Northwestern football players can unionize, NLRB rules

[smazza]

hate to say i told you so

[slick1ru2]

 

 

So if students are defined as employees, would they be able to be "fired" after a poor season? Or just for not being good enough? As it stands right now, if they keep their academic standing they're almost guaranteed a free four-year ride.

If you read the ruling it said the only reason they got scholarships was because of athletic ability, not anything they did academically in high school. And if you saw the Epix documentary Schooled, you'd see what happens when players drop down the depth chart or get a serious injury, they are booted out even if doing well in school. All this points to the facade of "student-athlete".

I don't think this answers my question at all.

 

Yes, they drop off the depth chart or have a serious injury they lose their scholarship, in effect fired. Its one of the reasons they ruled they can represented by a union because their scholarships have nothing to do with academics. What this does is give them rights to bargain  as a group with the school, something they never had. As their QB noted in a recent speech, they have the same health issues that pro athletes do but have to foot the costs, something pros don't. So that is something that needs to be addressed. But fired? They just pull the scholarship, effectively doing the same thing but there is much more to this issue than first meets the eye.

[slick1ru2]

 

Bottom line is the NCAA or college sports is virtually the ONLY route to the NFL. So if someone is great in high school, doesn't want to go to college, he is practically forced to do it. So while in college they produce massive revenues for school. They deserve much more, what they are doing on the field has nothing to do with education and all about money.

 

OMFG, you're talking about 1% of 1%.

 

You don't set policy to deal with the tip of the tail of the distribution.  The ones that get to the NFL will make money in the NFL. 99.9% of the college players NEVER play pro sports.

 

But they DO get a free college education.

 

Here's a solution. Pay the star football players, then charge them full tuition. Sorted.

 

 

 

Your argument just gives more reason to pay them. Its a billion dollar plus industry, college sports, and they get a piece of paper on the way out the door of the new athletic wing when they graduate, built on their work.So they don't get into the NFL or NBA etc, it was their only shot getting paid.

[charsibb]

 

 

Bottom line is the NCAA or college sports is virtually the ONLY route to the NFL. So if someone is great in high school, doesn't want to go to college, he is practically forced to do it. So while in college they produce massive revenues for school. They deserve much more, what they are doing on the field has nothing to do with education and all about money.

 

OMFG, you're talking about 1% of 1%.

 

You don't set policy to deal with the tip of the tail of the distribution.  The ones that get to the NFL will make money in the NFL. 99.9% of the college players NEVER play pro sports.

 

But they DO get a free college education.

 

Here's a solution. Pay the star football players, then charge them full tuition. Sorted.

 

 

 

Your argument just gives more reason to pay them. Its a billion dollar plus industry, college sports, and they get a piece of paper on the way out the door of the new athletic wing when they graduate, built on their work.So they don't get into the NFL or NBA etc, it was their only shot getting paid.

 

 

 

LOL.

 

The DEGREE is what gives them a shot at getting paid - for the REST of their life.

[slick1ru2]

 

 

 

 

 

 

As a long time union supporter, member, and current union representative, I disagree with this ruling. Students are not employees and therefore do not have the right to unionize. More than likely this will get overturned in a higher court.

 

They do revenue creating work, which students don't. They basically are considered unpaid temps, a segment of society that has recently become the focus of attention for what many consider unfair treatment.

There are plenty of students that do revenue creating work and don't get paid. A lot of research work is done by unpaid students.

 

 

 

The research work I've seen students do is grunt work, the counting, classifying, etc. that could be done by someone making minimum wage. I was just watching a show on oysters and if they grow faster in a predator free environment and there were the student researchers, laying out the controls. The professors usually do all the heavy mental lifting.

 

 

What they do isn't really relevant, their work creates revenue for the university in the form of research grants.

 

 

Its labor and I think they get a wage for it. Its not them doing the breakthrough, they are being directed by the professors whose ideas they are following. A student assistant didn't cure Polio or HIV. They may have spun test tubes.

 

 

Again, it doesn't matter in what capacity they are being used, their contribution, no matter how small, help secure the revenue.  Some may get a wage, but many, if not most, do not.

 

 

 

Yes it does matter. You are saying why doesn't the grunt research assistant who does what in the private sector is a minimum wage or close to it job not deserve more than what they get paid already vs someone like Johnny Football? Their contribution DID NOT help secure the revenue.

[slick1ru2]

 

 

 

Bottom line is the NCAA or college sports is virtually the ONLY route to the NFL. So if someone is great in high school, doesn't want to go to college, he is practically forced to do it. So while in college they produce massive revenues for school. They deserve much more, what they are doing on the field has nothing to do with education and all about money.

 

OMFG, you're talking about 1% of 1%.

 

You don't set policy to deal with the tip of the tail of the distribution.  The ones that get to the NFL will make money in the NFL. 99.9% of the college players NEVER play pro sports.

 

But they DO get a free college education.

 

Here's a solution. Pay the star football players, then charge them full tuition. Sorted.

 

 

 

Your argument just gives more reason to pay them. Its a billion dollar plus industry, college sports, and they get a piece of paper on the way out the door of the new athletic wing when they graduate, built on their work.So they don't get into the NFL or NBA etc, it was their only shot getting paid.

 

 

 

LOL.

 

The DEGREE is what gives them a shot at getting paid - for the REST of their life.

 

You do know that for many, the degree is a joke, the school sets them up with classes that don't interfere with practice. Watch Schooled, they had former players saying they wanted to go into one field and were denied because it cut into football or another who didn't even know his major because the football staff were in charge of it.

[slick1ru2]

The pros are represented after leaving the sport. There are college players with career ending injures that are doing well academically. They have to pay for their own medical care and lose their scholarship. That sounds like athelete-student, not the other way around. I'd like to see these doing well be able to graduate and get help taking care of their injuries.

[NCBull]

So if students are defined as employees, would they be able to be "fired" after a poor season? Or just for not being good enough? As it stands right now, if they keep their academic standing they're almost guaranteed a free four-year ride.

If you read the ruling it said the only reason they got scholarships was because of athletic ability, not anything they did academically in high school. And if you saw the Epix documentary Schooled, you'd see what happens when players drop down the depth chart or get a serious injury, they are booted out even if doing well in school. All this points to the facade of "student-athlete".

I don't think this answers my question at all.

Yes, they drop off the depth chart or have a serious injury they lose their scholarship, in effect fired. Its one of the reasons they ruled they can represented by a union because their scholarships have nothing to do with academics. What this does is give them rights to bargain as a group with the school, something they never had. As their QB noted in a recent speech, they have the same health issues that pro athletes do but have to foot the costs, something pros don't. So that is something that needs to be addressed. But fired? They just pull the scholarship, effectively doing the same thing but there is much more to this issue than first meets the eye.

I'm just trying to remember the last time USF pulled a football scholly for anything other than violation of team rules...I can't recall. Help me out.

[slick1ru2]

 

 

 

 

So if students are defined as employees, would they be able to be "fired" after a poor season? Or just for not being good enough? As it stands right now, if they keep their academic standing they're almost guaranteed a free four-year ride.

If you read the ruling it said the only reason they got scholarships was because of athletic ability, not anything they did academically in high school. And if you saw the Epix documentary Schooled, you'd see what happens when players drop down the depth chart or get a serious injury, they are booted out even if doing well in school. All this points to the facade of "student-athlete".

I don't think this answers my question at all.

Yes, they drop off the depth chart or have a serious injury they lose their scholarship, in effect fired. Its one of the reasons they ruled they can represented by a union because their scholarships have nothing to do with academics. What this does is give them rights to bargain as a group with the school, something they never had. As their QB noted in a recent speech, they have the same health issues that pro athletes do but have to foot the costs, something pros don't. So that is something that needs to be addressed. But fired? They just pull the scholarship, effectively doing the same thing but there is much more to this issue than first meets the eye.

I'm just trying to remember the last time USF pulled a football scholly for anything other than violation of team rules...I can't recall. Help me out.

 

USF isn't every school. But you've seen players leave the team over injuries, leave school. And violating team rules, hmmm. Some of these kids, like Stirrups, should have never been at USF.

http://www.voodoofive.com/2010/4/7/1410187/zach-hermann-and-leslie-stirrups

[NCBull]

So no one then?