Thousands of college students every year are employees at the school they attend. They have jobs as tutors, teaching assistants, food service, bookstore workers, etc. Few if any of those students are screened for employment, and the university has to follow the same employment rules with them that they do with non-student employees.

(05-21-2015 08:35 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-20-2015 09:56 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Well, if that is their position (and I respect it), then ND may have to withdraw from big time athletics.

Oh well, nothing lasts forever.

ND can help create another model, perhaps in conjunction with other private schools.

Who knows if that came about, which privates (and maybe service academies) would follow ND out the door???


Notre Dame
Stanford
Duke
BC
Northwestern
Vanderbilt
Syracuse
Army
Navy
Air Force


Any other possible candidates for this hypothetic model?

Yes, The Big Ten, per Delany's comments. Whether or not he meant what he said when he levied that threat? Well that's a different discussion. The Big Ten as a whole is a possible candidate for that hypothetical model.

I'm pretty sure he meant it.

Now a lot of people will say one thing, but will actually do something quite different when push comes to shove.

I don't think the presidents would have the courage to follow through.

(05-21-2015 04:06 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  Let me ask a few questions.

If these athletes are determined to be employees of the university, then I assume they will receive a W-2 like any other employee and will have to pay taxes - both federal and state. My understanding is that this is a complicated process for pro athletes as they literally have to file state tax forms in all of the states who have state income tax where they played a game during the tax year. Obviously, I would expect they have to hire accountants as this gets very complicated...with issues such as reciprocity, etc.

If this is indeed true, won't these college employees have to do the same thing for the states they play away games in who have a state income tax????

While the initial ruling applies to just private schools, IMO, it would seem likely that a number of state labor boards (who tend to mirror the federal board) would likewise determine that athletes in state schools are likewise employees.

If FB players are determined to be employees, what about all the athletes (men and women) in other sports? What will be the criteria? Revenue? Whether the athlete is on a scholarship? (IMO, if is the criteria, I could see schools eliminating athletic scholarships and moving to whatever the Ivy League now does to provide assistance to athletes.)

IMO, this will be the downfall of college athletics, as we have known it. My hope is that saner will heads will prevail.

There's no doubt it would result in a reduction of many non-rev sports to club level or total abandonment.

(05-21-2015 03:26 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-20-2015 07:55 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(05-20-2015 10:38 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(05-20-2015 10:21 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  being "employees" will be a disaster for most of the morons that support this

once they are subjected to the employee code of conduct and immediately being FIRED for breaking that code of conduct they will be getting kicked out of universities by the thousands yearly

there is not going to be two classes of "employees" where regular employees like janitors and repair staff ect are subjected to one set of rules and "pretend" employee athletes are subjected to a different set of rules

things like implied sexual harassment, "harmless" comments to other regular students ect that in the past would have been brushed off as students being students and "guys being guys" will now be no different than any other employee saying things to regular students and being reported for it and disciplined for it

any university that thinks they can get around this will find themselves in court pretty much in a heart beat.......either by current or past employees that were disciplined or let go for certain conduct or by regular students that do not appreciate university "employees" harassing them no matter how many touchdowns they have scored

mandatory drug testing that will now have to actually be reported on VS covered up in the past, on campus behavior of all types, physical fights, rude comments, in class behaviors all will have to result in "firings" or long "employment reviews" with the athlete sitting out part or all of the season while those reviews are carried out are going to be the norm

no more "hiring" athletes that need a "second chance" after they were fired from their last university unless you want to open the university to hiring all kinds of abusers and users in other university positions (or face a lawsuit) and unless you want to expose yourself even more to lawsuits about "hiring" athletes with known issues and exposing your customers (regular students) to those types of employees

standard coed break ups with he said she said and the university able to keep a lid on it will now be cases where the "employee" being accused of something will have to be removed from contact with the accuser until all investigations are complete and unless there is a clear finding of innocence they will probably have to be placed away from casual contact with the accuser

this will probably also severely limit the ability to "hire" new recruits with questionable high school police records unless you again want to expose the university to having to hire others for regular university positions with police records and expose the university to major lawsuits as soon as their questionable "hire" assaults another regular student

this will serve to clear a ton of knuckleheads off campus and hopefully keep a ton more from ever setting foot on campus, but at what cost to the universities overall in liability and employment lawsuits before they figure out they are not going to be able to have a special class of "employees" that are athletes VS other employees

Wonderful post, but this won't hit quite that hard... ...from this angle.

1. After a rough first year, kids will wisen up and clean up their act - especially since there is money on the line. At $x.xx/per hour, people begin to watch their mouth.

2. Universities are willing to lie and cheat to defend their football programs. I don't think you realize that the rabbit hole can go much further down than it already has.

Where it will hurt is in attendance. Students won't feel connected to random employees like they do to student-athletes. It will be harder to convince people that they are really supporting the UNIVERSITY of Alabama at Bryant-Denny. The sport would become a little more "fake", and that won't help viewership numbers.

Remove the scholastic element, and what you have is a variant of the D-League.

1. you really believe that many of these morons will clean up their act much less in a single year......get real

a boat load of these idiots can't manage to clean up their act after getting several warnings and after having other issues besides those they get a warning for covered up

2. I agree 100% about the lying and cheating and covering up

but there is one MAJOR issue when one goes from doing that for a "STUDENT" athlete to an employee

if you are asking your custodial staff, your grounds staff, your IT staff and on and on to pass drug test and to not have criminal convictions (or accusations) and you have been firing people for that or not hiring people based on a failed drug test or criminal histories for the last decade and suddenly your new "athlete employees" are caught and not only are they not FIRED there is a cover up.......well when that cover up is exposed you can expect to have about a decades worth of fired employees, disciplined employees and potential employees that were declined employment based on a drug test or a criminal history lining up to sue the university straight to hell

(05-20-2015 10:59 AM)TerryD Wrote:  There is nothing wrong with any of your predicted outcomes. What is the big deal, anyway? So, they will be employees. So what?

Is your solution to continue with the "Student-athlete" fiction?

my solution is to put academics back into the equation and stop using college sports as a front to get mush brained morons into a college setting where they can waste time and money on an education they put no value on

if that means some or many of these morons have no path to a career as a pro athlete who cares that is not the issue for an academic institution to concern themselves with

academic institutions need to concern themselves with education and educating people not with providing a path to a pro sports career at the expense of academics and academic reputation

and again the issue with becoming an "employee" is they become subjected to rules that can no longer be covered up or dismissed as "students being students"

if a member of your custodial staff at a university decided on their lunch break to play some pickup basketball in the rec center and they came to blows with a student or even another "athlete employee" I don't think there is anyone out there that would find that acceptable and not expect that employee to be severely disciplined and almost certainly fired

if a student athlete does that they can brush it off as a "student conduct issue" and have the STUDENT athlete run some laps

if a student athlete keeps approaching a coed in the rec center gym or the computer lab and making unwanted advances or even saying sexually suggestive things they can make him run the stairs at the stajium and tell him to stop

if a member of the dorm maintenance staff does that or one of the cooks in the dorm cafeteria that is not also a student does that they will be FIRED and even if it is a student worker they will probably be FIRED from their job even if allowed to remain a student

and when you FIRE an "athlete employee" well there goes their financial aid, their dorm room and their food and of course their reason for being on campus most likely

if your maintenance or grounds staff or your IT staff is walking around campus calling their coworkers "the N word" with an "A" or worse with the "ER" instead of the "A" you can expect they will be written up immediately and probably fired even is no one in the group was offended because you cannot allow EMPLOYEES to do that because eventually someone will get offended

if a "student athlete" is doing that no one would think twice about it as long as they are of the race that is allowed to call each other that.....if they are not well it could be an issue......but there again if all athletes are now employees you are no longer allowed to say "well they are in the demographic group that can say that".....because allowing one demographic group of employees to say something you deem offensive while disciplining another for saying it is how you end up in a lawsuit that you will LOSE

just like if you have student athletes calling females "Bs and Hs" people can get offended, but there is little that can be done about it

but of "EMPLOYEE athletes" are calling each other that even if they are all female well you are going to have to write them up at the least and fire them if they continue to do so

because of course you are not going to allow anyone in your administrative, custodial, maintenance, IT, grounds, food service or any other EMPLOYEES call each other that no matter the gender because again that is offensive and even some of the same gender might find it offensive and surely many more would find it offensive of members of the opposite gender were doing it.....and you cannot apply punishments or reprimands unequally based on "well of the same gender is not offensive"

if "student" athletes are calling people slurs about sexual orientation while walking around having fun with friends and giving friends a hard time on campus and someone of that sexual orientation overhears it they can complain, but it will have little consequences......if an EMPLOYEE (even one that is an athlete) does that well that will result in a disciplinary action, some "training" and possibly a firing

and if you try and "cover it up" then it is open season to get sued by all those that may have been fired or reprimanded for that in the past and open season to get sued by students and other employees that find it offensive

the list goes on and on.....anything that is not acceptable at any normal work place even "amongst the boys in the warehouse" or "the salesman" or whatever will be the same for EMPLOYEE athletes.....there will not be exceptions because they are "athletes".....they will be EMPLOYEES FIRST

hell it could be as bad as a nudie calender on their dorm room wall that the maid decides she does not like or that some other student or even some other athlete employee does not like

just like if you are in a "man camp" in the oil patch or on an off shore oil rig or on a Navy ship or on a regular ship.....when you live on the property of your work place then your place of residence is also your work place and subjected to the same exact rules as any other work place

if the female engineer, new rig hire, IT person ect can see it and find it offensive then IT COMES DOWN and if it does not then your company can expect a lawsuit unless they have disciplined you for it and forced you to take it down

people can pretend that it will be "well they are really student athletes, but they just get a little pay now".....but it will only be that until the first round of major lawsuit losses come about and universities start to panic and start trying to tell 18-22yo knuckle heads they can no longer do as they wish and if they try and cover it up or the athletes ignore it the university will pay in court over and over until they wise up and most likely ditch the pay for play and go back to STUDENT athletes

These universities already have many, many employees. They know how to handle that.

Why is it so different when we include athletes as employees?

1. Unionization
2. Undermining the authority and control of the Coach and or institution
3. Their high profile compared to the girl who works 10 hours a week at the bookstore

(05-21-2015 04:16 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-21-2015 08:35 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-20-2015 09:56 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Well, if that is their position (and I respect it), then ND may have to withdraw from big time athletics.

Oh well, nothing lasts forever.

ND can help create another model, perhaps in conjunction with other private schools.

Who knows if that came about, which privates (and maybe service academies) would follow ND out the door???


Notre Dame
Stanford
Duke
BC
Northwestern
Vanderbilt
Syracuse
Army
Navy
Air Force


Any other possible candidates for this hypothetic model?

Yes, The Big Ten, per Delany's comments. Whether or not he meant what he said when he levied that threat? Well that's a different discussion. The Big Ten as a whole is a possible candidate for that hypothetical model.

I'm pretty sure he meant it.

Now a lot of people will say one thing, but will actually do something quite different when push comes to shove.

I don't think the presidents would have the courage to follow through.

Presidents and Chancellors will not be the ones making the decision it will be the Trustees, meaning that for the vast majority it will become a political decision.

(05-21-2015 05:11 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(05-21-2015 03:26 PM)TerryD Wrote:  These universities already have many, many employees. They know how to handle that.

Why is it so different when we include athletes as employees?

1. Unionization
2. Undermining the authority and control of the Coach and or institution
3. Their high profile compared to the girl who works 10 hours a week at the bookstore

In other words, it's not truly unworkable, it's just that high-profile college football and basketball coaches are control freaks who don't want to deal with the normal employer-employee relationships that even the CEOs of billion-dollar companies manage to deal with every day.

I don't think that's a good enough reason.

(05-21-2015 05:13 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(05-21-2015 04:16 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-21-2015 08:35 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-20-2015 09:56 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Well, if that is their position (and I respect it), then ND may have to withdraw from big time athletics.

Oh well, nothing lasts forever.

ND can help create another model, perhaps in conjunction with other private schools.

Who knows if that came about, which privates (and maybe service academies) would follow ND out the door???


Notre Dame
Stanford
Duke
BC
Northwestern
Vanderbilt
Syracuse
Army
Navy
Air Force


Any other possible candidates for this hypothetic model?

Yes, The Big Ten, per Delany's comments. Whether or not he meant what he said when he levied that threat? Well that's a different discussion. The Big Ten as a whole is a possible candidate for that hypothetical model.

I'm pretty sure he meant it.

Now a lot of people will say one thing, but will actually do something quite different when push comes to shove.

I don't think the presidents would have the courage to follow through.

Presidents and Chancellors will not be the ones making the decision it will be the Trustees, meaning that for the vast majority it will become a political decision.

Trustees will not have a say if court ruling against the school to pay the player.

(05-21-2015 05:11 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(05-21-2015 03:26 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-20-2015 07:55 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(05-20-2015 10:38 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(05-20-2015 10:21 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  being "employees" will be a disaster for most of the morons that support this

once they are subjected to the employee code of conduct and immediately being FIRED for breaking that code of conduct they will be getting kicked out of universities by the thousands yearly

there is not going to be two classes of "employees" where regular employees like janitors and repair staff ect are subjected to one set of rules and "pretend" employee athletes are subjected to a different set of rules

things like implied sexual harassment, "harmless" comments to other regular students ect that in the past would have been brushed off as students being students and "guys being guys" will now be no different than any other employee saying things to regular students and being reported for it and disciplined for it

any university that thinks they can get around this will find themselves in court pretty much in a heart beat.......either by current or past employees that were disciplined or let go for certain conduct or by regular students that do not appreciate university "employees" harassing them no matter how many touchdowns they have scored

mandatory drug testing that will now have to actually be reported on VS covered up in the past, on campus behavior of all types, physical fights, rude comments, in class behaviors all will have to result in "firings" or long "employment reviews" with the athlete sitting out part or all of the season while those reviews are carried out are going to be the norm

no more "hiring" athletes that need a "second chance" after they were fired from their last university unless you want to open the university to hiring all kinds of abusers and users in other university positions (or face a lawsuit) and unless you want to expose yourself even more to lawsuits about "hiring" athletes with known issues and exposing your customers (regular students) to those types of employees

standard coed break ups with he said she said and the university able to keep a lid on it will now be cases where the "employee" being accused of something will have to be removed from contact with the accuser until all investigations are complete and unless there is a clear finding of innocence they will probably have to be placed away from casual contact with the accuser

this will probably also severely limit the ability to "hire" new recruits with questionable high school police records unless you again want to expose the university to having to hire others for regular university positions with police records and expose the university to major lawsuits as soon as their questionable "hire" assaults another regular student

this will serve to clear a ton of knuckleheads off campus and hopefully keep a ton more from ever setting foot on campus, but at what cost to the universities overall in liability and employment lawsuits before they figure out they are not going to be able to have a special class of "employees" that are athletes VS other employees

Wonderful post, but this won't hit quite that hard... ...from this angle.

1. After a rough first year, kids will wisen up and clean up their act - especially since there is money on the line. At $x.xx/per hour, people begin to watch their mouth.

2. Universities are willing to lie and cheat to defend their football programs. I don't think you realize that the rabbit hole can go much further down than it already has.

Where it will hurt is in attendance. Students won't feel connected to random employees like they do to student-athletes. It will be harder to convince people that they are really supporting the UNIVERSITY of Alabama at Bryant-Denny. The sport would become a little more "fake", and that won't help viewership numbers.

Remove the scholastic element, and what you have is a variant of the D-League.

1. you really believe that many of these morons will clean up their act much less in a single year......get real

a boat load of these idiots can't manage to clean up their act after getting several warnings and after having other issues besides those they get a warning for covered up

2. I agree 100% about the lying and cheating and covering up

but there is one MAJOR issue when one goes from doing that for a "STUDENT" athlete to an employee

if you are asking your custodial staff, your grounds staff, your IT staff and on and on to pass drug test and to not have criminal convictions (or accusations) and you have been firing people for that or not hiring people based on a failed drug test or criminal histories for the last decade and suddenly your new "athlete employees" are caught and not only are they not FIRED there is a cover up.......well when that cover up is exposed you can expect to have about a decades worth of fired employees, disciplined employees and potential employees that were declined employment based on a drug test or a criminal history lining up to sue the university straight to hell

(05-20-2015 10:59 AM)TerryD Wrote:  There is nothing wrong with any of your predicted outcomes. What is the big deal, anyway? So, they will be employees. So what?

Is your solution to continue with the "Student-athlete" fiction?

my solution is to put academics back into the equation and stop using college sports as a front to get mush brained morons into a college setting where they can waste time and money on an education they put no value on

if that means some or many of these morons have no path to a career as a pro athlete who cares that is not the issue for an academic institution to concern themselves with

academic institutions need to concern themselves with education and educating people not with providing a path to a pro sports career at the expense of academics and academic reputation

and again the issue with becoming an "employee" is they become subjected to rules that can no longer be covered up or dismissed as "students being students"

if a member of your custodial staff at a university decided on their lunch break to play some pickup basketball in the rec center and they came to blows with a student or even another "athlete employee" I don't think there is anyone out there that would find that acceptable and not expect that employee to be severely disciplined and almost certainly fired

if a student athlete does that they can brush it off as a "student conduct issue" and have the STUDENT athlete run some laps

if a student athlete keeps approaching a coed in the rec center gym or the computer lab and making unwanted advances or even saying sexually suggestive things they can make him run the stairs at the stajium and tell him to stop

if a member of the dorm maintenance staff does that or one of the cooks in the dorm cafeteria that is not also a student does that they will be FIRED and even if it is a student worker they will probably be FIRED from their job even if allowed to remain a student

and when you FIRE an "athlete employee" well there goes their financial aid, their dorm room and their food and of course their reason for being on campus most likely

if your maintenance or grounds staff or your IT staff is walking around campus calling their coworkers "the N word" with an "A" or worse with the "ER" instead of the "A" you can expect they will be written up immediately and probably fired even is no one in the group was offended because you cannot allow EMPLOYEES to do that because eventually someone will get offended

if a "student athlete" is doing that no one would think twice about it as long as they are of the race that is allowed to call each other that.....if they are not well it could be an issue......but there again if all athletes are now employees you are no longer allowed to say "well they are in the demographic group that can say that".....because allowing one demographic group of employees to say something you deem offensive while disciplining another for saying it is how you end up in a lawsuit that you will LOSE

just like if you have student athletes calling females "Bs and Hs" people can get offended, but there is little that can be done about it

but of "EMPLOYEE athletes" are calling each other that even if they are all female well you are going to have to write them up at the least and fire them if they continue to do so

because of course you are not going to allow anyone in your administrative, custodial, maintenance, IT, grounds, food service or any other EMPLOYEES call each other that no matter the gender because again that is offensive and even some of the same gender might find it offensive and surely many more would find it offensive of members of the opposite gender were doing it.....and you cannot apply punishments or reprimands unequally based on "well of the same gender is not offensive"

if "student" athletes are calling people slurs about sexual orientation while walking around having fun with friends and giving friends a hard time on campus and someone of that sexual orientation overhears it they can complain, but it will have little consequences......if an EMPLOYEE (even one that is an athlete) does that well that will result in a disciplinary action, some "training" and possibly a firing

and if you try and "cover it up" then it is open season to get sued by all those that may have been fired or reprimanded for that in the past and open season to get sued by students and other employees that find it offensive

the list goes on and on.....anything that is not acceptable at any normal work place even "amongst the boys in the warehouse" or "the salesman" or whatever will be the same for EMPLOYEE athletes.....there will not be exceptions because they are "athletes".....they will be EMPLOYEES FIRST

hell it could be as bad as a nudie calender on their dorm room wall that the maid decides she does not like or that some other student or even some other athlete employee does not like

just like if you are in a "man camp" in the oil patch or on an off shore oil rig or on a Navy ship or on a regular ship.....when you live on the property of your work place then your place of residence is also your work place and subjected to the same exact rules as any other work place

if the female engineer, new rig hire, IT person ect can see it and find it offensive then IT COMES DOWN and if it does not then your company can expect a lawsuit unless they have disciplined you for it and forced you to take it down

people can pretend that it will be "well they are really student athletes, but they just get a little pay now".....but it will only be that until the first round of major lawsuit losses come about and universities start to panic and start trying to tell 18-22yo knuckle heads they can no longer do as they wish and if they try and cover it up or the athletes ignore it the university will pay in court over and over until they wise up and most likely ditch the pay for play and go back to STUDENT athletes

These universities already have many, many employees. They know how to handle that.

Why is it so different when we include athletes as employees?

1. Unionization
2. Undermining the authority and control of the Coach and or institution
3. Their high profile compared to the girl who works 10 hours a week at the bookstore

I am a very pro union guy, so #1 does not bother me, quite the contrary.

Are pro coaches powerless because their players are paid?

Why does "high profile" matter? The coach and AD are high profile and are paid employees. Nobody seems to object to them being paid.

(05-21-2015 09:27 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(05-21-2015 08:35 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-20-2015 09:56 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Well, if that is their position (and I respect it), then ND may have to withdraw from big time athletics.

Oh well, nothing lasts forever.

ND can help create another model, perhaps in conjunction with other private schools.

Who knows if that came about, which privates (and maybe service academies) would follow ND out the door???


Notre Dame
Stanford
Duke
BC
Northwestern
Vanderbilt
Syracuse
Army
Navy
Air Force


Any other possible candidates for this hypothetic model?

Yes, The Big Ten, per Delany's comments. Whether or not he meant what he said when he levied that threat? Well that's a different discussion. The Big Ten as a whole is a possible candidate for that hypothetical model.

Then, there could be law suits by players forcing the Big 10 schools to pay them. The only schools that can opt out are the privates and the military academies. All public schools will be forced to pay their players. They can't opt out of it no matter how hard they try.

That's only true if The Big Ten is operating their Athletic Departments in the same manner. What Delany said was that they would drop down to Division III, which I personally believe is complete bull****, which would mean they wouldn't have to worry about it.

(05-21-2015 07:03 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-21-2015 09:27 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(05-21-2015 08:35 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-20-2015 09:56 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Well, if that is their position (and I respect it), then ND may have to withdraw from big time athletics.

Oh well, nothing lasts forever.

ND can help create another model, perhaps in conjunction with other private schools.

Who knows if that came about, which privates (and maybe service academies) would follow ND out the door???


Notre Dame
Stanford
Duke
BC
Northwestern
Vanderbilt
Syracuse
Army
Navy
Air Force


Any other possible candidates for this hypothetic model?

Yes, The Big Ten, per Delany's comments. Whether or not he meant what he said when he levied that threat? Well that's a different discussion. The Big Ten as a whole is a possible candidate for that hypothetical model.

Then, there could be law suits by players forcing the Big 10 schools to pay them. The only schools that can opt out are the privates and the military academies. All public schools will be forced to pay their players. They can't opt out of it no matter how hard they try.

That's only true if The Big Ten is operating their Athletic Departments in the same manner. What Delany said was that they would drop down to Division III, which I personally believe is complete bull****, which would mean they wouldn't have to worry about it.

No bowl = no money. That would weaken them to a point D3 have no say so. Pioneer League at FCS don't have scholarships for football. They could be safe. But, someone did point out D3 students could start unionizing and demand to get paid as well.

As I said, I think Delany was full of ****. Some folks are giving him more credit than me in that department. When it comes to Delany, I give him credit for being the best talespinner in the game. So it's not disrespect when I say he was full of shite when he said that The Big Ten would drop down to DIII. It was public negotiating, nothing more.

In regards to D3 students trying to unionize and get paid? Get paid what? Exactly how much money are they bringing in to the School at that level that isn't already covered with their current scholarship?

(05-21-2015 07:10 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  As I said, I think Delany was full of ****. Some folks are giving him more credit than me in that department. When it comes to Delany, I give him credit for being the best talespinner in the game. So it's not disrespect when I say he was full of shite when he said that The Big Ten would drop down to DIII. It was public negotiating, nothing more.

In regards to D3 students trying to unionize and get paid? Get paid what? Exactly how much money are they bringing in to the School at that level that isn't already covered with their current scholarship?

D3 is non-scholarships for all sports.

(05-21-2015 07:16 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(05-21-2015 07:10 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  As I said, I think Delany was full of ****. Some folks are giving him more credit than me in that department. When it comes to Delany, I give him credit for being the best talespinner in the game. So it's not disrespect when I say he was full of shite when he said that The Big Ten would drop down to DIII. It was public negotiating, nothing more.

In regards to D3 students trying to unionize and get paid? Get paid what? Exactly how much money are they bringing in to the School at that level that isn't already covered with their current scholarship?

D3 is non-scholarships for all sports.

Then at best, what those student athletes could push for are for rule changes to allow partial scholarships at those schools. If you think those students have a shot in hell at getting ANYTHING out of a school that makes next to nothing from sports while the student CHOSE to play sports there without so much as even receiving a scholarship?

I have a hard time understanding why anyone would believe they have a shot in hell at getting anything when they don't even receive scholarships.

They can try to get scholarships first before they try to "get paid".

ND isnt going anywhere.the powers that be know how to run an athletic program. EVERYTHING they do is calcuated and well planned. including statements to the press

Any decisions by the National Labor Relations Board are applicable to private schools only. The NLRB has no jurisdiction whatsoever over state or local governments. And, maybe, school directly administered by a religious organization might be able to argue any NLRB decision doesn't apply to them due to the separation of church and state.