Northwestern Players Trying to Unionize

DCB · January 30, 2014

The problem is not in scholarships, it is in that "students-athletes" sign legally binding contracts with out the consult of a lawyer. "Student-athletes" have to make four year commitments while the contracts are year to year and can be rescinded for ANY REASON. If they are accused of violating there eligibility "Student-athletes" cannot consult an attorney or fight the allegations from the NCAA without the school. Student-athletes" work on there craft more than 50 hrs a week then go to class and by the NCAA own admission, the scholarship do not cover the full amount of the cost of going to college. There are strict restrictions on any job a "student-athletes" could use to make up the difference. "Student-Athletes" names and likenesses during the time of there eligibility are considered NCAA Property in PERPETUITY. So buy your favorite players college jersey 10 years after they play, they don't see a dime, this is the crux of the the Ed O'bannon lawsuit. A student-athlete can not even write a book that has nothing to do with athletics with there own name without losing eligibility. "Student-athlete" wants to transfer to another college because he is "no longer in the future plans" of the coaching staff or the coaches were fired due to non academic reasons, the "student-athlete" has to ask permission to be released and cannot accept another scholarship until being granted that release (doesn't work both ways dose it). The problem is not that the NCAA doesn't pays its players its that it treats its players so unfairly when it comes to rights that would be upheld if they received a scholarship for playing a trumpet or painting. http://youtu.be/Mc73CXRbkhw

Harry · January 30, 2014

The problem is not in scholarships, it is in that "students-athletes" sign legally binding contracts with out the consult of a lawyer. "Student-athletes" have to make four year commitments while the contracts are year to year and can be rescinded for ANY REASON. If they are accused of violating there eligibility "Student-athletes" cannot consult an attorney or fight the allegations from the NCAA without the school. Student-athletes" work on there craft more than 50 hrs a week then go to class and by the NCAA own admission, the scholarship do not cover the full amount of the cost of going to college. There are strict restrictions on any job a "student-athletes" could use to make up the difference. "Student-Athletes" names and likenesses during the time of there eligibility are considered NCAA Property in PERPETUITY. So buy your favorite players college jersey 10 years after they play, they don't see a dime, this is the crux of the the Ed O'bannon lawsuit. A student-athlete can not even write a book that has nothing to do with athletics with there own name without losing eligibility. "Student-athlete" wants to transfer to another college because he is "no longer in the future plans" of the coaching staff or the coaches were fired due to non academic reasons, the "student-athlete" has to ask permission to be released and cannot accept another scholarship until being granted that release (doesn't work both ways dose it). The problem is not that the NCAA doesn't pays its players its that it treats its players so unfairly when it comes to rights that would be upheld if they received a scholarship for playing a trumpet or painting. http://youtu.be/Mc73CXRbkhw

Good info. Very valid points there!

MeanGreenTexan · January 30, 2014

The problem is not in scholarships, it is in that "students-athletes" sign legally binding contracts with out the consult of a lawyer. "Student-athletes" have to make four year commitments while the contracts are year to year and can be rescinded for ANY REASON. If they are accused of violating there eligibility "Student-athletes" cannot consult an attorney or fight the allegations from the NCAA without the school. Student-athletes" work on there craft more than 50 hrs a week then go to class and by the NCAA own admission, the scholarship do not cover the full amount of the cost of going to college. There are strict restrictions on any job a "student-athletes" could use to make up the difference. "Student-Athletes" names and likenesses during the time of there eligibility are considered NCAA Property in PERPETUITY. So buy your favorite players college jersey 10 years after they play, they don't see a dime, this is the crux of the the Ed O'bannon lawsuit. A student-athlete can not even write a book that has nothing to do with athletics with there own name without losing eligibility. "Student-athlete" wants to transfer to another college because he is "no longer in the future plans" of the coaching staff or the coaches were fired due to non academic reasons, the "student-athlete" has to ask permission to be released and cannot accept another scholarship until being granted that release (doesn't work both ways dose it). The problem is not that the NCAA doesn't pays its players its that it treats its players so unfairly when it comes to rights that would be upheld if they received a scholarship for playing a trumpet or painting. http://youtu.be/Mc73CXRbkhw

This also works the other way as a protection.

Could you imagine the chaos and the even greater disparity between the haves & the have-nots if this rule was not in place? All a school like Alabama would have to do is stealth-recruit players they like from all over the country, and just have them transfer. Think Khalil Mack would have finished his career at Buffalo? Think LSU would have been all over Brelan after what he did to them in 2012? He'd have spent his 2013 season as a Tiger.

As for the university making money off of a players jersey and such, just ask Vince Young if he's made any money signing #10 burnt orange jerseys over the years... DON'T ask Johnny Manziel if he's made any money signing A&M gear though, because he'll lie to you.

DCB · January 30, 2014

This also works the other way as a protection.

Could you imagine the chaos and the even greater disparity between the haves & the have-nots if this rule was not in place? All a school like Alabama would have to do is stealth-recruit players they like from all over the country, and just have them transfer. Think Khalil Mack would have finished his career at Buffalo? Think LSU would have been all over Brelan after what he did to them in 2012? He'd have spent his 2013 season as a Tiger.

As for the university making money off of a players jersey and such, just ask Vince Young if he's made any money signing #10 burnt orange jerseys over the years... DON'T ask Johnny Manziel if he's made any money signing A&M gear though, because he'll lie to you.

OMG Schools will actually keep there promises to student athletes and keep them happy. Also, does everyone that buys a jersey get there jerseys signed, and if they do do they always pay for it? If you are a player and you want to play football and be seen so that you may have a shot at the NFL what are you going to do sit on your butt and take a small check or play at a school where you will be seen and have a chance at millions. If you don't think that some would take a scholarship and a chance to be seen, why do kids move down to FCS, JUCO, and lower FBS schools from MAJOR Programs like Texas and Alabama and LSU just for an opportunity to play and be seen. This is a choice taken away from legal adults. I love what Brelan has done for our university, but if he makes a decision to better his life, what kind of jackass would I be to stop him when I don't pay any of his bills and after he is gone from football I will not have to live the results.

forevereagle · January 30, 2014

OMG Schools will actually keep there promises to student athletes and keep them happy. Also, does everyone that buys a jersey get there jerseys signed, and if they do do they always pay for it? If you are a player and you want to play football and be seen so that you may have a shot at the NFL what are you going to do sit on your butt and take a small check or play at a school where you will be seen and have a chance at millions. If you don't think that some would take a scholarship and a chance to be seen, why do kids move down to FCS, JUCO, and lower FBS schools from MAJOR Programs like Texas and Alabama and LSU just for an opportunity to play and be seen. This is a choice taken away from legal adults. I love what Brelan has done for our university, but if he makes a decision to better his life, what kind of jackass would I be to stop him when I don't pay any of his bills and after he is gone from football I will not have to live the results.

Allowing a free for all approach to transferring, the "lower FBS" schools may as well go ahead and stop playing the game. If their best talent can be easily poached by another school, why bother? They will not be able to be competitive and the program would become a money drain as their fans would likely stop watching since they would also be aware that competition is unlikely. That would kill opportunity for others to play and get an education. I am in favor of making some changes to the scholarship system, but free agency is not the way. I would rather see an LOI, upon enrollment, be a four or five year commitment from both the school and the student. Out clauses for both sides should exist for certain circumstances, but there should be an understanding that just cutting bait is not an easy option.

DCB · January 30, 2014

Allowing a free for all approach to transferring, the "lower FBS" schools may as well go ahead and stop playing the game. If their best talent can be easily poached by another school, why bother? They will not be able to be competitive and the program would become a money drain as their fans would likely stop watching since they would also be aware that competition is unlikely. That would kill opportunity for others to play and get an education. I am in favor of making some changes to the scholarship system, but free agency is not the way. I would rather see an LOI, upon enrollment, be a four or five year commitment from both the school and the student. Out clauses for both sides should exist for certain circumstances, but there should be an understanding that just cutting bait is not an easy option.

So why stop at athletics? Do you think that if a computer genius gets a better deal from another college he should be forced to stay? What if Cal tech and MIT and the Ivory League had the opportunity to steal all of the best students would schools stop having computer, biology, business and law schools. Well they already do. I would love to keep the scholarship system but if they refuse to make it fair then it should be blown up. My happiness dose not out way someone's rights as an American Citizen.

Cerebus · January 30, 2014

It's a contract, they choose to sign it. If they don't want to sign it, don't.

"Rights" are between a citizen and the government, not two parties. Just like a apartment complex can forbid firearms in the unit despite the second amendment.

Mean Green 93-98 · January 30, 2014

The problem is not in scholarships, it is in that "students-athletes" sign legally binding contracts with out the consult of a lawyer. "Student-athletes" have to make four year commitments while the contracts are year to year and can be rescinded for ANY REASON. If they are accused of violating there eligibility "Student-athletes" cannot consult an attorney or fight the allegations from the NCAA without the school. Student-athletes" work on there craft more than 50 hrs a week then go to class and by the NCAA own admission, the scholarship do not cover the full amount of the cost of going to college. There are strict restrictions on any job a "student-athletes" could use to make up the difference. "Student-Athletes" names and likenesses during the time of there eligibility are considered NCAA Property in PERPETUITY. So buy your favorite players college jersey 10 years after they play, they don't see a dime, this is the crux of the the Ed O'bannon lawsuit. A student-athlete can not even write a book that has nothing to do with athletics with there own name without losing eligibility. "Student-athlete" wants to transfer to another college because he is "no longer in the future plans" of the coaching staff or the coaches were fired due to non academic reasons, the "student-athlete" has to ask permission to be released and cannot accept another scholarship until being granted that release (doesn't work both ways dose it). The problem is not that the NCAA doesn't pays its players its that it treats its players so unfairly when it comes to rights that would be upheld if they received a scholarship for playing a trumpet or painting. http://youtu.be/Mc73CXRbkhw

I'm not disagreeing with what you observe as inequalities, but what are you saying should be the solution?

UNTFan23 · January 30, 2014

So why stop at athletics? Do you think that if a computer genius gets a better deal from another college he should be forced to stay? What if Cal tech and MIT and the Ivory League had the opportunity to steal all of the best students would schools stop having computer, biology, business and law schools. Well they already do. I would love to keep the scholarship system but if they refuse to make it fair then it should be blown up. My happiness dose not out way someone's rights as an American Citizen.

Regular students are free to transfer to whatever school they choose, whether it be for a perceived better degree/education or other reasons. Of course, as a perspective employer I might question why a student transferred more than a couple times.

UNT90 · January 30, 2014

It's a contract, they choose to sign it. If they don't want to sign it, don't.

"Rights" are between a citizen and the government, not two parties. Just like a apartment complex can forbid firearms in the unit despite the second amendment.

Yep.

Free agency would be a disaster and eliminate the chance for many to develop their skills at a "lower FBS" school, as it would destroy any program not in the Big 5.

Comparing NCAA FBS football athletes to computer majors is just disingenuous. There are hundreds of thousands of the later. The former is a VERY select group of (10,710 if all FBS schools have all of their scholarships filled, to be exact).

Just leave a pretty good system be.

DCB · January 30, 2014

Not all contracts are legal and that is why when the NCAA has gone before the Supreme Court they have lost EVERYTIME. Which is why you have the longhorn network and big ten network and the soon to come sec network and a cusa package with your local cable provider. As for a solution in the Scholarship system:

1. All scholarships are 5 years with 4 years of eligibility similar to today but no year to year renewal.

2. If a school wants to end an athletes scholarship for non academic or legal reasons then that athlete can move to any other school and be eligible immediately at the beginning or the next semester.

3. If a student remains eligible to play for their redshirt, redshirt freshman and redshirt sophomore years and are not a letter winner they are eligible for a transfer to any college outside of the conference and be eligible immediately at the beginning or the next semester .(the whole competitive balance thing.

4. If a college coach is fired for non academic or legal reasons, athletes on the team will be eligible to transfer out of conference with approval of the school, eligible immediately at the beginning or the next semester or sitting out one year of eligibility . ( this keeps kids with a path out, if they are not wanted and the school has some control if a kid leaves during the time of a coaching change).

5. An athletes name and image can be used by the NCAA or school during the time the athlete is using the scholarship. After which any likeness or name usage on apparel, individual athlete film or video games must be cleared by the athlete.(compensation after NCAA eligibility is negotiated.) I say exempt game film and rebroadcasts because that is featuring the team as a whole not just the individual athlete.

I have a few more ideas but this is a start.

Edited January 30, 2014 by DCB

MeanGreenTexan · January 30, 2014

So why stop at athletics? Do you think that if a computer genius gets a better deal from another college he should be forced to stay? What if Cal tech and MIT and the Ivory League had the opportunity to steal all of the best students would schools stop having computer, biology, business and law schools. Well they already do. I would love to keep the scholarship system but if they refuse to make it fair then it should be blown up. My happiness dose not out way someone's rights as an American Citizen.

This is a straw man argument, but still, I don't think Cal Tech/MIT/et al. go out and recruit other schools' academic students to come to their schools for academic reasons. The interest is just not there. The faculty the schools employ and the graduates' job placement rates (among other things) factor into how academics are rated between colleges. Not wins/losses & championships.

Regarding football/basketball/baseball/whatever, that would be completely different. Sports are played on TV for millions to see. And it's clear when a big school is getting throttled by a player on a mid-major team. Nothing would stop the big schools from poaching the little schools' best players if the transfer rules were not in place. The already-wide gap between the P5 schools and the mid-majors would blow up into a full-fledged difference in classification if it became a free-for-all like you're insinuating.

Its hard to see an entity you represent get paid tons and tons of money for your efforts (believe me, I've seen it at my work when I land $6/7-figure contracts for my company and only see a very small fraction of it in a spot-bonus), but that's how the world works. Here's another straw man: I get paid a salary to do that kind of work for my company. Student athletes get their education paid for.

UNTFan23 · January 30, 2014

Not all contracts are legal and that is why when the NCAA has gone before the Supreme Court they have lost EVERYTIME. Which is why you have the longhorn network and big ten network and the soon to come sec network and a cusa package with your local cable provider.

Here you are talking about the old TV contracts where the NCAA used to control TV rights. That was changed largely due to Antitrust laws.

Sorry but this does not help boost your argument for allowing free agency to destroy college sports.

MeanGreenTexan · January 30, 2014

Not all contracts are legal and that is why when the NCAA has gone before the Supreme Court they have lost EVERYTIME. Which is why you have the longhorn network and big ten network and the soon to come sec network and a cusa package with your local cable provider. As for a solution in the Scholarship system:

1. All scholarships are 5 years with 4 years of eligibility similar to today but no year to year renewal.

2. If a school wants to end an athletes scholarship for non academic or legal reasons then that athlete can move to any other school and be eligible immediately at the beginning or the next semester.

3. If a student remains eligible to play for their redshirt, redshirt freshman and redshirt sophomore years and are not a letter winner they are eligible for a transfer to any college outside of the conference and be eligible immediately at the beginning or the next semester .(the whole competitive balance thing.

4. If a college coach is fired for non academic or legal reasons, athletes on the team will be eligible to transfer out of conference with approval of the school, eligible immediately at the beginning or the next semester or sitting out one year of eligibility . ( this keeps kids with a path out, if they are not wanted and the school has some control if a kid leaves during the time of a coaching change).

5. An athletes name and image can be used by the NCAA or school during the time the athlete is using the scholarship. After which any likeness or name usage on apparel, individual athlete film or video games must be cleared by the athlete.(compensation after NCAA eligibility is negotiated.) I say exempt game film and rebroadcasts because that is featuring the team as a whole not just the individual athlete.

I have a few more ideas but this is a start.

These are good places to start, but I still think there would need to be steep caveats built around transferring, or P5 schools will find reasons to skirt the rules.

#1 isn't really necessary is it? We've seen guys come through UNT and have 5 yrs of eligibility and barely if ever letter. I think it's an ethics thing, one that would be exploited heavily against a coach during recruiting if he exercises cutting someone loose prematurely.

#2 kinda goes hand-in-hand with #1. Is there a specific instance of this happening?

#3 Now we're getting somewhere. This would be good for the game, I think. But again, tighten up the rules on it, or they will get skirted.

#4 No way. They make sure you know, up front, that you're committing to a University, not a coach. Gotta keep the 1-yr transfer rule in effect here.

#5 is fine with me.

DCB · January 30, 2014

#1 isn't really necessary is it? We've seen guys come through UNT and have 5 yrs of eligibility and barely if ever letter. I think it's an ethics thing, one that would be exploited heavily against a coach during recruiting if he exercises cutting someone loose prematurely. ( I want my coaches to have ethics when recruiting don't you want them to have it when talking to you about your kids.)

#2 kinda goes hand-in-hand with #1. Is there a specific instance of this happening? ( There are plenty of athletes whose scholarship are not renewed each year I am reminded of a guy from South Carolina

COLLEGE ATHLETES' RIGHTS: Some athletes lose their single ...)

#3 Now we're getting somewhere. This would be good for the game, I think. But again, tighten up the rules on it, or they will get skirted.

#4 No way. They make sure you know, up front, that you're committing to a University, not a coach. Gotta keep the 1-yr transfer rule in effect here.( I left in the year transfer rule if the kid wants to leave without the schools permission, After seeing two coaching changes up close there are always a few kids that new coaches when they come in want to get rid of , whether it be due to scheme or not buying in, why punish the kid because the new staff doesn't want him.

#5 is fine with me.

Edited January 30, 2014 by DCB

DCB · January 30, 2014

Here you are talking about the old TV contracts where the NCAA used to control TV rights. That was changed largely due to Antitrust laws.

Sorry but this does not help boost your argument for allowing free agency to destroy college sports.

Being that the NCAA acts as a Cartel, anti trust laws apply in fixing wages to 0 and not allowing mobility trade offs in. Its the same reason when ever you see the NFL, NHL, NBA, or MLB go on strike, then threaten disband the unions and make motions for a federal hearing things usually get settled quickly.

DCB · January 30, 2014

I've filled my requirement of post for the decade take care everybody.

Edited January 30, 2014 by DCB

UNTFan23 · January 30, 2014

Being that the NCAA acts as a Cartel, anti trust laws apply in fixing wages to 0 and not allowing mobility trade offs in. Its the same reason when ever you see the NFL, NHL, NBA, or MLB go on strike, then threaten disband the unions and make motions for a federal hearing things usually get settled quickly.

Do you understand why college athletes are under strict rules for working jobs outside of their scholarships? It's because people have given fluff jobs to athletes where the athlete doesn't work yet collects a pay check. It happens to this day even though it is barred by the NCAA. I think OU get its wrist slapped several years ago for such an incident.

Is if fair to all athletes -- No; but it is there to prevent people from cheating.