71Bear said:
Rushinbear said:
Another Bear said:
71Bear said:
Another Bear said:
Alkiadt said:
Another Bear said:
UDefinitely agree, especially given they aren't paid.
They are "paid"...
Have you paid tuition for a 4 year degree lately?
People want to simply forget that most of these kids are granted admission, free tuition, room and board.
That's anywhere from $100,000 to $400,000 lately.
So they're getting tan opportunity for a free education and a degree opportunity kids would die for.
Spare me the "they're not getting paid" B.S.....Shame on them if they fail to take advantage of the golden opportunity they get when they are granted a full ride.
Disagree. Paid means receiving a PAYCHECK for the work provided. At best it's a trade on services for schooling with schools making millions a years on FB games. The top school make 8 figures, like UTexass...$71m a year. Until the new transfer rule, schools held 99% of the cards.
I don't bother to reconcile the conflict of a multi-billion dollar sports industry run off amateurs...but there it is in stark reality. Also of note, it's 2019, not 1952.
I'm not sure where the numbers cited by the previous poster came from but they are definitely not significant considering the value of the product they produce. Players are the reason college football exists. Therefore, they should be at the top of the compensation scale. If a coach is making $9 million/year (Dabo S.), then players should earn at a lot more than between 100k- 400K over a four year stretch.
The argument that players are compensated through their scholarship is a grossly outdated notion.
At one point in time it was likely a reasonable trade but that was long ago...before massive TV contracts, TV executives, paid bowl committees and conference commissioners. That's a lot of people being paid (for real) while the who actually make it happen...get a schollie with many strings attached.
You pay them a paycheck and they become employees, subject to the responsibilities of same. Employment at will unless they unionize and then you can say goodbye to college fb as we know it. They have to file income taxes and pay on all that money in their checks. The Bears would become a minor league team. It becomes a completely different proposition, one that most of us would not like to see.
What you can say now is that these kids go into the deal with their eyes open. They know "the score." And, if they didn't like it, they could join one of those fledgling leagues or go abroad. The problem with their going right into fb as a profession is that they're 18 year olds up against grown men who see them as taking their meal tickets away.
The way it is now gives them a chance to ease into this demanding life and decide whether they want it or can handle it.
No one is suggesting unionization or employment at will. What is being suggested is a 5 year contract for x dollars. The dollars would be utilized (in part) to pay for their education. A player could walk away from the contract after three years but would receive no further benefits.
Solutions that appear simple often have unexpected complications. Here are a few complications.
Does this mean that the school no longer provides a scholarship for each athlete but replaces it with this new contract?
Or is the amount of the scholarship deducted annually from the contract amount?
I assume that this new contract would apply to all athletes whether recruited or
"walk-on"
If the athlete leaves the team (but stays in school) would that terminate the contract?
Or does the contract continue?
If the athlete drops out of school entirely does the contract continue?
If the athlete changes schools (to one in the same conference or to one in another conference) would that terminate the contract?
Would the new school and the old school both be required to pay the athlete?
Would there be a covenant not to compete built into the contract? (Yes I know that there may be problems enforcing such a covenant in CA. But this is not necessarily the case in other States.)
Would the athlete be considered an employee under local, State or Federal law?
What about OSHA? How would that play into the analysis (with all the head trauma created by the job)?
What about long-term disability claims for on-the-job injury to the brain?
What about local, State and Federal tax consequences? Withholding? social security?
Would the school be required to provide tax counseling?
Would the athlete be eligible for 401k made available for other employees of the school?
Etc. Etc.
IMO unionization won't kill college football. But it would be killed if athletes are considered employees. The schools could not deal with all the financial complications.
The only solution would be for there to be special legislation in each state to resolve the problems.
Anything else?