NLRB Favors Football Players

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
121

[quote]Northwestern players devote 50-60 hours a week to conditioning and drills during the preseason training camp. And during the season, they devote 40-50 hours a week to football, even though the NCAA caps mandatory in-season practice at 20 hours a week, by holding “voluntary” workouts in the evenings that are “arranged” by position captains rather than the coaching staff. After an “optional” few weeks post-bowl-game (where S&C coaches watch workouts and senior players take attendance), the team eases into spring ball, which has 20-25 hours a week of practice, followed by another “optional” period before summer workouts, again with 20-25 hours a week of practice, begin. Northwestern is almost certainly not alone in making these various “voluntary” workouts essentially required, and thereby getting around NCAA hours limitations.

Kain Colter, who hoped to go to med school, was told by the coaching staff that he shouldn’t take a required chemistry class that conflicted with football practice. As a result, he had to take the class during a makeup summer session, and he fell behind his cohort of fellow premeds. He ended up switching to a psychology major because he did not believe he could make up the lost ground in time. (Think about that: Northwestern told its football players not to take classes necessary for their majors. Imagine what it’s like at an actual football factory.)[/quote]

I think it’s really easy to paint players in this situation as greedy. I think we may be pointing that finger at the wrong people.

Now unionizing is not the way to do this, but if this makes peoples heads nod and changes get made then this was an awesome move.

122

For those who think this is coming from a greed position read this:

[quote]The union has said it would seek to negotiate over health and safety issues and does not intend to push for “pay-for-play” wages, which are not allowed under regulations issued by the NCAA.

Among its demands, CAPA is seeking financial coverage for former players with sports-related medical expenses, independent concussion experts to be placed on the sidelines during games and the creation of an educational trust fund to help former players graduate.[/quote]

This sounds so bad?!

123

[quote]H factor wrote:
For those who think this is coming from a greed position read this:

[quote]The union has said it would seek to negotiate over health and safety issues and does not intend to push for “pay-for-play” wages, which are not allowed under regulations issued by the NCAA.

Among its demands, CAPA is seeking financial coverage for former players with sports-related medical expenses, independent concussion experts to be placed on the sidelines during games and the creation of an educational trust fund to help former players graduate.[/quote]

This sounds so bad?!

In fairness that is likely just a lie. The key to union organizing is getting a bargaining unit recognized first and they’ll say anything they have to get recognized. Once a bargaining unit is recognized its too late to yell Katie bar the door because the wolves are already running through it.

124

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:
For those who think this is coming from a greed position read this:

[quote]The union has said it would seek to negotiate over health and safety issues and does not intend to push for “pay-for-play” wages, which are not allowed under regulations issued by the NCAA.

Among its demands, CAPA is seeking financial coverage for former players with sports-related medical expenses, independent concussion experts to be placed on the sidelines during games and the creation of an educational trust fund to help former players graduate.[/quote]

This sounds so bad?!

In fairness that is likely just a lie. The key to union organizing is getting a bargaining unit recognized first and they’ll say anything they have to get recognized. Once a bargaining unit is recognized its too late to yell Katie bar the door because the wolves are already running through it.

[/quote]

No real way of knowing. The point is those things don’t already happen. Why not?

Remember that is at Northwestern. What do you think happens in the SEC? I don’t think unionizing is the way to go, but if it creates changes then I welcome them. What we currently have is highly flawed.

125

[quote]H factor wrote:

[quote]Northwestern players devote 50-60 hours a week to conditioning and drills during the preseason training camp. And during the season, they devote 40-50 hours a week to football, even though the NCAA caps mandatory in-season practice at 20 hours a week, by holding “voluntary” workouts in the evenings that are “arranged” by position captains rather than the coaching staff. After an “optional” few weeks post-bowl-game (where S&C coaches watch workouts and senior players take attendance), the team eases into spring ball, which has 20-25 hours a week of practice, followed by another “optional” period before summer workouts, again with 20-25 hours a week of practice, begin. Northwestern is almost certainly not alone in making these various “voluntary” workouts essentially required, and thereby getting around NCAA hours limitations.

Kain Colter, who hoped to go to med school, was told by the coaching staff that he shouldn’t take a required chemistry class that conflicted with football practice. As a result, he had to take the class during a makeup summer session, and he fell behind his cohort of fellow premeds. He ended up switching to a psychology major because he did not believe he could make up the lost ground in time. (Think about that: Northwestern told its football players not to take classes necessary for their majors. Imagine what it’s like at an actual football factory.)[/quote]

I think it’s really easy to paint players in this situation as greedy. I think we may be pointing that finger at the wrong people.

Now unionizing is not the way to do this, but if this makes peoples heads nod and changes get made then this was an awesome move. [/quote]

The stats in that quote are pure bullshit.

There is no way, NO WAY, a player could dedicate 50-60 hours a week to football drills and conditioning.

Not even with 2 a day practices are you getting to 50-60 hours a week. If you got to 40 hrs a week, I would be shocked.

126

[quote]H factor wrote:

No real way of knowing. [/quote]

Lol. Unless you’ve ever work for or opposite a union organizing campaign or read any union organizing playbooks. Organizing tactics aren’t exactly a well-kept secret.

127

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:

[quote]Northwestern players devote 50-60 hours a week to conditioning and drills during the preseason training camp. And during the season, they devote 40-50 hours a week to football, even though the NCAA caps mandatory in-season practice at 20 hours a week, by holding “voluntary” workouts in the evenings that are “arranged” by position captains rather than the coaching staff. After an “optional” few weeks post-bowl-game (where S&C coaches watch workouts and senior players take attendance), the team eases into spring ball, which has 20-25 hours a week of practice, followed by another “optional” period before summer workouts, again with 20-25 hours a week of practice, begin. Northwestern is almost certainly not alone in making these various “voluntary” workouts essentially required, and thereby getting around NCAA hours limitations.

Kain Colter, who hoped to go to med school, was told by the coaching staff that he shouldn’t take a required chemistry class that conflicted with football practice. As a result, he had to take the class during a makeup summer session, and he fell behind his cohort of fellow premeds. He ended up switching to a psychology major because he did not believe he could make up the lost ground in time. (Think about that: Northwestern told its football players not to take classes necessary for their majors. Imagine what it’s like at an actual football factory.)[/quote]

I think it’s really easy to paint players in this situation as greedy. I think we may be pointing that finger at the wrong people.

Now unionizing is not the way to do this, but if this makes peoples heads nod and changes get made then this was an awesome move. [/quote]

The stats in that quote are pure bullshit.

There is no way, NO WAY, a player could dedicate 50-60 hours a week to football drills and conditioning.

Not even with 2 a day practices are you getting to 50-60 hours a week. If you got to 40 hrs a week, I would be shocked.

[/quote]

Conditioning no.

Film? Absolutely.

As a high school football coach our players watch a ton of film and we PALE in comparison to the college level. You’d be shocked the amount of work goes into film sessions.

If you think college quarterbacks are putting in under 40 hours a week you don’t know much about college football. Unless we are quibbling over the word “drills.”

No, players aren’t conditioning 40 hours a week. They condition less than they did 25 years ago. Partially because they are always in shape. Some of that is with the “voluntary” (in quotes because they aren’t voluntary) summer workouts that every single person does.

Things “related” to football are easily close in the ball park of 40 hours a week less or more depending on what time of the year. It’s not all worky work stuff, but it is stuff you are obligated to be at.

Seems as if some schools are taking this “game” seriously. I wonder why? Isn’t school supposed to come first?

That’s the line you need to buy to keep believing in the status quo. Keep saying student-athlete. The NCAA loves that term.

128

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/15/the-myth-of-the-student-athlete/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

Myth of the student athlete

129

H- Factor,

If you added up ALL the things involved with football (practice, film, meetings, weight training, medical treatment), you “might” get to 40 hrs a week, and even that is stretching it.

A QB could go over that with film, but the quote mentioned with “conditioning being 50-60 hrs a week” is beyond horseshit.

If a strength and conditioning coach did put the players through that much work, he should be fired immediately. I would also be willing to bet you would have numerous guys hurt, injured, and medically exhausted.

130

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
H- Factor,

If you added up ALL the things involved with football (practice, film, meetings, weight training, medical treatment), you “might” get to 40 hrs a week, and even that is stretching it.

A QB could go over that with film, but the quote mentioned with “conditioning being 50-60 hrs a week” is beyond horseshit.

If a strength and conditioning coach did put the players through that much work, he should be fired immediately. I would also be willing to bet you would have numerous guys hurt, injured, and medically exhausted.

[/quote]

Football related drills probably meant everything that goes into being a football player. Conditioning 40-50 hours a week is bullshit and not accurate, but football related stuff is easily there ON AVERAGE.

Actually players condition LESS nowdays than they used to. This is because players are in shape year round. Part of the reason they are in shape year round is they are ALWAYS training.

College football players have all sorts of “voluntary” workouts that are called voluntary but are actually mandatory. The NCAA sets restrictions and every college gets around them by calling things voluntary.

They are only voluntary if you want to keep your scholarship.

The point is that college athletes easily put full time job hours into that “free” scholarship everyone keeps talking about. The “free” education college football players gets actually costs them an asston of time.

131

[quote]H factor wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
H- Factor,

If you added up ALL the things involved with football (practice, film, meetings, weight training, medical treatment), you “might” get to 40 hrs a week, and even that is stretching it.

A QB could go over that with film, but the quote mentioned with “conditioning being 50-60 hrs a week” is beyond horseshit.

If a strength and conditioning coach did put the players through that much work, he should be fired immediately. I would also be willing to bet you would have numerous guys hurt, injured, and medically exhausted.

[/quote]

Football related drills probably meant everything that goes into being a football player. Conditioning 40-50 hours a week is bullshit and not accurate, but football related stuff is easily there ON AVERAGE.

Actually players condition LESS nowdays than they used to. This is because players are in shape year round. Part of the reason they are in shape year round is they are ALWAYS training.

College football players have all sorts of “voluntary” workouts that are called voluntary but are actually mandatory. The NCAA sets restrictions and every college gets around them by calling things voluntary.

They are only voluntary if you want to keep your scholarship.

The point is that college athletes easily put full time job hours into that “free” scholarship everyone keeps talking about. The “free” education college football players gets actually costs them an asston of time.
[/quote]

  1. Maximus played college football, my little brother has been intricately involved with college football, and I remain friends (starting from their playing days with me in college to now) with some people who have started and now assistant coach at the Div 1 level, so I’m taking their word over yours in terms of hours. There is no question that coaches put in far more than 40 hours but we are talking about players. Players in general will outside of games have 25 hours of workouts (5 hours a day split into 2 sessions, morning and afternoon). They are not putting in an additional 3 hours of daily film time. Not a chance. In training camp as they fight for starting spots and go through “boot camp” together, maybe. Average through the year? Not a chance. And there’s no way they’re getting close to 50 hours as a player.

  2. It costs everybody that goes to college an asston of time either working to pay bills or playing sports.

  3. You strawmanned the shit out of my position in your earlier responses, which I haven’t responded to yet.

132

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
H- Factor,

If you added up ALL the things involved with football (practice, film, meetings, weight training, medical treatment), you “might” get to 40 hrs a week, and even that is stretching it.

A QB could go over that with film, but the quote mentioned with “conditioning being 50-60 hrs a week” is beyond horseshit.

If a strength and conditioning coach did put the players through that much work, he should be fired immediately. I would also be willing to bet you would have numerous guys hurt, injured, and medically exhausted.

[/quote]

Football related drills probably meant everything that goes into being a football player. Conditioning 40-50 hours a week is bullshit and not accurate, but football related stuff is easily there ON AVERAGE.

Actually players condition LESS nowdays than they used to. This is because players are in shape year round. Part of the reason they are in shape year round is they are ALWAYS training.

College football players have all sorts of “voluntary” workouts that are called voluntary but are actually mandatory. The NCAA sets restrictions and every college gets around them by calling things voluntary.

They are only voluntary if you want to keep your scholarship.

The point is that college athletes easily put full time job hours into that “free” scholarship everyone keeps talking about. The “free” education college football players gets actually costs them an asston of time.
[/quote]

  1. Maximus played college football, my little brother has been intricately involved with college football, and I remain friends (starting from their playing days with me in college to now) with some people who have started and now assistant coach at the Div 1 level, so I’m taking their word over yours in terms of hours. There is no question that coaches put in far more than 40 hours but we are talking about players. Players in general will outside of games have 25 hours of workouts (5 hours a day split into 2 sessions, morning and afternoon). They are not putting in an additional 3 hours of daily film time. Not a chance. In training camp as they fight for starting spots and go through “boot camp” together, maybe. Average through the year? Not a chance. And there’s no way they’re getting close to 50 hours as a player.

  2. It costs everybody that goes to college an asston of time either working to pay bills or playing sports.

  3. You strawmanned the shit out of my position in your earlier responses, which I haven’t responded to yet.[/quote]

I bet I played college football more recently than Maximus and I know MULTIPLE people who coach in college right now and the director of basketball operations at Oklahoma State is in my wedding. One of my best friends growing up. I’m pretty aware for the time put in at Oklahoma State and TCU football at the minimum considering a TCU assistant is also in my wedding. Schools of course will be different, but the average joe has no idea how much goes on month to month in college athletics at bigger schools. I know what we did and we were small time.

I did not play Division 1 football and it has been 6 years since I played, but I think you may be making some assumptions in my lack of knowledge on the subject. Now I’m not trying to play a who ya know vs. who I know game, but “most” people don’t know what all goes into the operation. You probably know vastly more than the average person.

Time requirements will be different at different colleges, but for the most part the average person has no fucking idea how much time a college athlete actually puts in. Especially if you’re talking about elite programs.
I was trying to let people know what all went into that “free” education that everyone thinks college players get. Time is a resource any economist will tell you and 4 years of college athletics is a gigantic investment of time.

I apologize for straw manning your earlier posts, but this idea that they don’t “work” close to full time hours is nonsense. I was attempting to shoot down this myth that they get a free education over and over again. Not paying for that education comes at a cost…and it is a cost far higher than someone in the band or someone who did well on the ACT/SAT pays for their “free” education.

Hell we outta know on a largely conservative board that no one gets something for nothing.

133

FWIW I never thought I should be paid, but comparing a small college player like me to someone who plays for Alabama or Penn State or something is vastly different. These places are generating millions of dollars and much of the “university economy” in the sports world is around football.

EA Sports paid a 40 million dollar settlement. Now why did they do this? Because they were going to lose.

134

I don’t want to see this argument get into dick-waving, but when I see the term “conditioning”, I see that as things like cone drills, sprints, weight training (maybe), but not things like film and meetings.

I am just cautious to what the outcome of this is. How other athletes react. I don’t want to see the college sports experience turn into something ugly.

135

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I don’t want to see this argument get into dick-waving, but when I see the term “conditioning”, I see that as things like cone drills, sprints, weight training (maybe), but not things like film and meetings.

I am just cautious to what the outcome of this is. How other athletes react. I don’t want to see the college sports experience turn into something ugly. [/quote]

Conditioning (as I said) was always a poor choice of words. Didn’t it also say football related drills?

Football related things hits 40 hours a week easily at many programs. Those who don’t know this have limited experience with what the average big college basketball and football program do during the times their kids are asked to “work.”

Even on their “off” days most college players analyze their own film and opponents film.

And I agree I wasn’t trying to dickwave, it’s just something I happen to know quite a bit about.

136

If you don’t like it, don’t play. I’m not quite sure how much easier it gets than that. By accepting a college scholarship for sports, you accept the terms and conditions FREELY in a FREE MARKET.

I didn’t like that I had to work in a public accounting firm working 60-80 hours a week, coming home and having to study all night for a year to pass the CPA exam, and getting paid 30% less and working 50-70% more than people who worked in industry.
Those pesky partners made anywhere between $100-$400/hour off my time and I saw only peanuts of that.

Hmm, seems a lot like a college athlete huh? Having to invest a significant amount of time and energy for what amounts to probably MORE money than I made in my first 4 years of work.

But they took a risk on me, an unknown individual who showed potential (same thing as a high school athlete). I could have flopped and not had it (just like a college athlete). I did it b/c that’s what I wanted (just like a college athlete). I agreed to do that voluntarily (just like a college athlete). I’m not begging big government to step in and “make it better for me.” I’m free to do something else anytime I chose.

Perhaps you haven’t thought about supply and demand either? There’s an unending supply of high school athletes with college potential but only so many colleges and even worse, even LESS professional teams to play on. When you see high supply and low demand, you shouldn’t even see scholarships. But these schools have to offer scholarships b/c most of the really good kids can’t afford college. But I bet there’s an asston of kids who would PAY to go to school and play football. In fact, there are quite a few kids who are walk-ons and not on scholarship.

137

[quote]ZJStrope wrote:
If you don’t like it, don’t play. I’m not quite sure how much easier it gets than that. By accepting a college scholarship for sports, you accept the terms and conditions FREELY in a FREE MARKET.

I didn’t like that I had to work in a public accounting firm working 60-80 hours a week, coming home and having to study all night for a year to pass the CPA exam, and getting paid 30% less and working 50-70% more than people who worked in industry.
Those pesky partners made anywhere between $100-$400/hour off my time and I saw only peanuts of that.

Hmm, seems a lot like a college athlete huh? Having to invest a significant amount of time and energy for what amounts to probably MORE money than I made in my first 4 years of work.

But they took a risk on me, an unknown individual who showed potential (same thing as a high school athlete). I could have flopped and not had it (just like a college athlete). I did it b/c that’s what I wanted (just like a college athlete). I agreed to do that voluntarily (just like a college athlete). I’m not begging big government to step in and “make it better for me.” I’m free to do something else anytime I chose.

Perhaps you haven’t thought about supply and demand either? There’s an unending supply of high school athletes with college potential but only so many colleges and even worse, even LESS professional teams to play on. When you see high supply and low demand, you shouldn’t even see scholarships. But these schools have to offer scholarships b/c most of the really good kids can’t afford college. But I bet there’s an asston of kids who would PAY to go to school and play football. In fact, there are quite a few kids who are walk-ons and not on scholarship. [/quote]

There isn’t an unending supply of high caliber athletes.

The argument you are suggesting is that all athletes are equal, they aren’t. Schools want the best athlete they can recruit.

Do you think any old high school QB can play like Johnny Manziel ?

You are talking about a roster of 80 kids generating a revenue of up to a Billion dollars per year for some schools. Paying their scholarships is a speck when compared to that revenue.

My gripe is how that revenue is spent, I would rather see it help with financial aid for other students, and prop up programs and improve infrastructure.

If a new building is erected, and a new program is developed because the football program paid for it, then I am cool with that.

138

How people can call a market with tons of restrictions on the people involved in it a free market is beyond me. Restrictions by design make it NOT a free market.

NFL is a free market. Watch what Johnny football gets in a free market. Watch what he is worth without restrictions.

NCAA is a restricted market that controls what it’s “laborers” can do via regulation. Rules like can’t sign your own name for people, can’t sell your own property for people, can’t star in a commercial for people. Now the NCAA can have athletes do all that if they want…but those athletes won’t be making the money. The NCAA will. See jersey sales and video game sales.

Simply saying free market doesn’t make it a free market. Regulation and restrictions by definition make it not a free market.

139

[quote]H factor wrote:
How people can call a market with tons of restrictions on the people involved in it a free market is beyond me. Restrictions by design make it NOT a free market.
[/quote]

There are restrictions in a lot of “free” markets.

If I wanted to open an investment firm, I couldn’t. I lack the licenses. Even if I want to work for an investment firm I still need the licenses. I guess I can make coffee for a while.

In every other market we just call it “paying our dues”

140

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:
How people can call a market with tons of restrictions on the people involved in it a free market is beyond me. Restrictions by design make it NOT a free market.
[/quote]

There are restrictions in a lot of “free” markets.

If I wanted to open an investment firm, I couldn’t. I lack the licenses. Even if I want to work for an investment firm I still need the licenses. I guess I can make coffee for a while.

In every other market we just call it “paying our dues”
[/quote]

I don’t care what you call it just don’t call it a free market. An athlete is not free to do so many things and the NCAA IS free to profit off their likeness to the tune of millions of dollars.

Not being able to make money off yourself while others make millions off your accomplishments is paying your dues? Sounds like exploitation and control. Two ways you know you aren’t talking about a free market.

Lift those restrictions on kids who are making millions of dollars for other people and watch how some of these shady backdoor dealings disappear.

We can’t keep talking about restrictions and free markets at the same time. Interference by a government or other authority is NOT a free market. Even worse we’re talking about controlling 18-22 year old kids likeness and ability to market themselves while their value is high.

Where else do we do this? We don’t do it with actors. We don’t do it with Olympic athletes. We don’t do it with baseball players who get drafted and go play double A ball. We control the kids to maintain some “student athlete” integrity and profit highly off owning their rights to make money.