Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
Author Message
Wedge Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #41
RE: AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
(05-20-2015 06:02 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(05-20-2015 03:20 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(05-20-2015 02:35 PM)Bull Wrote:  There is a HUGE difference between watching bona fide student athletes, and watching what will essentially be minor league football.

Guys like Jameis Winston or all the one-and-done basketball players are bona fide student athletes? Just regular guys like the ones you studied with in your college calculus or world history classes? Riiiiiiiiight.

The college football and basketball stars we watch now are going to be the same guys playing "what will essentially be minor league football". Does whether they get paid $0 or $20,000 change the viewing experience?

It changes the perception of what is being watched. Radically.

Every year I put down over a thousand bucks of my hard-earned money to buy football and basketball tickets and make donations to support the student-athletes who represent the University of Hawaii. (Many of whom graduated last week with real degrees, and in some cases academic honors.) Am I going to do that to support employees of the University of Hawaii? Not a chance.

Would you buy those tickets if Hawaii was Division II?

Because if athletes end up being paid after the Kessler lawsuit, the schools that pay will effectively be Division I and those that opt out will be Division II.

How many current big-time programs will decide to effectively be Division II in college sports given everything they've already invested in it? They're going to abandon Division I because players can make about as much money as a science/engineering grad student makes? I doubt it.
05-20-2015 06:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Artifice Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,064
Joined: Jul 2008
Reputation: 168
I Root For: Beer
Location:
Post: #42
RE: AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
(05-20-2015 02:23 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  
(05-20-2015 02:16 PM)Artifice Wrote:  How much of this is Notre Dame not wanting to get caught with the same kind of scandal UNC CHeat is currently mired in?

The implication in a lot of those comments - about special admissions allowances and at risk kids is that they are worried just as much about what might be happening behind closed doors to keep these kids eligible. Notre Dame wants no part of that mess.

I really think that's their angle. Noble academic purpose, yes, but also a preemptive strike at potential dirt before it comes home to roost.

Lol, you belong on godlikeproductions.com man...

Its not far fetched at all. Notre Dame's first mission is academics, and maybe unlike CHeat, they aren't completely willing to sell out. Or maybe they are just ready to put the brakes on - the junkie looking for a self imposed intervention. The money has ruined other institutions; taking them far away from their founding purpose, and covering them in the taint of corruption.

It's a little ironic since they were one of the first sellout programs. And, they have the same mantra as CHeat - somehow walking the fine line of excellence in both athletics and academics. However, that was a sham in CHeat's case. And maybe the string of compromises has gotten just too distatseful to Notre Dame leadership. A cumulative effect where the money and PR arent worth compromising their mission anymore, especially with the way this change may alter and magnify these issues.
05-20-2015 07:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,151
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 886
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #43
RE: AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
(05-20-2015 10:03 AM)oliveandblue 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?

Some guesses:

Rice would jump at a conference like this.

Tulane, Wake Forest, and SMU would need a bit of convincing.

Miami, TCU, Baylor, and USC wouldn't be interested.

Service Academies would not have this ruling against them since the law suits really do not include them.

Notre Dame
Northwestern
Duke
Wake Forest
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Rice
Tulsa
Villanova
Georgetown
St. John's
Creighton
Marquette
Miami, Florida

This is something I posted about earlier where Notre Dame will take some privates with them that would open slots up in the ACC, Big 10, AAC and some other conferences. I do not see Stanford, Vanderbilt, Baylor, USC and TCU leaving.
05-20-2015 07:44 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,945
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 264
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #44
RE: AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
(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
(This post was last modified: 05-20-2015 07:57 PM by TodgeRodge.)
05-20-2015 07:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MWC Tex Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,850
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 179
I Root For: MW
Location: TX
Post: #45
RE: AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
(05-20-2015 07:44 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(05-20-2015 10:03 AM)oliveandblue 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?

Some guesses:

Rice would jump at a conference like this.

Tulane, Wake Forest, and SMU would need a bit of convincing.

Miami, TCU, Baylor, and USC wouldn't be interested.

Service Academies would not have this ruling against them since the law suits really do not include them.

Notre Dame
Northwestern
Duke
Wake Forest
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Rice
Tulsa
Villanova
Georgetown
St. John's
Creighton
Marquette
Miami, Florida

This is something I posted about earlier where Notre Dame will take some privates with them that would open slots up in the ACC, Big 10, AAC and some other conferences. I do not see Stanford, Vanderbilt, Baylor, USC and TCU leaving.
The Big 10 & Pac 12 would be part of that group. They have publicly stated so just as ND has. The Rose Bowl would not be part of the playoffs and it would be just as before the BCS days. And the fans would still support them just as much if not even more.
05-20-2015 07:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,151
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 886
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #46
RE: AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
(05-20-2015 07:55 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(05-20-2015 07:44 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(05-20-2015 10:03 AM)oliveandblue 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?

Some guesses:

Rice would jump at a conference like this.

Tulane, Wake Forest, and SMU would need a bit of convincing.

Miami, TCU, Baylor, and USC wouldn't be interested.

Service Academies would not have this ruling against them since the law suits really do not include them.

Notre Dame
Northwestern
Duke
Wake Forest
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Rice
Tulsa
Villanova
Georgetown
St. John's
Creighton
Marquette
Miami, Florida

This is something I posted about earlier where Notre Dame will take some privates with them that would open slots up in the ACC, Big 10, AAC and some other conferences. I do not see Stanford, Vanderbilt, Baylor, USC and TCU leaving.
The Big 10 & Pac 12 would be part of that group. They have publicly stated so just as ND has. The Rose Bowl would not be part of the playoffs and it would be just as before the BCS days. And the fans would still support them just as much if not even more.


Public schools can't or they could risk the research dollars. Since most of the PAC 12 and Big 10 are in states run by Democrats who wants these players be paid? I can only see the privates exempted and could move since Religious schools do not have to have the same rules that the publics. So, PAC 12 and Big 10 public schools are stuck in paying their players as employees.
05-20-2015 08:01 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HawaiiMongoose Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,769
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 453
I Root For: Hawaii
Location: Honolulu
Post: #47
RE: AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
(05-20-2015 06:48 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(05-20-2015 06:02 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(05-20-2015 03:20 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(05-20-2015 02:35 PM)Bull Wrote:  There is a HUGE difference between watching bona fide student athletes, and watching what will essentially be minor league football.

Guys like Jameis Winston or all the one-and-done basketball players are bona fide student athletes? Just regular guys like the ones you studied with in your college calculus or world history classes? Riiiiiiiiight.

The college football and basketball stars we watch now are going to be the same guys playing "what will essentially be minor league football". Does whether they get paid $0 or $20,000 change the viewing experience?

It changes the perception of what is being watched. Radically.

Every year I put down over a thousand bucks of my hard-earned money to buy football and basketball tickets and make donations to support the student-athletes who represent the University of Hawaii. (Many of whom graduated last week with real degrees, and in some cases academic honors.) Am I going to do that to support employees of the University of Hawaii? Not a chance.

Would you buy those tickets if Hawaii was Division II?

Because if athletes end up being paid after the Kessler lawsuit, the schools that pay will effectively be Division I and those that opt out will be Division II.

How many current big-time programs will decide to effectively be Division II in college sports given everything they've already invested in it? They're going to abandon Division I because players can make about as much money as a science/engineering grad student makes? I doubt it.

I don't buy the Division II analogy. The NLRB, the courts or some combination thereof are going to draw a line somewhere that says "If you cross this line your athletes must be compensated as employees." I expect many current P5 programs to decide they aren't going to cross that line. In doing so they won't be dropping to Division II; rather they'll be refusing to sponsor minor league professional sports. They'll continue to compete with like-minded peers for conference and national championships and continue to have sizable fan followings. And I suspect ESPN will still want to broadcast their games.
05-20-2015 08:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MWC Tex Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,850
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 179
I Root For: MW
Location: TX
Post: #48
RE: AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
(05-20-2015 08:01 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(05-20-2015 07:55 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(05-20-2015 07:44 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(05-20-2015 10:03 AM)oliveandblue 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?

Some guesses:

Rice would jump at a conference like this.

Tulane, Wake Forest, and SMU would need a bit of convincing.

Miami, TCU, Baylor, and USC wouldn't be interested.

Service Academies would not have this ruling against them since the law suits really do not include them.

Notre Dame
Northwestern
Duke
Wake Forest
Boston College
Northwestern
Syracuse
Rice
Tulsa
Villanova
Georgetown
St. John's
Creighton
Marquette
Miami, Florida

This is something I posted about earlier where Notre Dame will take some privates with them that would open slots up in the ACC, Big 10, AAC and some other conferences. I do not see Stanford, Vanderbilt, Baylor, USC and TCU leaving.
The Big 10 & Pac 12 would be part of that group. They have publicly stated so just as ND has. The Rose Bowl would not be part of the playoffs and it would be just as before the BCS days. And the fans would still support them just as much if not even more.


Public schools can't or they could risk the research dollars. Since most of the PAC 12 and Big 10 are in states run by Democrats who wants these players be paid? I can only see the privates exempted and could move since Religious schools do not have to have the same rules that the publics. So, PAC 12 and Big 10 public schools are stuck in paying their players as employees.
????? Those schools aren't forced to pay athletes. They can go to a D3 model if they choose to, with out losing so called research $$$
05-20-2015 08:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 38,396
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 8064
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #49
RE: AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
(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?

Tulane, Rice, Miami, and possibly U.S.C., T.C.U., Baylor, B.Y.U., and Wake Forest would all be candidates depending upon the circumstances. If it is just minimum wage perhaps most stay, but if it is the right to collective bargaining I think they are all out the door. But you have to admit you could form a pretty nice conference out of those schools.

If Big Time football was just the domain of the state schools that in itself would be an interesting hypocrisy. Just think what such a move would do the present conference alignments.

Hello Pitt, Connecticut, and perhaps Virginia Tech to the Big 10. Hello Virginia and North Carolina along with Georgia Tech to the SEC. Clemson, Florida State, N.C. State and Louisville to the Big 12 along with Cincinnati, Central Florida, and perhaps Colorado State and New Mexico.

Perhaps the PAC decides finally to take Boise, San Diego State, U.N.L.V. and Hawaii.
(This post was last modified: 05-20-2015 09:23 PM by JRsec.)
05-20-2015 09:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
chess Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,845
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 219
I Root For: ECU & Nebraska
Location: Chicago Metro
Post: #50
RE: AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
(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?

I wouldn't count out public schools like North Carolina, Virginia, Pittsburgh, and Georgia Tech.
05-20-2015 09:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
chess Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,845
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 219
I Root For: ECU & Nebraska
Location: Chicago Metro
Post: #51
RE: AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
(05-20-2015 12:18 PM)NoQuestion Wrote:  With all the new "benefits" for athletes. Unlimited food,FCOA,guaranteed scholarships,etc. Why would athletes want to be employees?

Think about going to the fanciest restaurant and they offer you all you can eat tacos and hotdogs.

College football is a billion dollar industry and the athletes get little for their value.
05-20-2015 09:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,945
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 264
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #52
RE: AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
(05-20-2015 09:22 PM)chess Wrote:  
(05-20-2015 12:18 PM)NoQuestion Wrote:  With all the new "benefits" for athletes. Unlimited food,FCOA,guaranteed scholarships,etc. Why would athletes want to be employees?

Think about going to the fanciest restaurant and they offer you all you can eat tacos and hotdogs.

College football is a billion dollar industry and the athletes get little for their value.

actually this is far from true

most get well above their value and even the top ones get a lot, but many are just not intelligent enough to put any value on it or to understand the value and worth of the rest of it
05-20-2015 09:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
blunderbuss Offline
Banned

Posts: 19,649
Joined: Apr 2011
I Root For: ECU & the CSA
Location: Buzz City, NC
Post: #53
Re: RE: AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
(05-20-2015 02:35 PM)Bull Wrote:  There is a HUGE difference between watching bona fide student athletes, and watching what will essentially be minor league football. How well does minor league hockey, baseball, etc. draw compared to pros? What makes college football special is knowing that these are students, NOT getting paid a salary, and ARE still taking classes exams right along with all the other students.

I guess if the students are still enrolled it's not strictly minor league ball, but it's getting pretty close.

Lolololololol
05-20-2015 11:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
oliveandblue Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,781
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 251
I Root For: Tulane
Location:
Post: #54
RE: AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
(05-20-2015 09:18 PM)chess 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?

I wouldn't count out public schools like North Carolina, Virginia, Pittsburgh, and Georgia Tech.

UNC wouldn't mind reclassifying students into employees. That university is in the BUSINESS of college sports.

GT has different priorities and would probably opt out. UVA and Pitt are tweeners - with UVA learning towards opting out.
05-21-2015 07:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #55
RE: AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
(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.
05-21-2015 08:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Dasville Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,796
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 246
I Root For: UofL
Location:
Post: #56
RE: AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
This all sounds like a perception problem to me. If you ask any non-sports fan, they see ALL football and men's basketball players the same. It doesn't matter if they attend ND, Ohio State, or UCF. I know ND and others like to portray their athletes as more so I understand Swarbrick's stance.
05-21-2015 08:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,151
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 886
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #57
RE: AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
(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.
05-21-2015 09:27 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,013
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 938
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Grayson Highlands
Post: #58
RE: AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
(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?
05-21-2015 03:26 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,945
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 264
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #59
RE: AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
(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?

because many many many athletes are total knuckleheads and are not screened like regular employees

they are not coming to COLLEGE as a job (except that they want to get paid) they are coming to college to have fun and act like college kids

and many of them get in trouble and as pointed out before it gets covered up or glossed over or reduced charges......that will not be remotely possible when they are employees unless the university wants to take major financial hits

look how athletes are treated VS regular employees

look what athletes get away with vs regular employees

look at the entitlement attitude of athletes vs regular employees and look at the stupidity of many athletes vs regular employees

many of the most vocal idiots for pay (both athletes and non athletes) are not close to prepared for what being an EMPLOYEE will mean and the changes that will have to take place in behaviors and treatment of issues

they are going to go from being BMOC that can't be touched unless they do something really stupid to BIG TARGET ON YOUR BACK with many people waiting for them to do something stupid and probably some of them even setting them up for it.....like psycho athlete chasing girl friends and the like

shortly many of these idiots will not even get a "job" offer and many more will be hitting the door in the first semester or two

the vast vast majority of regular employees come to work every day to work and be professional and sure there are a few morons

and while many athletes come to school to get an education many of the "needa git dat paid" types come to school to be morons.....and they will have to be sent packing faster than ever before
05-21-2015 03:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Eagle78 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,399
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 111
I Root For: BC
Location:
Post: #60
AD: If athletes are considered employees, Notre Dame will seek new model
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.
(This post was last modified: 05-21-2015 04:08 PM by Eagle78.)
05-21-2015 04:06 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.