Congressional bill introduced would allow college athletes to form unions, become employees

GoGophersUMN

Active member
Joined
Dec 16, 2016
Messages
982
Reaction score
191
Points
43
Even if this passed I doubt any conferences would unionize. The majority of student athletes play sports other than football, hockey, and basketball and are already getting a good deal as it is. The things football, hockey, and basketball players want would mean the end of most of the other sports so the majority of student athletes would likely be voting to kill their sport by unionizing.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
17,093
Reaction score
2,114
Points
113
The trick with any player unionization would be for revenue sports athletes to stand down on a conference or national basis if their non-rev comrade‘s programs get sent to the firing line. Certain players/programs can afford to be braver than others. Would be interesting to see the dynamics play out.
 

MplsGopher_fan

Active member
Joined
May 17, 2021
Messages
154
Reaction score
50
Points
28
Football and basketball are going to reward the superstars at the expense of everybody else.

Something is totally messed up.
Yeah, it's ironic that it's the opposite of what a lot of people want right now, which is more of having the super stars (billionaires) take the burden of the expense. Sorry, don't want this to go political, so I didn't mention names or parties, just a general thought. Please respect that and don't mention names and derail this.
 

MplsGopher_fan

Active member
Joined
May 17, 2021
Messages
154
Reaction score
50
Points
28
Tightening the rules to who gets to be admitted and punishing schools that do not achieve graduation rates would be a first step.
The bolded gave me a great idea for how to solve the unbalance between Alabama, Clemson, tOSU, and everyone else. Make the scholarship stick with the player for at least 4 years. So if you have an early entry into the draft, like a true junior, then you don't get to fill that scholarship - it has to sit empty. So if you're 'bama and lose 5 underclassmen to the draft, next year you only have 80 scholarship athletes.
 

MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
10,091
Reaction score
3,134
Points
113
The bolded gave me a great idea for how to solve the unbalance between Alabama, Clemson, tOSU, and everyone else. Make the scholarship stick with the player for at least 4 years. So if you have an early entry into the draft, like a true junior, then you don't get to fill that scholarship - it has to sit empty. So if you're 'bama and lose 5 underclassmen to the draft, next year you only have 80 scholarship athletes.
Honestly can't tell if you are serious or going for humor with this one but if serious this is a horrible idea. School shouldn't be punished for recruiting a player that ends up being good enough to go pro early.
 


MplsGopher_fan

Active member
Joined
May 17, 2021
Messages
154
Reaction score
50
Points
28
There has been and will be numerous legislative initiatives announced this year, all subject to and pending the Supreme Court antitrust decision coming down in late June. Senator Cory Booker’s revenue sharing legislation is interesting. Under his plan Minnesota would be required to share certain percentage of revenue - approximately 40M in FY 2019 - with revenue sport athletes. This may, of course, have some impact on the athletic department‘s ability to fund non-revenue programs. Sure, there is fat on the budget but I’m fairly certain a 40M hit would torpedo certain interested parties. Would the legislature approve student fees or general fund revenue to cover the cost?


Seriously???? The students are already paying for their own tuition, room and board, etc. and now you want them to chip in the fund the athletes? That would be terrible.
 

MplsGopher_fan

Active member
Joined
May 17, 2021
Messages
154
Reaction score
50
Points
28
Honestly can't tell if you are serious or going for humor with this one but if serious this is a horrible idea. School shouldn't be punished for recruiting a player that ends up being good enough to go pro early.
Why not? It would make 'bama et al to have to think twice before taking on all that talent. Or they'd have empty scholarships and so some of those players would trickle down to the rest of us.

If it happened in basketball, Kentucky could make a run one year with one and dones, but then their team would be full of walk-ons for the next 3 years and so the talent would even out more, or at least the championships would get dispersed.

Another way to phrase it would be to not say that schools like 'bama are being punished, but schools like Minnesota are being rewarded for actually playing athletes that are getting an education.
 

MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
10,091
Reaction score
3,134
Points
113
Why not? It would make 'bama et al to have to think twice before taking on all that talent. Or they'd have empty scholarships and so some of those players would trickle down to the rest of us.

If it happened in basketball, Kentucky could make a run one year with one and dones, but then their team would be full of walk-ons for the next 3 years and so the talent would even out more, or at least the championships would get dispersed.

Another way to phrase it would be to not say that schools like 'bama are being punished, but schools like Minnesota are being rewarded for actually playing athletes that are getting an education.
There is of course the obvious flaw in that underclassmen declaring for the draft come from all over the place. Yes schools like Alabama and Ohio State might have more of them but they don't have all of them.

Not going to waste a lot of time poking holes in something that will never happen because it makes no sense at all and would not come close to accomplishing what you think it would.
 

MplsGopher_fan

Active member
Joined
May 17, 2021
Messages
154
Reaction score
50
Points
28
There is of course the obvious flaw in that underclassmen declaring for the draft come from all over the place. Yes schools like Alabama and Ohio State might have more of them but they don't have all of them.

Not going to waste a lot of time poking holes in something that will never happen because it makes no sense at all and would not come close to accomplishing what you think it would.
So once every few years we'd lose a player early and have to burn the final year of their scholarship, it wouldn't harm us nearly as bad as it would 'bama.

With the "makes no sense at all" comment, I'm just curious - if my username was anything besides what it is, would you take my post more seriously? I've already got bob boblaw or whatever telling me that all my posts are incoherent nonsense, which obviously isn't true, so he's just prejudging based on username. Are you doing the same?
 



MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
10,091
Reaction score
3,134
Points
113
So once every few years we'd lose a player early and have to burn the final year of their scholarship, it wouldn't harm us nearly as bad as it would 'bama.

With the "makes no sense at all" comment, I'm just curious - if my username was anything besides what it is, would you take my post more seriously? I've already got bob boblaw or whatever telling me that all my posts are incoherent nonsense, which obviously isn't true, so he's just prejudging based on username. Are you doing the same?
You could maybe pull something like what you are talking about off in basketball to try and combat the 1 and done issue where teams are bringing in "student" athletes that could care less about the student part of the equation as they know they are going to be gone in a couple of months and off to the NBA.

But it wouldn't work in football. In football you have to stay in college for a minimum of 3 seasons so you are talking about punishing a team for a player electing to go pro 3-4 years after they were recruited because they are talented enough to go out and make millions. Not to mention the nightmare it would be to track and the messed up scholarship numbers it would lead to. According to the link there would have been 60+ teams that would be hit with scholarship loses based on the 2021 draft and if you are tying the losses to the number of years the player had left you would have some teams looking at multiple years of scholarship loss. It would be unbelievably messy to try and do something like what you are talking about.

 

MplsGopher_fan

Active member
Joined
May 17, 2021
Messages
154
Reaction score
50
Points
28
So at least it makes "some" sense, as it would help basketball. I disagree on it being "unbelievably messy" though - you pretty much explained it in one paragraph, didn't you?

I wouldn't tie the losses to the number of years left. That would be an issue if a player redshirted, then suffered a season-ending injury in his second year in the program, then played like a stud in his 3rd year and left for the NFL. In that case, if it was tied to the years left, it would mean that scholarship is empty for 3 more years, since the player had that much eligibility left. I would tie it to how many years he was enrolled in the school and subtract that from 4. So anyone leaving early would be doing it after being in the college for 3 years and so the scholly is only void for 1 year.

What is so hard about telling 'bama that after the NFL draft, they are losing x number of schollies for one year? And why are you so opposed to an idea that's meant to level the playing field?
 

MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
10,091
Reaction score
3,134
Points
113
So at least it makes "some" sense, as it would help basketball. I disagree on it being "unbelievably messy" though - you pretty much explained it in one paragraph, didn't you?

I wouldn't tie the losses to the number of years left. That would be an issue if a player redshirted, then suffered a season-ending injury in his second year in the program, then played like a stud in his 3rd year and left for the NFL. In that case, if it was tied to the years left, it would mean that scholarship is empty for 3 more years, since the player had that much eligibility left. I would tie it to how many years he was enrolled in the school and subtract that from 4. So anyone leaving early would be doing it after being in the college for 3 years and so the scholly is only void for 1 year.

What is so hard about telling 'bama that after the NFL draft, they are losing x number of schollies for one year? And why are you so opposed to an idea that's meant to level the playing field?
I'm opposed to the idea because it wouldn't work. You wouldn't just be taking scholarships from Alabama you would also be taking them from 60+ other teams as well, every year.

And as I said before I would be completely against the idea of punishing a program for recruiting/developing players good enough to go earn an NFL paycheck before their college eligibility expires.
 

Full Speed Ahead

Active member
Joined
Jan 9, 2021
Messages
178
Reaction score
172
Points
43
MplsGopher is back and making some strange posts. IMO there's no way you should penalize a school that successfully gets one of their students into professional sports. Success should be rewarded, not punished.
 
Last edited:



fmlizard

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 19, 2012
Messages
2,695
Reaction score
1,155
Points
113
Do we have any benevolent Dogecoin investors in our alumni? Buying a good team could be the U’s path to football glory.
 

bfriedrichs10

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 23, 2019
Messages
743
Reaction score
594
Points
93
So at least it makes "some" sense, as it would help basketball. I disagree on it being "unbelievably messy" though - you pretty much explained it in one paragraph, didn't you?

I wouldn't tie the losses to the number of years left. That would be an issue if a player redshirted, then suffered a season-ending injury in his second year in the program, then played like a stud in his 3rd year and left for the NFL. In that case, if it was tied to the years left, it would mean that scholarship is empty for 3 more years, since the player had that much eligibility left. I would tie it to how many years he was enrolled in the school and subtract that from 4. So anyone leaving early would be doing it after being in the college for 3 years and so the scholly is only void for 1 year.

What is so hard about telling 'bama that after the NFL draft, they are losing x number of schollies for one year? And why are you so opposed to an idea that's meant to level the playing field?
How many recruits do you think Alabama signs after the draft? I haven't looked but I'm guessing their class is pretty much set in stone by signing day. So then when they get 8 players drafted they have to "cut" 8 schollies? Or, do they have to say, "Well, I think we'll have 7 guys go pro, so I better not sign those 7 guys I want. And then if my guys don't get drafted and I've got schollies to fill I'll poach from other teams and then it will be their problem."
 

MplsGopher_fan

Active member
Joined
May 17, 2021
Messages
154
Reaction score
50
Points
28
How many recruits do you think Alabama signs after the draft? I haven't looked but I'm guessing their class is pretty much set in stone by signing day. So then when they get 8 players drafted they have to "cut" 8 schollies? Or, do they have to say, "Well, I think we'll have 7 guys go pro, so I better not sign those 7 guys I want. And then if my guys don't get drafted and I've got schollies to fill I'll poach from other teams and then it will be their problem."
Or you could just move signing day to the day after you have to declare for the draft. Probably a much cleaner way than what you suggested. But thanks for trying your hardest to find a problem with my idea.
 


bfriedrichs10

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 23, 2019
Messages
743
Reaction score
594
Points
93
Or you could just move signing day to the day after you have to declare for the draft. Probably a much cleaner way than what you suggested. But thanks for trying your hardest to find a problem with my idea.
Thanks for the attempt at flattery but it was nowhere near my hardest. I came up with it as I was reading your post. Unfortunately, I don't care enough about the idea to try my hardest to find problems with it.
 




Top Bottom