Saw this on my news feed....worth a read.

https://theintercept.com/2018/02/22/ncaa...id-prison/

That's crazy. Student athletes isn't slave labor whether they're paid or not.

Just because one case draws on precedent from another case does not mean the two cases are the same.

You may draw on precedent from a murder case in your shoplifting case. That does not mean the other side should start screaming that you should not do so because you are equating them with murderers.

Likewise, a free speech case may involve arguments based on the ACLU defending Nazis...doing so does not make you a Nazi or your opponent a Holocaust victim.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

(02-22-2018 04:35 PM)Curtisc83 Wrote:  Saw this on my news feed....worth a read.

https://theintercept.com/2018/02/22/ncaa...id-prison/

Let me get the logic straight here:
1) The NCAA is sued because it doesn't pay athletes
2) One of the 67 cases cited as precedents in the NCAA's 33 page was a principle filing outlined in Vanskike v. Peters
3) Vanskike v. Peters was decided based on the 13th amendment allowing prisoners to be used as unpaid labor.
4) Therefore, (according to the article) the NCAA is bigoted.

Do I have that right?

This article is the very definition of fake news.

I read the NCAA's filing. The principle cited from Vanskike v. Peters was an indirect citation. It quotes why a previous court dismissed a previous suit against the NCAA (Berger v. NCAA). So the NCAA is repeating a judge's ruling in favor of them.

Here is the direct quote from the filing:

"Accordingly, Berger turned to a well-established FLSA principle to resolve the issue: "“Because status as an ‘employee’ for purposes of the FLSA depends on the totality of circumstances rather than on any technical label, courts must examine the ‘economic reality’ of the working relationship … to decide whether Congress intended the FLSA to apply to that particular relationship.” Id. (quoting Vanskike v. Peters)"

Note: the "Id." means that they're citing the ruling in the Berger case.

(02-22-2018 04:48 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  That's crazy. Student athletes isn't slave labor whether they're paid or not.

The NCAA fights this because being forced to pay players will most likely kill off the college sports model.

There are very few schools that have self-supporting athletic departments.

Even amongst those, most of their sports are not self-supporting.

It is difficult imagining how college sports as a whole could survive being forced to treat athletes as employees.

So many people yelling (and virtue signalling) about paying college athletes have not a care in the world that an unintended consequence might be only 20 schools able to have college athletics. Thousands of athletes with no college program to offer them scholarships. No place to play.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

If the players win, I logically see schools dropping all scholarships for athletics except revenue sports, and the NCAA having to scale back the requirements to be D-I.

Basically everything but basketball and Football would turn into club sports, because schools would not recruit and probably not pay coaches as much, and certainly no assistants. It would dry up a number of employment opportunities.

But this may be where things are heading anyway.

(02-22-2018 05:47 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  If the players win, I logically see schools dropping all scholarships for athletics except revenue sports, and the NCAA having to scale back the requirements to be D-I.

Basically everything but basketball and Football would turn into club sports, because schools would not recruit and probably not pay coaches as much, and certainly no assistants. It would dry up a number of employment opportunities.

But this may be where things are heading anyway.

I don't agree with this, at all. If this lawsuit results in a win for players wanting to be played, virtually every school would shut down all intercollegiate athletic programs(and club and even intramural sports, too).

(02-22-2018 05:12 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(02-22-2018 04:48 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  That's crazy. Student athletes isn't slave labor whether they're paid or not.

The NCAA fights this because being forced to pay players will most likely kill off the college sports model.

There are very few schools that have self-supporting athletic departments.

Even amongst those, most of their sports are not self-supporting.

It is difficult imagining how college sports as a whole could survive being forced to treat athletes as employees.

So many people yelling (and virtue signalling) about paying college athletes have not a care in the world that an unintended consequence might be only 20 schools able to have college athletics. Thousands of athletes with no college program to offer them scholarships. No place to play.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

What will happen is womens sports will die. Title 9 wont apply to employees. So schools will no longer need to balance off 105 mens scholarships with the required number of womens scholarships. Thats where alot of the money to cover wage costs will come from.

(02-22-2018 08:31 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-22-2018 05:12 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(02-22-2018 04:48 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  That's crazy. Student athletes isn't slave labor whether they're paid or not.

The NCAA fights this because being forced to pay players will most likely kill off the college sports model.

There are very few schools that have self-supporting athletic departments.

Even amongst those, most of their sports are not self-supporting.

It is difficult imagining how college sports as a whole could survive being forced to treat athletes as employees.

So many people yelling (and virtue signalling) about paying college athletes have not a care in the world that an unintended consequence might be only 20 schools able to have college athletics. Thousands of athletes with no college program to offer them scholarships. No place to play.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

What will happen is womens sports will die. Title 9 wont apply to employees. So schools will no longer need to balance off 105 mens scholarships with the required number of womens scholarships. Thats where alot of the money to cover wage costs will come from.

I think most school Presidents and BOD's are going to just get out of the business before trying to sell a 'to hell with the ladies' platform.




Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

Randy Edsall weighs in:

Randy Edsall‏Verified account @RandyEdsall

With @NCAAFootball proposal 2017-99 adopted Colleges and Universities will employee more people in their scouting departments than the NFL and still not paying the players with all the money being brought into the Conferences. We’ve become a farm system. #PayThePlayers
10:41 AM - 23 Feb 2018

(02-22-2018 05:47 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  If the players win, I logically see schools dropping all scholarships for athletics except revenue sports, and the NCAA having to scale back the requirements to be D-I.

Basically everything but basketball and Football would turn into club sports, because schools would not recruit and probably not pay coaches as much, and certainly no assistants. It would dry up a number of employment opportunities.

But this may be where things are heading anyway.

You could argue that the only ones not currently being fairly compensated are the revenue sport athletes anyway. And if these weren't billion dollar industries it wouldn't have been an issue. Room and board at most universities the days is what? $30K+ If your an employee that's a taxable fringe benefit. $30K/year tax free to play field hockey seems like more than compensated enough. Probably for basketball or football as well if not for the fact that schools are bringing in millions.