Unions in college football

[NoNC4Tubs]

That was the next logical step. I don't like it, but it made sense from their prospective.
What I can't wait for is Dartmouth to give them their W2 Forms. I wonder if any of those kids will list their NIL money on their tax forms.

They better, as the NIL will be reporting it...if they are above board to begin with.

 

[lowend]

The crazy thing is that Dartmouth is in the NON-SCHOLARSHIP Ivy League. Some of these athletes may find themselves playing intramural football if they keep biting the hand that feeds them.

 

[teamplayer]

One perspective would be that it has always been far more romantic notion (some might say "lie") than reality...and now we're just talking truth. There's a lot about it that is ugly, but it was always ugly. From this perspective the failure is that, time and time again, the PTB abrogated the responsibility to actually address issues and instead focused on covering them up with a romantic fantasy.

The reckoning that we as fans may be facing is whether we really love the game, or mostly just the romantic fantasy.

The fact that kids were able to trade an athletic ability to get an education is not fantasy. That doesn't mean that all of them were great students, but many were. Even some who were not great students still applied themselves enough to get degrees in something besides underwater basket weaving. The fact that kids were helped by coaches, teachers, and teammates to grow from kids into early adulthood is not fantasy. The fact that kids learned the value of hard work is not fantasy. The fact that kids learned how to work with others to accomplish things greater than themselves is not fantasy. The fact that most of these kids grew to care about their universities and share those feelings with alums and fans is not fantasy. Those are many of the things that made college football great. I love that game of college football. Those things that are life lessons that help build communities are the things that made college football great. Whether or not some kid gets a hundred dollar handshake back in the day or is currently getting a million dollars just demonstrates the amount of change that has happened very quickly, but that isn't the only problem.

However, you are definitely correct that some of us older guys may just be trying to hold on to those things we loved dearly in our past. Frankly, I already don't see how many people enjoy watching the game as much. My thoughts deal more with instant replay and targeting and other rules changes that tie the hands of the defense than it does with NIL and transfer rules. My connection with the players, though, is definitely affected by NIL and transfer portal situations. Anyway, thanks for sharing thoughts and keeping the discussion going.

 

[gtgilbert]

The crazy thing is that Dartmouth is in the NON-SCHOLARSHIP Ivy League. Some of these athletes may find themselves playing intramural football if they keep biting the hand that feeds them.

in the end, it's going to end up costing many of the players a good deal of $$ to continue to play in college. Why? The ruling established the Dartmouth players were employees because the value of the equipment they were provided was compensation - hence the employee/employer relationship. Well, if that is the case, then that value must be reported as income, and is taxable. If the players are employees, then the cost of attendance scholarships they get (not in the Ivies, but everyone else) is also likely reportable as income and taxable...

 

[bamaga]

One perspective would be that it has always been far more romantic notion (some might say "lie") than reality...and now we're just talking truth. There's a lot about it that is ugly, but it was always ugly. From this perspective the failure is that, time and time again, the PTB abrogated the responsibility to actually address issues and instead focused on covering them up with a romantic fantasy.

The reckoning that we as fans may be facing is whether we really love the game, or mostly just the romantic fantasy.

This is a load of crap. If you don't know the difference in loyalty of yesteryear vs today than you are either very young or like to rationalize away problems as the way they have always been. Oh sure you can use a player or coach from days gone by as an example vs nearly everything about college football today. But thats cherry picking, vs the whole. If you don't think there was loyalty or love for the University in the past, look up guys like Tommy Lewis, or Barry Krause or even Paul Bryant. Heck, just look at Bryce Young and Will Anderson playing in the bowl game.

 

[bamaga]

What kind of statement is that? LOYALTY "DID" EXIST!

Don't pretend it never did!

I think you misread that. He is on your side with his comment. His inference is that loyalty in society in general doesn’t exist today.

 

[twofbyc]

I suppose a legitimate question is, We are all fans, but of what? And why ?Certainly not college football as we`ve all known it. The athletic teams in general, and the football team in particular, have traditionally had obvious ties to the University. The players were students. They had to maintain grades to maintain eligibility. No longer, it appears. IMHO the connection between the team and the University is fading rapidly. Are we just fans now out of habit? Is it nostalgia? What?

Some of us are no longer “fans”. I’ve purchased my last Bama gear (shirt, sweatshirt, ball cap).
And the reasons you mention are at the heart of the decision, but the money is the clincher. No need to rehash my feelings about what money has done to the game - suffice it to say they won’t get any more of mine (not that they’ll notice, with the millions being thrown around - unless hundreds and hundreds of thousands do the same).
People seldom realize the power they have individually until they exercise it collectively.

 

[bamaga]

As with all things in sports when extreme greed is applied( talking about the system, not the players) , the real losers are the fans . The fans make it all happen with tickets, viewership and merchandise but have no say in any of it except by voting with their wallet.

 

[CajunCrimson]

What kind of statement is that? LOYALTY "DID" EXIST!

Don't pretend it never did!

I know it did. But it’s gone now is my point. It no longer exists in society. So no surprise it left amateur sports.

 

[CajunCrimson]

I have ZERO agreement with his snarky comment.

Let the banning begin...

Calm down dude. You misinterpreted my message.

 

[Ole Man Dan]

Universities stopped being about strictly education long ago. Its all about how much they can get away with raising tuition rates now.....all that guaranteed loan money.

I do wonder how this unionization will bleed into the smaller sports. What about Title 9? Women's athletics. The real money makers are and have always been football and the NCAA tournament in March.....the other sports are at a loss already.

So when the soccer, tennis and lacrosse teams decide to unionize.....what's the university to do at that point?

I fear many Universities will do away with the smaller sports, making them Intramural Sports.

 

[TDBama78]

College sports needs to some how disconnect from all this craziness and reorganize. The plan is to destroy traditional college sports and it's working.

 

[22Musso22]

Calm down dude. You misinterpreted my message.

Sorry Cajun. I misinterpreted what you said. See my comments in the new Eli thread about cognitive decline...LOL!

 

[davefrat]

If unions are involved, maybe the mafia will also get involved.

I'd trust Don Corleone or Tony Soprano to run things better than the NCAA.

 

[teamplayer]

If unions are involved, maybe the mafia will also get involved.

I'd trust Don Corleone or Tony Soprano to run things better than the NCAA.

I would guess there wouldn't be any push back from member institutions, but I also wouldn't think the games would be on the level.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

This is a load of crap. If you don't know the difference in loyalty of yesteryear vs today than you are either very young or like to rationalize away problems as the way they have always been.

Oh please. That so-called "loyalty" is better termed, "Didn't have any other options."

Oh sure you can use a player or coach from days gone by as an example vs nearly everything about college football today. But thats cherry picking, vs the whole.

Unless someone is going to do the legwork for every single player then versus now, it's cherry picking anyway.

If you don't think there was loyalty or love for the University in the past,

You mean a past where:
- there was no (or little) television
- the NFL ranked about where mixed martial arts does today in national interest
- every NFL team was in the Rust Belt/Midwest
- there were 25-man nfl rosters
- college football was regional (and totally white if you were in the South)
- but football players on college programs were the equivalent of today's military vets in some eyes
?

I'm not questioning anyone's loyalty (more on that in a moment) but anyone who thinks this was the product of something other than the circumstances of the time is deceiving themselves. Neither you nor I were ANY BETTER at 14 than the modern clowns, we just didn't have social media and gadgets to show our foolishness.

look up guys like Tommy Lewis,

I'll never understand why anyone associated with Alabama thinks a guy going on national TV and saying - when he CAME OFF THE BENCH AND ILLEGALLY TACKLED AN OPPONENT - that he was "so full of Alabama" is a GOOD thing.

Is THAT what we're about? Is that taught somewhere as a good thing?

or Barry Krause or even Paul Bryant.

Ok, you mean the Paul Bryant who BY HIS OWN ADMISSION:
- had 20 or so meetings with Joe Robbie and did everything except sign the contract to coach Miami
- had a meeting with Joe Namath about the talent already on the Dolphins and whom to draft
- was given permission by the UA trustees to be let out of his contract but with the condition he choose the replacement and couldn't get one

THAT Paul Bryant???

Because that's a pretty interesting definition of LOYALTY in my book. I have no problem with any man choosing to stay or leave at Alabama, but let's not pretend we can revise history and turn Bryant the legend into Bryant the "would never consider leaving Alabama" legend because he wasn't.

Heck, just look at Bryce Young and Will Anderson playing in the bowl game.

And if both had suffered life-altering "you can't play in the NFL" injuries, it would be a story of "missed opportunity" unless they had insurance policies to cover that one game (which Willis McGahee did).


=======================

Let's face it, people are people whether it's 1914 or 1964 or 2014 or today. They weren't REALLY any better or any worse, the only real differences are which so-called "values" were considered to be more prominent.

It always amuses me how often "loyalty" gets praised even when it's at the consequence of "dishonesty."

 

[RollTide_HTTR]

If the players are employees, then the cost of attendance scholarships they get (not in the Ivies, but everyone else) is also likely reportable as income and taxable...

I've seen a lot of people say this but I'm not sure it's true. I don't know how it would all work out but it would definitely be an interesting case. I'm not a tax expert though

 

[Alogan1983]

You're not going to fire players. Unless you just don't want a team. And that's bad for business.

Example: "Well fire them, or let them walk!!"
"Oh, we lost to LSU and Auburn again"
"Get them back on the team, I'm tired of losing to Auburn."

Very simplistic way of how it would actually go down. College football means too much to this state to ever let the program go down the drain when there's money out there that can fix it.

 

[Tideflyer]

God, what madness.

 

[bamaga]

Oh please. That so-called "loyalty" is better termed, "Didn't have any other options."




Unless someone is going to do the legwork for every single player then versus now, it's cherry picking anyway.



You mean a past where:
- there was no (or little) television
- the NFL ranked about where mixed martial arts does today in national interest
- every NFL team was in the Rust Belt/Midwest
- there were 25-man nfl rosters
- college football was regional (and totally white if you were in the South)
- but football players on college programs were the equivalent of today's military vets in some eyes
?

I'm not questioning anyone's loyalty (more on that in a moment) but anyone who thinks this was the product of something other than the circumstances of the time is deceiving themselves. Neither you nor I were ANY BETTER at 14 than the modern clowns, we just didn't have social media and gadgets to show our foolishness.



I'll never understand why anyone associated with Alabama thinks a guy going on national TV and saying - when he CAME OFF THE BENCH AND ILLEGALLY TACKLED AN OPPONENT - that he was "so full of Alabama" is a GOOD thing.

Is THAT what we're about? Is that taught somewhere as a good thing?



Ok, you mean the Paul Bryant who BY HIS OWN ADMISSION:
- had 20 or so meetings with Joe Robbie and did everything except sign the contract to coach Miami
- had a meeting with Joe Namath about the talent already on the Dolphins and whom to draft
- was given permission by the UA trustees to be let out of his contract but with the condition he choose the replacement and couldn't get one

THAT Paul Bryant???

Because that's a pretty interesting definition of LOYALTY in my book. I have no problem with any man choosing to stay or leave at Alabama, but let's not pretend we can revise history and turn Bryant the legend into Bryant the "would never consider leaving Alabama" legend because he wasn't.



And if both had suffered life-altering "you can't play in the NFL" injuries, it would be a story of "missed opportunity" unless they had insurance policies to cover that one game (which Willis McGahee did).


=======================

Let's face it, people are people whether it's 1914 or 1964 or 2014 or today. They weren't REALLY any better or any worse, the only real differences are which so-called "values" were considered to be more prominent.

It always amuses me how often "loyalty" gets praised even when it's at the consequence of "dishonesty."

Ah yes, only a matter of time before Selma showed up breaking down my post writing a thesis on every sentence . Or in other words, more crap. If you in all your self wisdom don’t understand the mindset of the generations previous vs today, I can’t help you bub. (No personal attacks please)