel this way. However, they answer to Trustees or Boards of Governors that include many big boosters that act more like fans than administrators when it comes to matters of athletics. I think we underestimate their clout at our peril.

And, FWIW, I would love to see all athletic scholarships eliminated. But I don't expect it to happen.
(This post was last modified: 04-05-2014 12:24 PM by ken d.)
04-05-2014 12:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #10
RE: A lil blog piece I wrote on what unionizing impacts could be like
While everyone loves jumping onto these "this is the end of college sports as we know it" dooms days scenarios......

it will take years, even decades for this stuff to play out and a lot of new things can happen inbetween now and then
04-05-2014 12:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #11
RE: A lil blog piece I wrote on what unionizing impacts could be like
(04-05-2014 12:17 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  You guys aren't really thinking this through. Think like a university president, not a sports fan.

You really think that a lifelong academic is going to cheapen the brand that they've built their academic reputation by licensing it to a minor league football/basketball franchise that is identical in structure to minor league baseball? Of course not. The very idea is absurd. The only reason they allow the current funding system to continue is that they can cling to the student-athlete concept. The moment that football/basketball players start being paid differently than the members of the chess club, the tennis team, or IEEE competitions, many presidents will no longer allow their universities to participate.

If the D-1 model of compensating college athletes gets outlawed, then I guarantee that the Big 10 and Pac 10 will switch to the D-3 model of funding college athletics. If the bulk of D-1 schools follow their lead (which they probably will), then there will be a lot of pressure for the ACC, SEC, and Big 12 to do the same.

They might feel that way initially until shrinking Federal and State funding and the increased need to hire teams of lawyers to comb through corporate grant proposals to determine the potential for losing rights to intellectual property are coupled with the stark reality that losing revenue from all forms for athletics, licensing fees, campus sales of sports related product, television revenue, local, regional and some corporate add money, the good will and donations of restaurants, hotels, and local businesses which rely upon the sports crowds, tickets, parking fees, athletic fund contributions, and concessions all combine in one maelstrom of economic despair to make tuition hikes, the likelihood of no raises for academic faculty, or the possibility of hiring freezes and layoffs a direct consequence of abandoning sports programs. And then, in the light of reality, things suddenly change.

Realignment didn't just happen. It was created when the need for new and sustainable revenue streams met the economic crisis, and the pocket books of willing networks who were searching for a cheap to produce undervalued product. Schools need sports now more than ever before. The chopping block option is the decision that faces the most difficulty. These schools will adapt rather than lose a revenue producer. And don't cite that garbage to me about how many of them lose money either. That's just good accounting for the most part. No state entity ever got more in appropriations by running in the black.
(This post was last modified: 04-05-2014 02:05 PM by JRsec.)
04-05-2014 02:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OrangeCrush22 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,426
Joined: Feb 2011
Reputation: 267
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:
Post: #12
RE: A lil blog piece I wrote on what unionizing impacts could be like
(04-05-2014 07:16 AM)JRsec Wrote:  IMO here are the sports that survive as profit sports: Football (but in much fewer numbers of teams), Basketball (about the same as today), Baseball (in the Southeast, West, and Southwest and in spots everywhere else), Hockey (in the North and Northeast).

Corporately sponsored sports would be Swimming and Diving, Track & Field, Wrestling, Golf, Tennis, and perhaps Rodeo and Equestrian and Lacrosse. Where there was no sponsorship these sports would cease to exist. I could see corporate sponsorship at P5 schools, but not all, and at very few schools below that level.

Syracuse lax turns a profit. I assume for schools like Virginia and Johns Hopkins it does, too. It's also the third highest attended championship behind football and basketball. In 2008 more people showed up to watch Syracuse-Johns Hopkins than Kansas-Memphis. And in 2006 more people attended Virginia-Massachusetts over Florida-UCLA.
04-05-2014 02:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #13
RE: A lil blog piece I wrote on what unionizing impacts could be like
(04-05-2014 02:42 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  
(04-05-2014 07:16 AM)JRsec Wrote:  IMO here are the sports that survive as profit sports: Football (but in much fewer numbers of teams), Basketball (about the same as today), Baseball (in the Southeast, West, and Southwest and in spots everywhere else), Hockey (in the North and Northeast).

Corporately sponsored sports would be Swimming and Diving, Track & Field, Wrestling, Golf, Tennis, and perhaps Rodeo and Equestrian and Lacrosse. Where there was no sponsorship these sports would cease to exist. I could see corporate sponsorship at P5 schools, but not all, and at very few schools below that level.

Syracuse lax turns a profit. I assume for schools like Virginia and Johns Hopkins it does, too. It's also the third highest attended championship behind football and basketball. In 2008 more people showed up to watch Syracuse-Johns Hopkins than Kansas-Memphis. And in 2006 more people attended Virginia-Massachusetts over Florida-UCLA.
And that's true at a handful of schools. For lacrosse to be widely played it would probably need corporate sponsorship outside of the region's teams of which you speak. I don't think the most ardent lacrosse fans think of it as a sport with a national reach, but it does have a tremendous upside given enough time to gain broader acceptance.
04-05-2014 02:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


ClairtonPanther Offline
people need to wake up
*

Posts: 25,056
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 777
I Root For: Pitt/Navy
Location: Portland, Oregon

Donators
Post: #14
RE: A lil blog piece I wrote on what unionizing impacts could be like
(04-05-2014 12:17 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  You guys aren't really thinking this through. Think like a university president, not a sports fan.

You really think that a lifelong academic is going to cheapen the brand that they've built their academic reputation by licensing it to a minor league football/basketball franchise that is identical in structure to minor league baseball? Of course not. The very idea is absurd. The only reason they allow the current funding system to continue is that they can cling to the student-athlete concept. The moment that football/basketball players start being paid differently than the members of the chess club, the tennis team, or IEEE competitions, many presidents will no longer allow their universities to participate.

If the D-1 model of compensating college athletes gets outlawed, then I guarantee that the Big 10 and Pac 10 will switch to the D-3 model of funding college athletics. If the bulk of D-1 schools follow their lead (which they probably will), then there will be a lot of pressure for the ACC, SEC, and Big 12 to do the same.

Actually I am thinking like a College President. Think of how much money a university makes from local vendors on game day. Think of how much money is brought into the local economy due to alumni and visiting fans coming into town. You think people are going to travel hundreds of miles to watch D3 football? You'll see 100K+ stadiums downsized to 20K overnight. Just the names of schools alone due to football helps rake in a plethora of money for academics. How many HS students dream of going to the big state university? Shoot, how many ads for universities are aired during these sporting events. Colleges would lose so many revenue streams by just dropping pegs.

(04-05-2014 12:53 PM)john01992 Wrote:  While everyone loves jumping onto these "this is the end of college sports as we know it" dooms days scenarios......

it will take years, even decades for this stuff to play out and a lot of new things can happen inbetween now and then

While this is correct, this is the off season and there isn't anything else to talk about right now due to realignment practically being over. And it's likely to be over until this stuff is sorted out.
04-06-2014 12:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kaplony Offline
Palmetto State Deplorable

Posts: 25,393
Joined: Apr 2013
I Root For: Newberry
Location: SC
Post: #15
RE: A lil blog piece I wrote on what unionizing impacts could be like
One thing I have yet to see discussed......how is this supposed to effect schools in right to work states? Might this be the last bit of hope for those schools in recruiting deadzones with little hope of being nationally relevant like UMass, UConn, Syracuse, and BC? "Co e play for us and you can be in the union."
04-06-2014 02:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,335
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #16
RE: A lil blog piece I wrote on what unionizing impacts could be like
(04-06-2014 02:25 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  One thing I have yet to see discussed......how is this supposed to effect schools in right to work states? Might this be the last bit of hope for those schools in recruiting deadzones with little hope of being nationally relevant like UMass, UConn, Syracuse, and BC? "Co e play for us and you can be in the union."

Last time I checked, North Carolina was a right to work state. That hasn't seemed to affect the Panthers. I don't think this is an issue.
04-06-2014 07:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,881
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 898
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Grayson Highlands
Post: #17
RE: A lil blog piece I wrote on what unionizing impacts could be like
"Right to Work" just means no closed shops (have to join union to work at company) are allowed.

There is nothing about "Right to Work" state laws that prevents unions from forming. It would just be voluntary per each employee, not mandatory, in those states.

In contrast, non "Right to Work" states can have closed shops. If you want to work somewhere, you have to join a union and pay dues to get the job at the company.

Obviously, closed shops don't exist everywhere even in non "Right to Work" states.
(This post was last modified: 04-06-2014 09:04 AM by TerryD.)
04-06-2014 08:55 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Rube Dali Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,018
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 46
I Root For: UST, BSU, Minn
Location: Maplewood, MN
Post: #18
RE: A lil blog piece I wrote on what unionizing impacts could be like
(04-06-2014 08:55 AM)TerryD Wrote:  "Right to Work" just means no closed shops (have to join union to work at company) are allowed.

There is nothing about "Right to Work" that prevents unions to form. It would be voluntary per each employee, not mandatory.

I know that at least South Carolina is trying to ban any union from organizing in that state. In fact, their Governor is trying to force unions that are already organized to be "broken".
04-06-2014 09:03 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,881
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 898
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Grayson Highlands
Post: #19
RE: A lil blog piece I wrote on what unionizing impacts could be like
(04-06-2014 09:03 AM)Rube Dali Wrote:  
(04-06-2014 08:55 AM)TerryD Wrote:  "Right to Work" just means no closed shops (have to join union to work at company) are allowed.

There is nothing about "Right to Work" that prevents unions to form. It would be voluntary per each employee, not mandatory.

I know that at least South Carolina is trying to ban any union from organizing in that state. In fact, their Governor is trying to force unions that are already organized to be "broken".

That is ideology talking. She has no legal authority to do so. Federal labor law in favor of the rights of workers to unionize and collectively bargain preempts state law in private business situations.
(This post was last modified: 04-06-2014 07:06 PM by TerryD.)
04-06-2014 07:02 PM
Visit this user's website 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.