|
fuckin duh
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 20:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 19:10 |
|
|
This is fantastic news. It's also nice to see the NLRB point out that "student-athletes" are a farce and a ruse to prevent treating the players fairly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
Alouicious posted:probably more money then they'd spend paying the players 
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 20:47
|
|
|
Is this going to require colleges to pay athletes as well as provide free schooling? I'm not saying this is out of line as colleges generally provide free school to their employees. Edit: And medical care for athletes who are injured on the job, right? Alereon fucked around with this message at 20:57 on Mar 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 20:53
|
|
|
Alereon posted:Is this going to require colleges to pay athletes as well as provide free schooling? Who knows how the colleges respond to it. It has to go before the national ruling board since Northwestern is obviously going to appeal. That's when it gets real interesting. If the National Board upholds it. The only Hurdle left would be overcoming the public schools and their case that since they are state funded they are exempt or something. Dexo fucked around with this message at 20:58 on Mar 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
Dexo posted:Who knows how the colleges respond to it. It has to go before the national ruling board since Northwestern is obviously going to appeal. That's when it gets real interesting. Wouldn't that make them the opposite of exempt, that if the national labor board ruled that they had to pay players that they couldn't even question it because it's state funded?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
Doltos posted:Wouldn't that make them the opposite of exempt, that if the national labor board ruled that they had to pay players that they couldn't even question it because it's state funded? The main difference between Northwestern and other schools is their private school status. So if if the appeal fails for Northwestern, When the other schools get hit with similar cases, other schools are going to fight it by bringing up differences, of which that is one.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 21:09
|
|
|
I'm glad that the decision addressed head on that they receive $61k+ of pay for what they do. Haven't read through the whole thing but it looks pretty sound. Anyone know how often lower NLRB boards get reversed by the DC one?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
Dexo posted:The main difference between Northwestern and other schools is their private school status. So if if the appeal fails for Northwestern, When the other schools get hit with similar cases, other schools are going to fight it by bringing up differences, of which that is one. Why does being state funded matter, though? My mom works for the University of Minnesota and as far as I know everyone that works there is union.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 21:54
|
|
|
IcePhoenix posted:Why does being state funded matter, though? My mom works for the University of Minnesota and as far as I know everyone that works there is union. It very well might not, I'm just pointing out a difference. As some States could have silly laws or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 21:56
|
|
|
I think it would have some impact because the athletes at a public school would then be state/government employees getting paid with tax dollars.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 21:57
|
|
|
IcePhoenix posted:Why does being state funded matter, though? My mom works for the University of Minnesota and as far as I know everyone that works there is union. There's a bunch of legal differences between government unions and non-government unions. It's how Scott Walker was able to ban public sector unions in Wisconsin but couldn't do anything about the private sector ones. Someone with a labor law background probably knows better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
A yahoo article had this to say:quote:For now, the push is to unionize athletes at private schools, such as Northwestern, because the federal labor agency does not have jurisdiction over public universities. And there's also this: quote:'It's like preparing so long for a big game and then when you win - it is pure joy,'' said former UCLA linebacker Ramogi Huma, the designated president of Northwestern's would-be football players' union. Which is allegedly a feeling he experienced while at Northwestern?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
KettleWL posted:Which is allegedly a feeling he experienced while at Northwestern? quote:'It's like preparing so long for a big game and then when you win - it is pure joy,'' said former UCLA linebacker Ramogi Huma, the designated president of Northwestern's would-be football players' union. This rules, I love all the people who are like "we can't do this, it will ruin college sports." I guess we should have kept slavery too since it would hurt the southern cotton trade
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
Ribsauce posted:I guess we should have kept slavery too since it would hurt the southern cotton trade I knew Panthers fans felt that way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 23:41
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:I'm glad that the decision addressed head on that they receive $61k+ of pay for what they do. Haven't read through the whole thing but it looks pretty sound. Anyone know how often lower NLRB boards get reversed by the DC one? By the full NLRB board? Rarely. By the DC Circuit? All the time. That may not be the case now because the DC Circuit recently gained a majority of Democratic appointees
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
A key difference is that public schools fall under the jurisdiction of their respective state labor boards, not the NLRB. Depending on the state (right to work, etc.) it can be extremely difficult for public "employees" to unionize. An SI article had a good point, though. Northwestern having unions is a big advantage in recruiting - will other schools have to allow unions in order to remain competitive? Also what about Title IX?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
Ribsauce posted:This rules, I love all the people who are like "we can't do this, it will ruin college sports." I guess we should have kept slavery too since it would hurt the southern cotton trade And now we know why I'll be rejected from Northwestern for grad school.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 02:17
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:So your pride in your alma mater is more important to you than the interests of these athletes? Yes. A&M could shut down all sports and it wouldn't change my feelings toward A&M. I love college football and I would be angry and sad to see it go, but I love my school even more. And A&M is one of the few schools that can weather this situation. This is really bad for collegiate athletics. Most schools are already way in the red and subsidized by the university, it's a guarantee that they will just shut down their programs rather that spend millions more. Also, good luck to the athletes who now get to pay taxes on their "salary" since they are now employees of the university. Anyone who thinks this is a good thing for collegiate sports is delusional. This is the beginning of the end, so you better enjoy it while you can.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 04:18
|
|
|
Unless the "taxes" are 100% that isn't really that big a deal.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 04:20
|
|
|
ryan8723 posted:Yes. A&M could shut down all sports and it wouldn't change my feelings toward A&M. I love college football and I would be angry and sad to see it go, but I love my school even more. This is great but you need to toss in a few more traditional jokes, you hit poe's law pretty hard.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 04:30
|
|
|
ryan8723 posted:Yes. A&M could shut down all sports and it wouldn't change my feelings toward A&M. I love college football and I would be angry and sad to see it go, but I love my school even more. Those poor students who will be making 61,000 a year minus taxes sure would be better off not being able to afford to eat during Spring Break. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 04:33
|
|
|
$61k is $16k more than what the average person in the US makes. $61k with no debts and being 20 would be like living like an Egyptian god made flesh.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
This decision has nothing to do with whether or not scholarships are considered taxable income. That's a completely unrelated set of laws. This just means that for the purposes of forming a union, scholarship college football players are considered employees of the university.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 04:57
|
|
|
Ribsauce posted:I guess we should have kept slavery too since it would hurt the southern cotton trade  I didn't know that Auburn tried to have Cam Newton's Achilles tendons clipped to keep him from fleeing school early.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 04:57
|
|
|
Crazy Ted posted:I didn't know that Auburn tried to have Cam Newton's Achilles tendons clipped to keep him from fleeing school early. How many lashes did he get for stealing that laptop?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 04:59
|
|
|
Sash! posted:How many lashes did he get for stealing that laptop?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 05:00
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:Those poor students who will be making 61,000 a year minus taxes sure would be better off not being able to afford to eat during Spring Break. You're forgetting insurance and the other expenses as a result of them being employees. Beyond like 30 schools, exactly how in the hell do you think these schools can afford this? The insurance alone will kill most programs. Some of you are so dead set on "sticking it to the man" that you can't see the forest through the trees.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 05:05
|
|
|
ryan8723 posted:You're forgetting insurance and the other expenses as a result of them being employees. Beyond like 30 schools, exactly how in the hell do you think these schools can afford this? The insurance alone will kill most programs. Crazy Ted fucked around with this message at 05:09 on Mar 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 05:07
|
|
|
ryan8723 posted:You're forgetting insurance and the other expenses as a result of them being employees. Beyond like 30 schools, exactly how in the hell do you think these schools can afford this? The insurance alone will kill most programs. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 05:08
|
|
|
I don't think it's any kind of crazy to think that athletes should get loving medical coverage. i will say that probably only extremely loving batshit crazy bastards who are loving. CRAZY, would think that they shouldn't
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 05:10
|
|
|
ryan8723 posted:You're forgetting insurance and the other expenses as a result of them being employees. Beyond like 30 schools, exactly how in the hell do you think these schools can afford this? The insurance alone will kill most programs. I don't play division 1 football, but are they not providing medical care for them already? Like, when Lattimore loving demolished his knee did Carolina just toss him out like an old eskimo on an iceflow? Also, if a school can't afford to treat a student who spends 50+ hours a week training to play a sport for them, then the school probably shouldn't have the program to begin with.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 05:13
|
|
|
Honestly if the sport can't run while providing that minimum decent stuff for its athletes it probably deserves to die.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 05:14
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:I don't play division 1 football, but are they not providing medical care for them already? Like, when Lattimore loving demolished his knee did Carolina just toss him out like an old eskimo on an iceflow?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 05:16
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:Those poor students who will be making 61,000 a year minus taxes sure would be better off not being able to afford to eat during Spring Break. Where did you come up with the 61,000 a year? I'm not sure where I sit on this one. On one hand, everyone knows the NCAA is a farce. On the other hand, NCAAMF is so much fun to watch and I agree with the people who think that college athletics will be seriously hurt as a result of this. I wish there was a middle ground where students could make money selling autographs and poo poo, were protected from any negative consequence of injury, still required to attend class, but did not receive a salary. Maybe a small per athlete allowance based off of program profits? I think what this does is reward the super programs that generate a shitload of revenue. Yes, if you're Texas, Alabama, OSU, UF you can probably afford to pay your QB and that soccer midfielder a salary because you're pulling in an assload of money because you have an enormous population and there is significant demand. But how the gently caress is a D2 school going to be able to pay their athlete's when most programs operate in the red? If you have hundreds of athletes it's going to be an extreme cost for programs that don't have national exposure or ESPN money. How many hundreds of athletes does a medium sized D2 school have? 250? And how would an athlete's compensation be calculated? Would it be based on free market value or is it a fixed rate per athlete? If they are being paid to play sports then are scholarships and class attendance requirements out? If they aren't required to go to school but only to play sports all of a sudden it isn't college sports. And honestly, no one gives a poo poo about minor league sports and if football is forced to setup a minor league that has a diluted (or no) association to a system that effectively connects to a huge percentage of the middle and upper class to it there will be a major impact on the sport as a whole. Even more so than getting rid of the PAT *gasp*. And how the gently caress did you come up with $61,000 a year for an athlete salary?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 05:22
|
|
|
Mukaikubo posted:Honestly if the sport can't run while providing that minimum decent stuff for its athletes it probably deserves to die. Empty quote.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 05:23
|
|
|
Chiken n' Waffles posted:Where did you come up with the 61,000 a year?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 05:24
|
|
|
ryan8723 posted:You're forgetting insurance and the other expenses as a result of them being employees. Beyond like 30 schools, exactly how in the hell do you think these schools can afford this? The insurance alone will kill most programs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 05:25
|
|
|
Frackie Robinson posted:If that's where you're coming from that's fine, it's just weird to see people in this thread that I know to have rooting interests in college football act like this is great news. I know nothing's going to come of this specific effort, but it's still an omen of things to come, none of which are good for the continued existence of college football at its current level of competition.  I look forward to any and all efforts that lead to the destruction of the current NCAA model.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 05:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 19:10 |
|
|
Chiken n' Waffles posted:If they are being paid to play sports then are scholarships and class attendance requirements out? If they aren't required to go to school but only to play sports all of a sudden it isn't college sports. Look how dumb you sound.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 05:28
|
|