The College Athletes Players Association (CAPA), which has been led by Northwestern’s Kain Colter, won its case at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) on Wednesday, which means that Northwestern football players are seen as employees rather than student-athletes, and that they can form a union.
USC better be sending me a check soon.
“While we respect the NLRB process and the regional director’s opinion, we disagree with it. Northwestern believes strongly that our student-athletes are not employees, but students. Unionization and collective bargaining are not the appropriate methods to address the concerns raised by student-athletes.”
I fucking bet they disagree with it.
I’ve heard that the NLRB ruling may only apply to private schools because the NLRB’s jurisdiction does not extend to state schools. That could shake things up in the future.
Or they could stop giving out scholarships. now you are no longer an employee of the school.
I mean, what about all the scholarship kids? The better students you have, the more donations and state/federal funding you get so aren’t good students also making you money? Where does it end?
Lol, our student-athletes are students. Since when?
Andrew Wiggins generated an asston of money for the University of Kansas and only had to go to school there for one semester because he CAN’T directly go pro.
Who benefited more from the deal? KU or Wiggins?
I would love to see us get rid of one and done go back to letting kids go pro when they can. The point of making them wait is what exactly?
Pertinent.
I say WHOOP WHOOP 
GO Union
Maybe now the players will have the long term health issues addressed with some of the profits
[quote]H factor wrote:
Lol, our student-athletes are students. Since when?
Andrew Wiggins generated an asston of money for the University of Kansas and only had to go to school there for one semester because he CAN’T directly go pro.
Who benefited more from the deal? KU or Wiggins?
I would love to see us get rid of one and done go back to letting kids go pro when they can. The point of making them wait is what exactly? [/quote]
Making them wait isn’t a school or NCAA requirement. Making them wait is a League requirement.
[quote]H factor wrote:
No one forces them to go to school and play football there.
If people have such a problem with it, why doesn’t someone start up their own “intro level professional” league?
[quote]ZJStrope wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
Lol, our student-athletes are students. Since when?
Andrew Wiggins generated an asston of money for the University of Kansas and only had to go to school there for one semester because he CAN’T directly go pro.
Who benefited more from the deal? KU or Wiggins?
I would love to see us get rid of one and done go back to letting kids go pro when they can. The point of making them wait is what exactly? [/quote]
Making them wait isn’t a school or NCAA requirement. Making them wait is a League requirement.
[/quote]
Maybe the NCAA should pressure the league to change.
Nah, the NCAA LOVES LOVES LOVES 1 and done. Are you kidding me? You think KU, UK, places like that don’t love it? Think how much money that made off Wiggins. And his cost? Miniscule. After all no one was making him play there.
[quote]ZJStrope wrote:
No one forces them to go to school and play football there.
If people have such a problem with it, why doesn’t someone start up their own “intro level professional” league?[/quote]
Why fuck up such a great system for colleges? Why pay a lot for those leagues from the NFL point of view when colleges can give them almost nothing and then leagues can pick from the finest?
So are Maddy Wollmuth and Colleen Ward (Virginia Tech Lacrosse) entitled to the same pay as Andrew Wiggins?? I think people conveniently forget that there are only two college sports that make money and the profits from those two literally support every other sport. But if an athletic scholarship (why just athletic, why not academic also) equates to a paycheck, then are all scholarship athletes employees, and if that’s the case, should profit of sport effect whether or not scholarships can be given (this is the death nail to all women’s athletic scholarships if so).
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
So are Maddy Wollmuth and Colleen Ward (Virginia Tech Lacrosse) entitled to the same pay as Andrew Wiggins?? I think people conveniently forget that there are only two college sports that make money and the profits from those two literally support every other sport. But if an athletic scholarship (why just athletic, why not academic also) equates to a paycheck, then are all scholarship athletes employees, and if that’s the case, should profit of sport effect whether or not scholarships can be given (this is the death nail to all women’s athletic scholarships if so). [/quote]
And let’s move this one step further. What about the girl scouts? I mean, surely that girl who sold 20k boxes of cookies deserves more than a trip to Washington DC (or whatever crap they give out as a reward)?
[quote]ZJStrope wrote:
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
So are Maddy Wollmuth and Colleen Ward (Virginia Tech Lacrosse) entitled to the same pay as Andrew Wiggins?? I think people conveniently forget that there are only two college sports that make money and the profits from those two literally support every other sport. But if an athletic scholarship (why just athletic, why not academic also) equates to a paycheck, then are all scholarship athletes employees, and if that’s the case, should profit of sport effect whether or not scholarships can be given (this is the death nail to all women’s athletic scholarships if so). [/quote]
And let’s move this one step further. What about the girl scouts? I mean, surely that girl who sold 20k boxes of cookies deserves more than a trip to Washington DC (or whatever crap they give out as a reward)?
[/quote]
What about the guy who gets a free membership to a gym to pull in clients?? Is that guy an employee of the gym? Should they be getting a W2 and reporting his “earnings” (the cost of the membership) as wages??
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
What about the guy who gets a free membership to a gym to pull in clients?? Is that guy an employee of the gym? Should they be getting a W2 and reporting his “earnings” (the cost of the membership) as wages??
[/quote]
That’s considered a “gift” so probably not 
But I get your point.
[quote]ZJStrope wrote:
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
So are Maddy Wollmuth and Colleen Ward (Virginia Tech Lacrosse) entitled to the same pay as Andrew Wiggins?? I think people conveniently forget that there are only two college sports that make money and the profits from those two literally support every other sport. But if an athletic scholarship (why just athletic, why not academic also) equates to a paycheck, then are all scholarship athletes employees, and if that’s the case, should profit of sport effect whether or not scholarships can be given (this is the death nail to all women’s athletic scholarships if so). [/quote]
And let’s move this one step further. What about the girl scouts? I mean, surely that girl who sold 20k boxes of cookies deserves more than a trip to Washington DC (or whatever crap they give out as a reward)?
[/quote]
Yes, let’s move the debate away from should some college athletes who generate a shit ton of money be rewarded for that to what about the girl scouts?
We can either talk about this or go down really stupid rabbit holes. If we want to talk about college athletes that sounds fun. If we want to talk about other shit and pretend it is the exact same as what I was saying then I’d rather not.
“I guess if we’re going to do X we may as well do Y” is one of the laziest forms of argument you can encounter. Why talk about anything if we’re just going to skip around going “what about the lemonade stand ran by my daughter this summer she needs a bailout if GM got one!”
“If we invaded Iraq why not Canada?”
“If we went into Afghanistan why not Russia?”
I mean we can talk and debate these things if you like because I think it would be interesting, but this type of “what about the guy who cleaned my oven two summers ago does he get a scholarship” nonsense is a waste of time.
[quote]H factor wrote:
I would love to see us get rid of one and done go back to letting kids go pro when they can. The point of making them wait is what exactly? [/quote]
That’s the NBA not college.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
I would love to see us get rid of one and done go back to letting kids go pro when they can. The point of making them wait is what exactly? [/quote]
That’s the NBA not college. [/quote]
So why isn’t the NCAA pushing hard to get rid of this?
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
[quote]ZJStrope wrote:
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
So are Maddy Wollmuth and Colleen Ward (Virginia Tech Lacrosse) entitled to the same pay as Andrew Wiggins?? I think people conveniently forget that there are only two college sports that make money and the profits from those two literally support every other sport. But if an athletic scholarship (why just athletic, why not academic also) equates to a paycheck, then are all scholarship athletes employees, and if that’s the case, should profit of sport effect whether or not scholarships can be given (this is the death nail to all women’s athletic scholarships if so). [/quote]
And let’s move this one step further. What about the girl scouts? I mean, surely that girl who sold 20k boxes of cookies deserves more than a trip to Washington DC (or whatever crap they give out as a reward)?
[/quote]
What about the guy who gets a free membership to a gym to pull in clients?? Is that guy an employee of the gym? Should they be getting a W2 and reporting his “earnings” (the cost of the membership) as wages??
[/quote]
Actually, the membership is income and taxable, although he’s probably an independent contractor and not an employee. Depending on the amount, he should probably get a 1099 (but not a W-2).