Northwestern Wildcat Players Attempt to Unionize

[StrangeSox]

If they get injured, they can lose their scholarship and not have medical coverage for their injuries. These guys are going out there week after week, putting their bodies at risk for your entertainment (and money!). Colter signed up and took the risk that he did, but why is it wrong for him to want to lessen that risk or at least help protect against that risk for future players?

[ChiSox_Sonix]

How about universities drop athletics and focus on education? Why should they field teams? It's a silly tradition started a hundred years ago. Have intermural sports and let those serious athletes hook up with pro teams. It may hurt the universities, but it will be much fairer to all the athletes who are being ripped off by this system. They can be pro athletes and not worry about going to classes or getting a degree.

 

Why even allow high schools to field teams then? I mean, isn't the point of high school to get an education?

[StrangeSox]

Get rid of the socialist GOVERNMENT youth sports leagues and let the PRIVATE SECTOR innovate!

[Soxbadger]

Only problem with your argument Tex, is im not sure thats fairer for the kids. What is the fairest is if they have the choice to go to school for free or go to the pros.

 

 

[ptatc]

If they get injured, they can lose their scholarship and not have medical coverage for their injuries. These guys are going out there week after week, putting their bodies at risk for your entertainment (and money!). Colter signed up and took the risk that he did, but why is it wrong for him to want to lessen that risk or at least help protect against that risk for future players?

This is the only reason to have the union. Not even so much for NW but for the smaller schools with smaller budgets. The "wroking environment" needs to improve for many of the smaller schools.

[ptatc]

Get rid of the socialist GOVERNMENT youth sports leagues and let the PRIVATE SECTOR innovate!

Actually I would prefer this. Get the "professional athletics" out of the universities and make the NFL go like baseball and create their own minor leagues. We know this will never happen due to the money generated but it would solve many of the problems.

[Balta1701]

Actually I would prefer this. Get the "professional athletics" out of the universities and make the NFL go like baseball and create their own minor leagues. We know this will never happen due to the money generated but it would solve many of the problems.

If you look at the other side of it...how many people would never get an actual university education if this happened?

[StrangeSox]

Actually I would prefer this. Get the "professional athletics" out of the universities and make the NFL go like baseball and create their own minor leagues. We know this will never happen due to the money generated but it would solve many of the problems.

I was more making a joke about public high school teams.

 

NCAA Football and Men's BB are basically professional leagues these days, but what about NCAA swimming/track/wrestling etc.?

 

I have plenty of issues with the amount of money sports can siphon away from academic institutions (e.g. Rutgers), but I don't know that eliminating the professionalized NCAA sports is really a solution.

[EvilMonkey]

If you look at the other side of it...how many people would never get an actual university education if this happened?

With the classes that some of these 'student athletes' take at various colleges, not sure if they are really getting an education.

[Balta1701]

With the classes that some of these 'student athletes' take at various colleges, not sure if they are really getting an education.

While this is certainly true for some...you have to admit, for a lot of them, these programs open doors that would otherwise be completely shut. They get access to tutoring, resources, leadership, and facilities that even regular students don't get, they constantly have people looking over their shoulders, these types of programs are a path to take people who might not have focus and give them a chance to have a life. The commercials are right on this...very few athletes even on the football teams of the big-name programs actually ever play a down in the pro-leagues.

[EvilMonkey]

While this is certainly true for some...you have to admit, for a lot of them, these programs open doors that would otherwise be completely shut. They get access to tutoring, resources, leadership, and facilities that even regular students don't get, they constantly have people looking over their shoulders, these types of programs are a path to take people who might not have focus and give them a chance to have a life. The commercials are right on this...very few athletes even on the football teams of the big-name programs actually ever play a down in the pro-leagues.

For the ones that actually WANT an education, yes, they have a lot of doors that can open for them.

[Jenksismyhero]

If they get injured, they can lose their scholarship and not have medical coverage for their injuries. These guys are going out there week after week, putting their bodies at risk for your entertainment (and money!). Colter signed up and took the risk that he did, but why is it wrong for him to want to lessen that risk or at least help protect against that risk for future players?

 

I know they can lose their scholarships, but I don't believe they can lose their medical coverage. My understanding is that college athletes basically have workers' comp claims at that point, so the school is going to be on the hook for that injury until the person has reached "maximum medical improvement."

 

 

[StrangeSox]

It's more of the long-term impact that injuries or even just playing DI football can have on your body that aren't covered. Sure, the surgery to repair your torn ACL may be covered, but not the lingering bad shoulder you'll have for the rest of your life or maybe the CTE you got playing.

[ptatc]

I was more making a joke about public high school teams.

 

NCAA Football and Men's BB are basically professional leagues these days, but what about NCAA swimming/track/wrestling etc.?

 

I have plenty of issues with the amount of money sports can siphon away from academic institutions (e.g. Rutgers), but I don't know that eliminating the professionalized NCAA sports is really a solution.

 

I was being the far end Devil's advocate as well.

 

There are plenty of opportunities in track and wrestling at the professional level if you are that good. There is USA swimming and such for most of the others as well. This would make them truly amateur where it is not a job and they could get funding from the USOC.

 

However, the point stands that sports is a way to get athletes into schools when many of them couldn't afford it. This a agree with. Maybe it should be that they need to be free. No charging for anything to college sports?

[Jenksismyhero]

It's more of the long-term impact that injuries or even just playing DI football can have on your body that aren't covered. Sure, the surgery to repair your torn ACL may be covered, but not the lingering bad shoulder you'll have for the rest of your life or maybe the CTE you got playing.

 

Right, and that's the part I could give two s***s about. You chose to play a sport in which you run full speed into another human and land on a hard ground. Why should anyone else be responsible for that decision?

 

edit: and that's ignoring the benefits these guys get for that potential long-term impact.

Edited January 29, 2014 by Jenksismybitch

[StrangeSox]

Right, and that's the part I could give two s***s about. You chose to play a sport in which you run full speed into another human and land on a hard ground. Why should anyone else be responsible for that decision?

 

Some people don't see any good reason that the players who actually play the game should be treated as disposable while the coaches and administrators make millions of dollars a year. Why don't you give a s*** that these people who play a game for your entertainment can face lifelong health issues because of it? It doesn't even require you, as an individual, to do or change anything at all. They're just asking for some of the revenue to go towards the players themselves for scholarship guarantees and medical issues that directly result from the game.

 

I'm also unclear as to why anybody but the industry that makes billions of dollars a year off of these athletes should be responsible for medical conditions that arise from playing the sport. What's the moral argument here against medical coverage for athletes and for keeping all of the revenue with the non-athletes? Against not giving athletes a voice when discussing working conditions and durations before adding more and more games and practices?

[Jenksismyhero]

Some people don't see any good reason that the players who actually play the game should be treated as disposable while the coaches and administrators make millions of dollars a year. Why don't you give a s*** that these people who play a game for your entertainment can face lifelong health issues because of it? It doesn't even require you, as an individual, to do or change anything at all. They're just asking for some of the revenue to go towards the players themselves for scholarship guarantees and medical issues that directly result from the game.

 

I'm also unclear as to why anybody but the industry that makes billions of dollars a year off of these athletes should be responsible for medical conditions that arise from playing the sport. What's the moral argument here against medical coverage for athletes and for keeping all of the revenue with the non-athletes? Against not giving athletes a voice when discussing working conditions and durations before adding more and more games and practices?

 

Coaches are disposable. Coaches get fired all the time. Until coaches make it big, they live pretty awful lives as assistant coaches. You've got a warped view of the actual system. Not ever player is a star being denied millions in endorsement deals, and not every coach is making millions without doing any work. That's all wrong. It's the complete opposite. Very few players could make any money outside of football even if it were allowed, and very few coaches make millions without doing any work.

 

I don't care because that's their choice to play the game. And IMO they're compensated just fine for it. Give me 100-150k (or more) and i'll deal with a bad shoulder.

 

And yes it does require me to change. I'll have to pay more for tickets. I'll have to donate more to my school to get the same seats/perks. I'll have to eventually pay more to get sports networks and whatnot on TV. It's not like the cost of this is going to be taken from the schools or the NCAA.

 

Look, the NCAA is a joke. It should be abolished. I fully support the major conferences that want to leave it and operate on their own. That would be great. But there's not a single cell in my body that feels badly for college athletes. None. The vast majority are getting an excellent opportunity. And the ones that are really being taken advantage of will be making s*** tons of money at the professional level anyway.

[Balta1701]

Coaches are disposable. Coaches get fired all the time. Until coaches make it big, they live pretty awful lives as assistant coaches.

I don't know every school but here's University of Tennessee's assistant coaching roster salaries:

Mike Bajakian // Offensive coordinator/Quarterbacks // $475,000 // $261,000 (Cincinnati)

 

Zach Azzanni // Wide receivers // $300,000 //

 

Jay Graham // Running backs // $260,000 //

 

Don Mahoney // Offensive line // $350,000 //

 

Mark Elder // Tight ends/special teams coordinator // $220,000 //

 

John Jancek // Defensive coordinator // $475,000 //

 

Steve Stripling // Defensive line/assistant head coach // $380,000 //

 

Tommy Thigpen // Linebackers // $345,000 //

 

Willie Martinez // Secondary // $280,000 //

I dunno, I might be pretty game for that pretty awful life.

[Jenksismyhero]

I don't know every school but here's University of Tennessee's assistant coaching roster salaries:

I dunno, I might be pretty game for that pretty awful life.

 

Oh don't get me wrong, they pay well, but your life sucks. You work for that money by working 80-100 hour weeks. Job security sucks. You change jobs and move constantly. It's not some amazing deal where you just show up to the stadium, get paid bank and let the "disposable players" make you all the money. That's a complete fallacy.

[Balta1701]

Oh don't get me wrong, they pay well, but your life sucks. You work for that money by working 80-100 hour weeks. Job security sucks. You change jobs and move constantly. It's not some amazing deal where you just show up to the stadium, get paid bank and let the "disposable players" make you all the money. That's a complete fallacy.

You realize you just said that to a person who spent 6.5 years in Grad School for 1/10th of those salaries?

[StrangeSox]

Coaches are disposable. Coaches get fired all the time. Until coaches make it big, they live pretty awful lives as assistant coaches. You've got a warped view of the actual system. Not ever player is a star being denied millions in endorsement deals, and not every coach is making millions without doing any work. That's all wrong. It's the complete opposite. Very few players could make any money outside of football even if it were allowed, and very few coaches make millions without doing any work.

 

I don't think and didn't say that any coaches make millions without doing any work. They don't put their personal health at risk, but that's not the same thing.

 

I don't care because that's their choice to play the game. And IMO they're compensated just fine for it. Give me 100-150k (or more) and i'll deal with a bad shoulder.

 

You're arguing against free markets here and in favor of a cartel, fwiw.

 

And yes it does require me to change. I'll have to pay more for tickets. I'll have to donate more to my school to get the same seats/perks. I'll have to eventually pay more to get sports networks and whatnot on TV. It's not like the cost of this is going to be taken from the schools or the NCAA.

 

This assumption doesn't hold in any other area of economics. Businesses can't actually pass 100% of the costs on by raising prices, because if they could, then they'd already raise prices and just have bigger profits.

 

And I'm sorry if this multi-billion dollar industry can only survive or you can only support it if the overwhelming majority of labor goes unpaid. But the NCAA has no inherent right or need to exist, and if it can't function without taking adequate care of the athletes, then it should collapse.

 

Look, the NCAA is a joke. It should be abolished. I fully support the major conferences that want to leave it and operate on their own. That would be great. But there's not a single cell in my body that feels badly for college athletes. None. The vast majority are getting an excellent opportunity. And the ones that are really being taken advantage of will be making s*** tons of money at the professional level anyway.

 

The NCAA is a joke, so why do you so strongly support their cartel actions that only serve to horde revenues?

 

[ptatc]

You realize you just said that to a person who spent 6.5 years in Grad School for 1/10th of those salaries?

I've come to realize that the more education you have the less money you make. When I worked in the field I made a heck of a lot more than I do at the university.

[ptatc]

Some people don't see any good reason that the players who actually play the game should be treated as disposable while the coaches and administrators make millions of dollars a year. Why don't you give a s*** that these people who play a game for your entertainment can face lifelong health issues because of it? It doesn't even require you, as an individual, to do or change anything at all. They're just asking for some of the revenue to go towards the players themselves for scholarship guarantees and medical issues that directly result from the game.

 

I'm also unclear as to why anybody but the industry that makes billions of dollars a year off of these athletes should be responsible for medical conditions that arise from playing the sport. What's the moral argument here against medical coverage for athletes and for keeping all of the revenue with the non-athletes? Against not giving athletes a voice when discussing working conditions and durations before adding more and more games and practices?

How is this different than say a truck driver. Many more of them die in crashes and become injured than football. I see many in the clinic that have lifelong injuries but I haven't heard too many people give a crap about them. The education and other benefits the players receive are more than many "regular' employees and the degree will set them up pretty well if they do it right.

[StrangeSox]

How is this different than say a truck driver. Many more of them die in crashes and become injured than football. I see many in the clinic that have lifelong injuries but I haven't heard too many people give a crap about them. The education and other benefits the players receive are more than many "regular' employees and the degree will set them up pretty well if they do it right.

I think you'll generally find me strongly on the side of labor and unionization regardless of industry. Truckers routinely can barely make ends meet.

[Jenksismyhero]

I don't think and didn't say that any coaches make millions without doing any work. They don't put their personal health at risk, but that's not the same thing.

 

 

 

You're arguing against free markets here and in favor of a cartel, fwiw.

 

How exactly? The "employees" have the option to play the game or not play the game. No one is forcing them to do it. They can wait and see if they get drafted. They can go play in other countries. That's pretty "free" to me.

 

And it's not a cartel either. The schools don't own some unique product. You can start a school and a football program if you'd like. There's also not any price fixing. Schools charge different amounts to watch the games. They charge different amounts for networks to broadcast their games. And they don't really market themselves the same way either. I fail to see how that's a cartel situation.

 

This assumption doesn't hold in any other area of economics. Businesses can't actually pass 100% of the costs on by raising prices, because if they could, then they'd already raise prices and just have bigger profits.

 

And I'm sorry if this multi-billion dollar industry can only survive or you can only support it if the overwhelming majority of labor goes unpaid. But the NCAA has no inherent right or need to exist, and if it can't function without taking adequate care of the athletes, then it should collapse.

 

I don't think AD departments act like normal businesses, so that's a faulty comparison. They have no shareholders or investors to pay back. They worry about funding their programs and maybe expanding the school a little bit. That's it. I'd also bet that the major schools like OSU, Texas, any SEC, etc. could double their ticket prices and still sell out. But they don't, because there's no need to. Present them with the need and they will.

 

The NCAA is a joke, so why do you so strongly support their cartel actions that only serve to horde revenues?

 

The NCAA made 71 million in 2012. http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/colle...urplus/2128431/ In the grand scheme that's really not a lot.