Kirby Smart just negotiated a 10 year, $112 million deal. And every major sport has a players union.
I see nothing wrong with this, it's just the process of capitalism.
Will this end up helping ncaa turn into 2 mega conferences, eliminate NIL and basically become a minor league that consist of the big ten and sec?
Maybe. Maybe not.
My question is, what happens to the nonrevenue sports if schools will be sharing revenue directly with football players? If players are going to be getting a cut, that money's coming from somewhere.
Replied here so this is near the top.
Unions can be incredibly powerful, for example, the nurse's union at the University of Michigan's "Michigan Medicine", is so strong that the nurses literally can choose whether to take the vaccine or not and face no repercussions--irrespective of ANYONE'S stance (which is not the point), THAT is true employee power, especially at a place like UofM.
The prosperity that Southeast Michigan used to enjoy (decades ago) via the automotive industry was purely a result of a incredibly strong unions.
I'm very pro-union.
Blizzards for all!
That’s not necessarily a good thing. All power needs to be checked.
Right like anti-trust laws or something
Unions had something to do with the noted prosperity but they also have something to do with the downfall of the American car companies. I think unions can be good or bad. It mostly depends on whether the leader ship is rational or delusional.
“The prosperity that Southeast Michigan used to enjoy (decades ago) via the automotive industry was purely a result of a incredibly strong unions.”
I think you’re engaging in a bit of snark here. But if you’re not, I don’t think the postwar success of the American auto companies can be attributed solely to the UAW.
Could have worded it better on my part, I mean just that the profits trickled down to a very large proportion of employees, solidly putting them in the middle class.
Will be an interesting discussion. We have gone from scholarships/housing/stipends worth up to of $300,000 for four/ five years to limitless NIL opportunities, unmitigated transferring, and now demands for much more. The rapid evolution of ‘College sports’ is fascinating…
Fascinating but not necessarily a good thing in the long run.
That's bait! But I'll bite anyway...
SallyFieldUnion.gif
Final nail in the coffin for the NCAA. They got what they deserved. Pigs get fat......hogs get slaughtered.
If you're an organization that makes rules but never enforces t hem, what's the point?
College football amateurism is dead. Long live college football amateurism.
So the football players are declaring themselves to be employed by the University--state employees. I wonder what impact, if any, that will have on how NIL will have to be structured.
And how can this self-declared union already be bargaining with the Big Ten? A union is a formal legal entity, like a corporation. I'm guessing that there's a process to go through here that needs to be completed and approved before you can just walk into the Big Ten offices, plop down, and demand a share of the pie. I would google 'how to start a union,' but yeah, not on my work computer. Plus, anything that the union would get would necessarily impact what the universities themselves get, so there would likely have to be universities involved in some capacity as well...
Amateurism was initially a scam to keep working class people from sullying wealthy people's leisure activities.
I mean, maybe? But if you're going back in time, there were real benefits conferred to players in the form of educations that helped them obtain careers. The difference now is the gigantic influx of money into college sports such that the benefit now simply doesn't compare to what it once was.
There have also always been very real costs associated with being a player, including and up to life-changing injuries and death. I don't think I'd die for an education alone. Would you?
We can't pretend like players caused the schools to move toward generating more and more revenue based on the sport. Schools, conferences, and TV networks did that. And also, the players aren't declaring themselves anything; NLRB General Counsel last fall ruled that the Supreme Court's NIL ruling meant players should be considered employees for the purpose of labor law.
Since PSU is a public institution, unionization will fall under public employee labor organizing statutes. Curious to see how it all plays out.
And when the universities often times give players little education put them on the easiest track possible to pass classes including lots of tutoring it's not like most of them even use that education. The benefits have always been overblown for football players while the risks have been very high.
And also, the players aren't declaring themselves anything; NLRB General Counsel last fall ruled that the Supreme Court's NIL ruling meant players should be considered employees for the purpose of labor law.
Since PSU is a public institution, unionization will fall under public employee labor organizing statutes. Curious to see how it all plays out.
Thanks for the above, I wasn't aware of the NLRB's position. That said, it's one thing for the NLRB general counsel to provide guidance on a topic and for the union to actually be recognized under the organizing statutes. Perhaps it will sail through, but from the little bit in that tweet, it sounded like it hadn't happened yet. Perhaps it has, which would explain why negotiations were underway. But that wouldn't explain why the news hadn't dropped sooner. Ah well, will just have to read up on current events.
College football amateurism is only as good as the McDonalds bag full of cash that is handed off. Proposing a union is a relatively easy through the NLRB but first you need to be classified as employees is the first hurdle. Seems like this is inevitable at this point.
This really only applies to P5. Smaller schools will just drop the sport if unionization efforts are made.
Not sure that it will play that way. I could see smaller schools saying that you can unionize but I'm not giving you anything more than you get now, i.e. free room, board and education. If you don't want it, there is a competitive market that will take it.
Will this union ask for help from the NFLPA or attempt to develop their own union from scratch? I think the NFL has a vested interest in seeing college football continue to develop players to minimize their investment at the pro level.
Amazing how much this has evolved in such a short period of time with much more to come of course.
There's an argument that below the P5 there is so much less revenue that the scholarship and room and board is actually a reasonable trade off value wise. I feel like the unions would have much less leverage.
I would like to add (also “without comment”):
Kirby Smart just signed a 9-figure extension.
Not an entirely irrelevant point, but it's like comparing paychecks of a 4-star general and a private.
For a better and more obvious analog you could compare NFL coaching salaries to NFL player salaries.
First, it was probably my mistake to comment on a post that heavily implicates a position while trying to keep myself out of the discussion whether players should or should not be played. But I'm here.
In response to your point, I would only point out the stat that less than 2% of college players go on to play in the NFL. This would suggest that only the top two percent of players should have their compensation compared to Smart's, assuming all the things, of course.
Whether or not 2% of college football players go to play in the NFL is irrelevant.
That's like saying only 2% of NFL players make the Hall of Fame.
In fact, that 98% won't make money going pro on reinforces the belief they should get paid when they can.
Most apples to apples would be at a given school: UGA player earnings compared to UGA coach earnings. Perhaps informative at a conference level, but to (I think) your point comparing a MAC long snapper to Kirby doesn’t make sense
Obviously far more than 2% of players contribute to the $$$ benefit for universities across athletics, development, enrollment.
The NFL isn’t a perfect comp but it’s the best we have, and pretty clearly shows teams value star players more than star coaches.
When I hear, "contributes to the benefit of" it brings to mind the idea of revenue sharing or stock in a company. What was quoted above was kirby's salary, which likely includes certain performance bonuses. So this is another way in which we are talking apples to oranges. If we are talking a comparison of salaries, then I think you are going to see wide disparities in what players and coaches make. It doesnt change the obvious fact the there is a lot more money in the game now.
What’s the relevance of the 2% figure?
what proportion of college coaches go on to have successful NFL coaching careers? I’m guessing less than 2%
Love it.
PSU might become my 2nd favorite B1G team.
perfect gif for this +1
ELI5 please
Sean Clifford and basically every other Penn State QB under Field Goal Franklin have been beaten into the ground behind pathetic O-line play. He was sacked again by O-JA-BO and Hutch as I typed this comment.
Speaking of OL, how is it that Moore's line wins the Joe Moore Award and the pundits insist we are struggling to recruit? Is it because we are so stacked right now? I gotta think it's this, and next recruiting season will tick up big-time.
You want stability re: transfer portal? You want an NIL salary cap? This is how we get there.
one. hundred. percent.
there's no way to limit pay without some sort of collectively-bargained agreement among the employees.
What collective bargaining agreement has ever limited your ability to get endorsements? Who would limiting their money help anyways?
This will have to be negotiated at the conf. level. The NCAA won't do shit (/stating the obvious).
The conf with the biggest TV deals and revenue will be able to not only pay the players at a higher rate but continue to pay the coaches, staff and keep the facilities up and running.
The MAC, et al. won't be able to compete at all. I doubt the Pac12minus2 will be able to either without the LA schools and SDSt won't be able to save them. The B12 talks a good game, I'll give them that. But OkSt, Iowa St and Tex Tech won't be able to get the money the SEC and B10 will. ACC has a chance, but likely only if they can convince ND to join 100% for football and I don't see that happening. I think the ACC is also dead as a result. They are discussing non-equal revenue sharing and with unionization, the bottom of the ACC won't be able to complete within their own conference under those conditions. Why be in a conference competing directly with teams whose revenues are so much greater?
This will all lead to the top 60 or so FB schools breaking away from the NCAA and the G5 schools. It will be 24-30 in the B10 and another 24-30 to the SEC, or 18-22 from those two plus a 3rd major conference forms out of the ACC, P12-2 leftovers and B12 leftovers.
SEC: adds one or two more? IDK who b/c I'm not sure UF wants FSU or Miami and USC(NTUSC) won't want clemson.
B10: Adds ND, UNC, UVa, Duke, GT, Stanford, UWash?
3rd Conf: the current B12, remaining P12 and ACC. Most will view this as the 3rd wheel but ND could go here depending on Stanford, Wash, UNC et al.
Gonna be 15-20 years, depending on the GoR in the ACC but this is the future, IMO
No salary caps for players until there is a salary cap for coaches and administrators. Otherwise its just BS