NLRB Rules College Athletes are EMPLOYEES

[S.C. OrangeMan]

I do believe that is what will happen. The money that is typically used to fund other sports is going to need to be used to pay the football players.

Either that or ticket prices are going to increase drastically or maybe there will be corporate sponsorships for the stadiums. Maybe we will have Food City Stadium instead of Neyland.

The only sports that are able to stand on their own are Football and Men's Basketball.

Commercial sponsors may well be the answer.

 

[MinisterofDef#92]

So non revenue sports will need to stand on their own, just like any other business, or at least with less subsidy from football and MBB?

To one degree or another... Just like how it works in the real world

 

[WoodsmanVol]

I, and a whole lot of folks I know, sure have. There are many fields where employment contracts limit your options to work elsewhere for a period of time.

Sadly, that's true, Hollywood was and still is famous for locking in actors/actresses that way. And if you dared to defy them, they'd blacklist you, so other studios wouldn't hire you. IIRC, that happened to Laurel and Hardy, a boat load of actresses who wouldn't put out, undress for a scene, attend, and uh, entertain at certain parties to attract some tycoon to fund a project. Just for example. Football players? If you didn't toe a coach's or school's line, you were gone, and forbidden to compete at another school. That defense guy who had a wife and young daughter (Dooley era?), took money, got caught, and expelled. Never played elsewhere. Though I think he did later try out for the pros, can't recall what happened with that. Point is, before NIL and salary, colleges had players over a barrel, and there wasn't a forking thing they could do about it. Johnny Football was an exception to the rule. I still don't know how he got away with what he did. Might be his pappy's influence, I don't really know.

 

[Mccage]

Once they become employees of the school wonder what the salary will be for a scout team player?

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

To one degree or another... Just like how it works in the real world

I won't cry about it...

The non revenue sports have options.
Corporate sponsors. Attract more fans...however unlikely. Become a club sport.

Or...just drop the sports that are financial drains.

 

[volfan102455]

Looking at the 2023 report from the AD, across all sports it appears there was around an 11M available. There were 753 athletes across all sports - that is not a lot of dollars to pay 753 folks. Do you just pay them for "in season" activities or year-round? Do you make them punch a clock and pay by hours?

Very few schools actually make money - UT is one that does but it is not a lot.

While it may seem like the universities are drowning in money, they really aren't. It takes a lot of $$'s to run an AD department.

Ultimately everyone loses - us fans will adjust and either get used to a smaller number of sports or just walk away.

But the biggest loss is for those athletes that will no longer have an avenue to use their talents to help better themselves with a college education. What is happening will advance the chosen (FOOTBALL) while kicking the non-chosen to the curb.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

Looking at the 2023 report from the AD, across all sports it appears there was around an 11M available. There were 753 athletes across all sports - that is not a lot of dollars to pay 753 folks. Do you just pay them for "in season" activities or year-round? Do you make them punch a clock and pay by hours?

Very few schools actually make money - UT is one that does but it is not a lot.

While it may seem like the universities are drowning in money, they really aren't. It takes a lot of $$'s to run an AD department.

Ultimately everyone loses - us fans will adjust and either get used to a smaller number of sports or just walk away.

But the biggest loss is for those athletes that will no longer have an avenue to use their talents to help better themselves with a college education. What is happening will advance the chosen (FOOTBALL) while kicking the non-chosen to the curb.

The chosen???? Have you noticed the size difference between Neyland Stadium and the other UT sports venues? Have you noticed the $$$ difference between the SEC football contract and what other sports make?

As for ADs not drowning in money, the reason is that football - and in some cases, MBB and WBB - subsidizes Olympic sports that can't stay afloat without constant infusion of football $$$.

 

[EZE]

I think the NLRB over-reached. Specifically in this finding: "...that the players perform that work in exchange for compensation...."

Calling it "work" is disingenuous. It is play, not work.

The proof? "98% of college athletes go pro in something other than sports." What does that mean? It means the vast majority of college athletes don't see it as a job, they see it as play, as fun, as a pastime. Maybe a high-demand one, but still a voluntary activity that they do for some reason other than pay.

And if the 98% see it as fun, as sport and not a job, how many of the other 2% also see it as fun? Not a job?

I would guess most. Far more than half. The norm, in other words. They'd do it even if there were no chance to go pro.

But we can't know for sure.

What we do know is that it is not accurately called "work."

And so the NLRB over-reached with this description. And without this description, their finding does not wash.

This should be challenged in court. This is one the NCAA, or Dartmouth, or whoever, could win.

Go Vols!

I see your points, but it is not “play” when the schools and coaches are raking in millions upon millions of dollars.

There are a lot of complicated issues in there to sort out, and I don’t care to even begin conjuring up the brain power to think about them seriously (and I’m a retired lawyer).

One interesting observation someone posted above. Dartmouth players (being in the Ivy League) don’t get athletic scholarships. In other words, they get no tangible compensation (at least not yet). So, it is really interesting that the NLRB made this finding.

Scholarship athletes have an even better argument.

 

[EZE]

But the biggest loss is for those athletes that will no longer have an avenue to use their talents to help better themselves with a college education. What is happening will advance the chosen (FOOTBALL) while kicking the non-chosen to the curb.

Great point. Athletes need to be very careful or they might very well demand their way out of opportunities.

 

[GulfCoasterVol]

Players making over a certain threshold through any combination of whatever source (Revenue sharing + NIL + whatever else) should have to pay for their own tuition, food, medical insurance, room and board.... etc.
Athletes under whatever the threshold is would still be eligible for academic/or athletic scholarship in the traditional sense. Let it be voluntary to pursue a degree just like it is for everyone else now.. if your parents make too much money (use the same financial aid/scholarship eligibility rules everyone else has to go by).... gotta pay for it all.... unless you can obtain an academic scholarship in and "in demand" field or be under the threshold for an athletic scholarship.

In fact ...lets just go ahead and separate all the football programs from the educational institutions in terms of players having to be enrolled in the school. Remove the rules that they have to be enrolled and remove academic standards and just let the football program be like a side entity or side business of the school... might as well now.

 

[volfan102455]

The chosen???? Have you noticed the size difference between Neyland Stadium and the other UT sports venues? Have you noticed the $$$ difference between the SEC football contract and what other sports make?

As for ADs not drowning in money, the reason is that football - and in some cases, MBB and WBB - subsidizes Olympic sports that can't stay afloat without constant infusion of football $$$.

They are "chosen" because that is where the money is due to the size of the stadiums, though to be honest it may be more the media payouts than anything.

The concept of the student athlete was originally the idea of using one's athletic talent to secure an education and networking opportunities that would in the end provide an opportunity to someone who might not be able to secure that opportunity in other ways. That is why you have the commercials with every game about how they are "going pro" in something else.

That is also why you see Tennessee schedule games with other in state schools. That money provides those AD's with money that wouldn't be there. It in turn lets those schools offer opportunities to students.

What has gotten lost in this "chase for the money - it is all about me" attitude is the fact that the system has been very good at providing opportunities to many who would not have had that without sports.

In the end the rich sports and those that play those will prosper while the poor sports will be pushed away and those that play those will lose the opportunities they have. There is a place for capitalism and then there is a place where opportunities should continue to exist - higher education opportunities are not something we should cast aside so casually.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

Players making over a certain threshold through any combination of whatever source (Revenue sharing + NIL + whatever else) should have to pay for their own tuition, food, medical insurance, room and board.... etc.
Athletes under whatever the threshold is would still be eligible for academic/or athletic scholarship in the traditional sense. Let it be voluntary to pursue a degree just like it is for everyone else now.. if your parents make too much money (use the same financial aid/scholarship eligibility rules everyone else has to go by).... gotta pay for it all.... unless you can obtain an academic scholarship in and "in demand" field or be under the threshold for an athletic scholarship.

In fact ...lets just go ahead and separate all the football programs from the educational institutions in terms of players having to be enrolled in the school. Remove the rules that they have to be enrolled and remove academic standards and just let the football program be like a side entity or side business of the school... might as well now.

No one connected to a FBS football program is going to be that stupid. Your suggestion is like recommending a hanging as treatment for a slight cough.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

They are "chosen" because that is where the money is due to the size of the stadiums, though to be honest it may be more the media payouts than anything.

The concept of the student athlete was originally the idea of using one's athletic talent to secure an education and networking opportunities that would in the end provide an opportunity to someone who might not be able to secure that opportunity in other ways. That is why you have the commercials with every game about how they are "going pro" in something else.

That is also why you see Tennessee schedule games with other in state schools. That money provides those AD's with money that wouldn't be there. It in turn lets those schools offer opportunities to students.

What has gotten lost in this "chase for the money - it is all about me" attitude is the fact that the system has been very good at providing opportunities to many who would not have had that without sports.

In the end the rich sports and those that play those will prosper while the poor sports will be pushed away and those that play those will lose the opportunities they have. There is a place for capitalism and then there is a place where opportunities should continue to exist - higher education opportunities are not something we should cast aside so casually.

That isn't "chosen". It's earned.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

They are "chosen" because that is where the money is due to the size of the stadiums, though to be honest it may be more the media payouts than anything.

The concept of the student athlete was originally the idea of using one's athletic talent to secure an education and networking opportunities that would in the end provide an opportunity to someone who might not be able to secure that opportunity in other ways. That is why you have the commercials with every game about how they are "going pro" in something else.

That is also why you see Tennessee schedule games with other in state schools. That money provides those AD's with money that wouldn't be there. It in turn lets those schools offer opportunities to students.

What has gotten lost in this "chase for the money - it is all about me" attitude is the fact that the system has been very good at providing opportunities to many who would not have had that without sports.

In the end the rich sports and those that play those will prosper while the poor sports will be pushed away and those that play those will lose the opportunities they have. There is a place for capitalism and then there is a place where opportunities should continue to exist - higher education opportunities are not something we should cast aside so casually.

The Supreme Court of the United States and longstanding federal law disagree.

 

[volfan102455]

The Supreme Court of the United States and longstanding federal law disagree.

Then what was title IX all about? And I ask that question because it will be women's sports that are cut first.

 

[volfan102455]

No one connected to a FBS football program is going to be that stupid. You suggestion us like recommending a hanging as treatment for a slight cough.

I wouldn't bank on that. Plus, there are players on the team that are not on scholarship - do they get paid? If yes, that will be factored into the equation just like it is for non-athletes who apply for aid.

 

[volfan102455]

There are other relevant details in there that wouldn't necessarily affect "normal" schools, in that Ivy League schools apparently don't offer traditional athletic scholarships....

This is a significant difference between what happens in most schools. They were not offered a scholarship to participate.

At some point to truly test out this ruling you would need a situation involving a player who accepted a scholarship with an agreement that said player would participate in a specified sport at that school. In that situation there was a 'contractual' agreement between the two. The school could then argue the costs of what was offered as part of the "payment" to the athlete which is truly is.

 

[volfan102455]

I see your points, but it is not “play” when the schools and coaches are raking in millions upon millions of dollars.

There are a lot of complicated issues in there to sort out, and I don’t care to even begin conjuring up the brain power to think about them seriously (and I’m a retired lawyer).

One interesting observation someone posted above. Dartmouth players (being in the Ivy League) don’t get athletic scholarships. In other words, they get no tangible compensation (at least not yet). So, it is really interesting that the NLRB made this finding.

Scholarship athletes have an even better argument.

I think scholarship athletes have a worse argument. They agreed to play in return for a scholarship along with their cost and expenses related to participating being paid for. This is similar to those that agree to a scholarship from the armed services and in return agree to serve in the military. If they break that agreement, they pay the scholarship back because they agreed to serve.

Dartmouth players got nothing which I assume implies there was no financial based contractual agreement associated with them playing a sport. As a simple-minded person, I can understand their argument given players at other schools get a free ride. And as a simple-minded person I equate the free ride, all expenses paid as a form of payment.

 

[EZE]

I think scholarship athletes have a worse argument. They agreed to play in return for a scholarship along with their cost and expenses related to participating being paid for. This is similar to those that agree to a scholarship from the armed services and in return agree to serve in the military. If they break that agreement, they pay the scholarship back because they agreed to serve.

Dartmouth players got nothing which I assume implies there was no financial based contractual agreement associated with them playing a sport. As a simple-minded person, I can understand their argument given players at other schools get a free ride. And as a simple-minded person I equate the free ride, all expenses paid as a form of payment.

The issue is whether they are employees or not.

 

[volfan102455]

The issue is whether they are employees or not.

Understand the issue - but you also have to factor in the agreement of a scholarship to participate. That was not a factor in the Dartmouth case for either side so it could not be used in any argument. That is similar to acceptance terms of employment (salary, reimbursement, etc.) which yes could be skewed to say they are employees per se.

But then would that entail that any student that obtains a scholarship is an employee whether they play sports or not? Some students get a full free ride based on their academic excellence.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

I think scholarship athletes have a worse argument. They agreed to play in return for a scholarship along with their cost and expenses related to participating being paid for. This is similar to those that agree to a scholarship from the armed services and in return agree to serve in the military. If they break that agreement, they pay the scholarship back because they agreed to serve.

Dartmouth players got nothing which I assume implies there was no financial based contractual agreement associated with them playing a sport. As a simple-minded person, I can understand their argument given players at other schools get a free ride. And as a simple-minded person I equate the free ride, all expenses paid as a form of payment.

Meaningless... soon as either side chose to end it. Scholarship athletes lose their scholarships all the time.

Any athlete that simply gives up his or her scholly has no further obligation.. Nothing is enforceable after that.

 

[volfan102455]

Meaningless... soon as either side de used to end it. Scholarship athletes lose their scholarships all the time.

Any athlete that he's es simply gives up his or her scholly. Nothing is enforceable after that.

Then any employment offered is useless as well. Employees lose their job all the time.

 

[volfan102455]

Being an employee has a very different set of rules. I doubt that some of these players wanting that really understand what that means. NIL without employment is the better option for them.

As an employee, the University can as the employer, put restrictions around what an employee can and can't do. Yes, said employee can leave but in the real world, you do that often you eventually have a hard time finding a new employer.

 

[GulfCoasterVol]

No one connected to a FBS football program is going to be that stupid. You suggestion us like recommending a hanging as treatment for a slight cough.

You us like trying to say what ?

 

[Pappy]

Does this ruling mean that now scholarships and allowances to athlete's are taxable?

I'm sure I missed something, but if they are employees, then why give them a scholarship or an allowance? Maybe a year-end bonus.