Skip to main content

View Diary: Anti-Union on Daily Kos (323 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I had the same reaction. I'm excited as hell (73+ / 0-)

    by this decision. I'm very surprised by the vehemence of its rejection by many Kossacks. Many of the fiercest opponents of this ruling I'm sure are offended by your apt suggestion that they're anti-union. They would describe themselves as strong backers of organized labor, but see this as different... somehow.

    This is the beginning of a long process, not the end of one, but the hypocritical system of unpaid "student athletes" who see not a dollar of the billions they generate is broken beyond repair and needs to be rebuilt fundamentally.

    A minor league system for football and basketball akin to those long in place for baseball and hockey would be an excellent start.

    When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

    by PhilJD on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 03:56:04 PM PDT

    •  the free $100,000 education isn't pay of any type? (8+ / 0-)

      Seems to me there are ways to improve the system, but to claim the student gets nothing from the setup is just wrong.

      Plus once the actual revenue sports like Basketball and Football are neutered, the rest of the sports will be gone as most all athletics, at least here at the U of A, is supported by B-Ball and Football revenues, both are self supporting and support the rest of student athletics as well.... The State does not have the money to make up any shortfall caused by changing the programs....

      Vaya con Dios Don Alejo
      I want to die a slave to principles. Not to men.
      Emiliano Zapata

      by buddabelly on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 05:37:05 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  divide by four .. (46+ / 0-)

        ... to get the equivalent annual salary, and then factor in that big-time college athletes don't really have much time for academics.  Some schools have impressive graduation rates, but profs are often pressured to pass the athletes.

        And then, for football players, there's the brain damage.  A union would be a mechanism to represent the players' interests.  It wouldn't mean that the players get their way on everything, just that they have someone to speak for them.

        •  Throw in arthritis, and other long-term permanent (36+ / 0-)

          ... physical disabilities, and many college athletes lose a lot in the long-run. The tiny fraction who make it to the big leagues end up well off, but the a fairly large fraction of the rest wind up with a lifetime of medical bills, poorly educated, with no financial backstop.

          •  Then maybe they shouldn't take the job? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            No one is forcing them to play, if they don't like the terms of the deal.  If they don't want to risk a lifetime of injury, then don't play.

            •  Whoa, talk about right wing, libertarian (18+ / 0-)

              talking points.  So instead of improving labor rights, we dismissively tell people not to take the job?  That amounts to a Hobson's Choice.  Fuck that.

              •  Unions don't prevent injuries (0+ / 0-)

                Unions can provide long term health care after an injury takes place, but that may be cold comfort to someone in a wheelchair.
                If a person doesn't want to risk permanent debilitating injury for the hope of a huge payout, then yes they shouldn't take the job.

                •  So it is, in fact, a "job"? (3+ / 0-)

                  Then why does take the NCAA's self-serving fiction that players aren't employees. Why does one insist that these workers should have no rights, no bargaining power, before employers who get rich exploiting their labor?

                  While a union can't prevent a sports injury, a union could advocate for players in negotiating better safety standards & safer working conditions, which should make such injuries less frequent in the future.

                  •  I do support the union, just not at university (0+ / 0-)

                    Yes they are jobs.  Yes the athletes are paid entertainers, not students.  I do want to end the NCAA fiction.  Time to setup NFL and NBA minor league teams that hire 18 year olds right out of high school.  Those will then be real jobs, not pretend students, and can be fully unionized with all sorts of rights and benefits.

                    College sports can then go back to being student hobbies that are not revenue generating.

                    This will make college football much more safe as the huge 300 pounders will all go to the NFL minor leagues, and college football will be much lower energy.
                    But nothing can eliminate injuries from football.  It's a risk the player takes.  The only way to not get hurt is to not play.

                    •  It'll also never happen. (3+ / 0-)

                      I too would like to see all professional sports leagues sponsor farm systems like Major League Baseball does, or Junior Hockey Leagues or developmental leagues or whatever they might be called, then let college teams compete against one another with honest-to-goodness student-athletes. That way, we wouldn't have to continue the farce of college athletes who are professional in all but name. Young athletes who aren't prepared for or wouldn't otherwise be bound for college could develop their skills, play their sport & get paid for the work they do. As things stand now, a gifted 17-year-old football player, if he can't qualify academically & isn't so elite that he can go straight to the NFL, is just out of luck. Career over. Door slammed.

                      I would much like to see that happen. But that's not the world in which we live. College athletics, in particular college football, is deeply ingrained into American culture. Few things stir people's passions, & loyalty to dear old State U., like football glory on Saturday afternoons. For all the brand loyalty, generous donations, media exposure & stature that sports teams engender, colleges are never going to give that up.

                      That said, anything that can give players a voice & some bargaining power within this corrupt & peculiar system certainly would seem worth supporting.

            •  Oooh boy (14+ / 0-)

              If I had a dollar for every time a factory owner, nursing home operator or restaurateur said something well as early labor law before the SCOTUS actually protected workers

              In fact, my partner once had a Libertarian roommate who refused to tip waiters because, as he put it, "if they don't want to bad pay, they can get another job."

              And - when you say, well this is different, its sports - think through how many people get to university because doors are opened through their athletic ability. For many, its not even close to a choice.

              •  No, your roommate was just a cheapskate (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                sethtriggs, Sparhawk

                He asked the waiter to work and live for his sake, then refused to pay for that service.  An honest man would have just refused to go out to eat if he was too cheap to tip the waiters.  Libertarian my ass.  Your roommate was a straight up thief.

                I also disagree about athletics being a door of opportunity.  It's extremely unequal and heavily biased towards physical ability.

                So there are two poor kids in a poor neighborhood.  Both are equally smart, both want to go to college.  One kid can run very, very fast.  The other kid can't.

                The fast kid gets a full ride, maybe he studies hard, maybe he doesn't.  The slow kid goes to work in fast food.

            •  Selective Memory? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Dirtandiron, radical simplicity

              Maybe you've forgotten what it's like to be under 20 years old? Maybe you never were a 2, 3, or 4 star recruit for college football or basketball?

              You any idea how joyful and wanted that makes a high school athlete feel? If you're a 3 or 4 star recruit, multiple big time FBS or Men's BB universities will come calling! Who would deny themselves that? I sure wouldn't have all those years ago. Heck, call me shallow, but back in the early 1960s I was thrilled when a player from my HS in LA went to USC on scholarship, and then was 'hired' by the MN Vikings!  

              Just being on an FBS team, or a big basketball conference team, let alone with a scholarship, is an opportunity that few or none at that age can resist. And why should they, at that age? You may think that you are going to live forever, but you also know that time will pass you by if you don't carefully consider the offer.

              So, let's not take advantage of them: if a player is offered a scholarship, and becomes injured to the point where further play is impossible, don't take the scholarship away until at least four years (five if a player is red-shirted). Force universities to take more responsibility for career-ending injuries.

              There is so much money in big-time college football, and big-time men's basketball, that making these changes will not trim programs back much at all. Even a modest stipend/salary, scaled appropriately, for all players will not break the overstuffed piggy bank that most universities with these programs have. JMO...

              You meet them halfway with love, peace, and persuasion ~ And expect them to rise for the occasion...

              by paz3 on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 11:47:04 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  25k a year .... (5+ / 0-)

          Assuming that "degree" is even worth 100k, or is 100k even the going rate for that particular school - where often the coach, history, and sports program itself is the athletic draw, and the education is average.

          It's about that shot at the pros, everyone involved knows this.

          “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” ... Voltaire

          by RUNDOWN on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 11:15:15 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Maybe require colleges (0+ / 0-)

          to purchase long-term care insurance for every football player -- they could fund that through the memorabilia sales and TV contracts. That would at least take care of any issues that might creep up down the road. (That's actually the biggest issue now in the NFL -- how much should be done for the retirees who are now showing the effects of the game in brain related ailments, as well as leg and back issues.)

          There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

          by Cali Scribe on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 11:58:18 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  It's pay of a sort when it's freely chosen (43+ / 0-)

        by young athletes who have other options; college baseball players for example.

        Presumably, even if a minor league football system existed, some high school football players would opt for the education and the college experience the way some baseball players do; it would be a bargain freely chosen for them as well.

        When the only realistic way for an athlete with professional aspirations to perfect their skills is to endure an education that they don't particularly want, don't particularly excel at, and often can't particularly even use effectively when it's completed...

        no, that's not "pay."

        When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

        by PhilJD on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 05:59:01 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  this is the first valid argument on why they (7+ / 0-)

          should be employees that I have seen yet....

          In a sense, the Colleges forced this by lobbying the NFL and NBA to not take players right out of high school...I agree that a minor league for those who do not want the education would be a good idea....However, so many need that education to earn anything after they blow out a knee in their first pro season that it seems a good idea to keep the college system...

          The degree and the notoriety helps them get decent employment after the pros or hell for the 98% that never make the pros....One change I'd love to see is programs that have poor graduation rates, lose scholarships in direct proportion to the graduation rate.....minus those who leave early for the pros....that isn't the colleges fault while a 5 year player that hasn't graduated is imo.....

          have a 45% grad rate, after 2 years no change, you lose 53% of your scholarships....with a high end cutoff of say 10-15% not graduating as there will be some who can not graduate, just because they can throw a ball doesn't mean they can understand the mathematics and engineering behind what they are doing.....

          Vaya con Dios Don Alejo
          I want to die a slave to principles. Not to men.
          Emiliano Zapata

          by buddabelly on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 06:14:56 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Lots of college grads can't find jobs (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Red Tom Kidd

            I think you may be over optimistic that every pro athlete can fall back on a college degree.

            With so many college grads looking for good jobs, why would the job go to the pro athlete who didn't really care about his classes, versus the academic student who studied hard and aced her classes?

            Shouldn't the jobs go to those for whom learning, not sports, was their full time job in college?  Or is this just another kick in the teeth to the non-jocks?

            •  non-jocks? (0+ / 0-)
              Shouldn't the jobs go to those for whom learning, not sports, was their full time job in college?  Or is this just another kick in the teeth to the non-jocks?
              Well they freely chose not to be athletes.  You see, two can play that libertarian game.

              Where are all the jobs, Boehner?

              by Dirtandiron on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 06:22:29 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Not in Division III (19+ / 0-)

        There are plenty of fine colleges who compete at the Division III level that don't give athletic scholarships (not allowed in D3), don't rely on revenue from football and basketball, and who field plenty of competitive teams.  MIT has 33 varsity teams (most in D3, and very few D1 schools offer more), and two years ago made the Final Four in men's basketball.  About 20% of MIT's undergraduates participate in a varsity sport.  There are also club teams, and an extensive intramural program.

        This year's men's Final Four had a mix -- two small, very well-regarded liberal arts colleges from the northeast (Amherst and Williams), a public college from Wisconsin (UW-Whitewater), and an independent private college from Illinois (Illinois Wesleyan).  The final between Williams and UWW was a game for the ages that went down to the final second, when UWW won it on a full-court drive for a layup.

        (I'm not exactly a UWW fan -- they knocked out MIT 2 years ago, with a lot of the same players -- but they have some pretty damned good teams.)

        The problem with athletic scholarships is that it's very clear why those athletes, excuse me, students, are there -- they are there to play their sport and help the school make money.  But I wonder how much of that money ever gets recycled into helping the overall student population, as opposed to paying for big facilities and high-priced big-name coaches.

        •  here the name sports pay for all the sports (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          caul, Norm in Chicago

          programs male and female.

          We're lucky that we have a very good Basketball program that pays many times over and a football program that is ok but profitable enough to contribute to the other sports also.

          Here, without the money sports, I'd lay odds the rest would be gone as we have a hard enough time getting cash out of the state for the actual education functions.  and tuition has skyrocketed.....and this is with a state constitution that requires college be as inexpensive to the student as possible.

          Luckily, as a major land grant research facility and with a med/research hospital to boot so we get a lot for our buck here imo.....

          Vaya con Dios Don Alejo
          I want to die a slave to principles. Not to men.
          Emiliano Zapata

          by buddabelly on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 08:02:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  And so the football and basketball players (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Red Tom Kidd, JVolvo, Dirtandiron

            somehow owe their services for free to pay for the rest of the programs?  

            You get a lot for your buck.  The players?  Not so much for their buck.

            Your sense of entitlement to the proceeds generated from the toll taken on these players' bodies is truly amazing.

          •  And that's precisely why (0+ / 0-)

            unionizing scholarship athletes makes sense: the schools are getting a lot of benefit from the athletes' minimally-paid labor, and the athletes don't have a lot of influence over their working conditions.

            Division III is a different matter: those schools are not relying on athletics as a funding source, and athletes are free to leave the team without repercussion to their student status.

        •  It doesn't work? Really? (5+ / 0-)

          At this point I get the sense that the detractors are simply people who dislike jocks in general and want to see athletics go away. Or maybe you're just naive enough to believe the really transparent lies about how no one is making money off of college football.

          All those TV contracts and stadiums and merchandise and coaching salaries and everything else... but they can't seem to make any money off of it. Please, that's just absurd. They're making boatloads of cash off the backs of these kids and it's obscene that people don't see a problem with it.

          You can do whatever you want to us, but we're not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America.

          by Eric Stratton on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 09:35:10 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I agree it's a business. And if that business (16+ / 0-)

            cannot succeed without free labor, it should cease to exist.

            If coaches can be paid millions upon millions, players can be paid a fair wage.

            •  Well, I agree completely. (7+ / 0-)

              It appears I misunderstood the argument you were making. I thought you were saying that unionization of college football would be bad because it would bankrupt the schools, so we either should stick with the status quo or cancel athletics altogether.  

              Instead, it appears you are calling the "no money in football" crowd's bluff. I suppose if it were really true that college football was unprofitable, then shuttering these programs would make sense. But that's preposterous. There is plenty of money to go around, the NCAA is simply being greedy.

              You can do whatever you want to us, but we're not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America.

              by Eric Stratton on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 10:33:25 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  IT'S NOT FREE LABOR (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              COllege athletes are paid, on average, more than 100k a year in housing, food, training, tickets, scholarships, travel, etc.

              100k for someone without a college degree is pretty damn good.

              Oh year, and it lasts for 5 years, hello free grad school for simply being large or fast.

              •  You really don't know what goes on (6+ / 0-)

                Don Curtis, a UNC trustee, told me that impoverished football players cannot afford movie tickets or bus fare home. Curtis is a rarity among those in higher education today, in that he dares to violate the signal taboo: “I think we should pay these guys something.”

                Fans and educators alike recoil from this proposal as though from original sin. Amateurism is the whole point, they say. Paid athletes would destroy the integrity and appeal of college sports. Many former college athletes object that money would have spoiled the sanctity of the bond they enjoyed with their teammates. I, too, once shuddered instinctively at the notion of paid college athletes.

                But after an inquiry that took me into locker rooms and ivory towers across the country, I have come to believe that sentiment blinds us to what’s before our eyes. Big-time college sports are fully commercialized. Billions of dollars flow through them each year. The NCAA makes money, and enables universities and corporations to make money, from the unpaid labor of young athletes.

                Slavery analogies should be used carefully. College athletes are not slaves. Yet to survey the scene—corporations and universities enriching themselves on the backs of uncompensated young men, whose status as “student-athletes” deprives them of the right to due process guaranteed by the Constitution—is to catch an unmistakable whiff of the plantation. Perhaps a more apt metaphor is colonialism: college

                sports, as overseen by the NCAA, is a system imposed by well-meaning paternalists and rationalized with hoary sentiments about caring for the well-being of the colonized. But it is, nonetheless, unjust. The NCAA, in its zealous defense of bogus principles, sometimes destroys the dreams of innocent young athletes.

                I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                by jbou on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 09:11:26 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Link (4+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  JVolvo, JesseCW, m00finsan, Dirtandiron

                  I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                  by jbou on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 09:12:33 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  that has exactly nothing to do (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:

                    with the fact that athletes are already generously paid for their time.

                    In fact, they're paid multiples more than academic scholarship recipients. If college FBall players form a union and demand medical benefits are large salaries, what's stopping physics majors or medical school scholarship recipients.

                    Football players who take school seriously come out of school with no debt, more connections than we could count and a graduate degree in the field of their choice. plus, they get into schools their grades would have never allowed without football.

                    •  Seriously? (6+ / 0-)

                      college football coaches make millions a year and the players don't even get a four-year scholarship it gets renewed year to year by the millionaire coach but only if he didn't find someone better to take that spot.

                      I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                      by jbou on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 09:34:40 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  most employees (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:

                        are on an hour to hour contract, and can be replaced by their boss, who usually makes more money than them, at a moment's notice if they find someone better. It's called real life.

                        If coaches were around kicking players off their team so they could sign another freshmen then players would stop wanting to play for that coach. Does it happen, sure. On a wide scale? not even close.

                        But again, none of that has to do with the fact that football players are already being compensated more than fairly for their time and effort. Over 5 years, it wouldn't be hard to find 400-500k worth of costs for each player that the school paid.

                        Also, the NCAA and athletic departments are more than just fball and bball. It's dozens of other sports than bring in no revenue at all. not a single penny. no donations, no ticket sales, no jersey sales, no TV deals, nothing. bball and fball pay for those sports. Every penny out of the fball budget directly kills another sport and another dozen college graduates every year.

                        •  You're wrong on this issue (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          JesseCW, Dirtandiron

                          I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                          by jbou on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 10:39:28 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  well thought out retort (0+ / 0-)

                            care to be more specific?

                            do you claim that athletic departments are profitable?

                            Do you claim athletes aren't paid?

                            Do you claim there are vast numbers of athletes cut from teams?

                            do you disagree that fball and bball pay for olympic sports, and without that revenue there would be no olympic sports under the NCAA banner?

                          •  The Olympics? (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JesseCW, Freedomfreak, Dirtandiron

                            The world would be better place without the bullshit Olympics. Bunch of kids play their hearts out so NBC and some corporations can sell crap to the masses.

                            Athletes are not paid nearly enough.

                            College athletic departments are out of control.

                            I don't care about the rest of the sports that don't generate revenue.  They should be played on a small scale and the costs controlled. The NBA and the NFL need to create their own minor leagues and the NCAA needs to be burned to the ground.

                            That's why you're wrong.

                            I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                            by jbou on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 01:37:14 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  ahh i get it (0+ / 0-)

                            you're just anti-sports. That makes this discussion worthless, because you're not debating the topic, you just want to burn it all to the ground.

                            But, just for clarity on your side:

                            Olympic sports are defined as sports played in the olympics. For instance, most major colleges have a track and field team and a swimming team. these are referred to as olympic sports as colleges, because there is no pro-version to work toward. These sports are paid for by two main sources 1) private donations from former players and 2) revenue from bball and fball.

                          •  I don't care (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JesseCW, Dirtandiron

                            Let NBC pay for the whole thing. Why have colleges foot the bill for training athletes that are going to make billions for corporations?

                            I am not anti sports, I'm anti the NCAA and their hypocrisy and their greed.

                            I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                            by jbou on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 02:08:22 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                        •  Democrats see this (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Dirtandiron, jbou
                          most employees (1+ / 0-)

                          are on an hour to hour contract, and can be replaced by their boss, who usually makes more money than them, at a moment's notice if they find someone better. It's called real life.

                          as unjust and support the right of workers to organize in order to change it.

                          People who don't see it as unjust, or who don't think workers should have the right to organize to change it, are by definition not Democrats.

                          •  seeing reality (0+ / 0-)

                            and liking reality are two different things.

                            Organization is great - not being able to see consequences is stupid.

                            You call your stance being a democrat. I call it being a simpleton without the ability to look into the future and do a cost/benefit analysis.

                    •  They aren't paid at all. They're given "store (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      jbou, m00finsan, Dirtandiron


                      I really don't know where your "Five year graduate degree" theory comes from.

                •  I age that they're absolutely not slaves, but (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  jbou, m00finsan, Dirtandiron

                  they aren't that far from indenture.

                  •  really? (0+ / 0-)

                    they could go to Europe and get paid to play easily. They could not play the sport.

                    They willingly sign the paperwork, as do their parents.

                    It's not even remotely close to indenture.

                    If they want to get paid for their abilities, they have that option.

                    •  "They could quit and lose their entire investment" (0+ / 0-)

                      It's like talking to Republicans about Chinese sweat shops.

                      •  you use quotes (0+ / 0-)

                        around something i never said.

                        HS athletes have options. they, along with their parents, make a conscious decision to go to college and abide by NCAA bylaws.

                        •  you're yucky (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:

                          I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                          by jbou on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 06:52:10 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  Now you're just making another of the Bosses (0+ / 0-)


                          Workers are always told "you agreed to shitty conditions, what right do you think you have to change them now?"

                          Do you work in management?

                          •  nope, never have (0+ / 0-)

                            but I do firmly believe that comparing college athletic to slavery or indentured servitude is about as factually incorrect as can be.

                            People who make those claims either

                            1) don't know what slavery or indentured servitude are
                            2) don't understand how college athletics work

                            if the players want to unionize and demand cash payments instead of scholarships, or medical insurance for the rest of their lives, good for them. I'm not going to stop them. I'm also not going to be ignorant and assume it doesn't have consequences.

                    •  Really? (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      they could go to Europe and get paid to play easily
                      For soccer maybe. But do you think Europeans really care about American football? To them "football" means what we call soccer.

                      Where are all the jobs, Boehner?

                      by Dirtandiron on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 06:25:58 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  i was referring to BBall (0+ / 0-)

                        with that statement.

                        many HS kids go to europe and play as 18 or 19 year olds. There is canadian football and other "american" football leagues around the world without age restrictions they could play in.

                        Students get paid better in the NCAA than they would abroad, and they get better medical care, so they stay here.

              •  Pretending that massively inflated tuition is (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                m00finsan, Dirtandiron

                "pay" is idiotic.

                That's "pay" only at the company store.

          •  Your right...I don't like jocks in general. (1+ / 1-)
            Recommended by:
            Kristin in WA
            Hidden by:
            Red Tom Kidd

             Declaring that I shouldn't be calling myself a democrat, or that I'm a pseudo liberal and anti-union is macho bullying.

                ororis (below) gave an inteliigent argument and I agree with it.

             I have always been a pacifist, I abhor violence and equate football with cage fighting. While college football is path to an education, it becomes less and less so as the profit increases. Schools need to be accountable for unsafe practices such as pushing players too hard or putting profits over safety or of a students lack of education at completion. If you really cared about these kids you'd be calling them students, not workers.  The strategy of calling them workers is pretty transparent.
               You care about unions so passionately? There are millions of fast food workers in the U.S. that are desperate for your help.

            •  Wow. So if workers are involved in a (9+ / 0-)

              profession you aren't interested in, then the hell with them.  Not only that, but anyone who happens to be interested in it should also ignore them to focus on someone else you consider more deserving.

              I wouldn't say you shouldn't call yourself a Democrat or a pseudo liberal.  I'd call you a narrow minded, selfish, egotist .

              •  Name calling? (0+ / 0-)

                Too bad you don't like my opinion, but censorship is a marker of the truly narrow, small minded, selfish egotist, now, isn't it?
                 I thought I'd have to defend that thinking, but you don't want a debate,,,you want compliance with your thinking.
                LOL !!
                 I'm done with this thread

            •  I don't understand the hide rate. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              canabisflower, unfangus

              This will be my first counter-rate.  I see nothing but disagreement.  Whereas the comment below contains actual insults.

              "You want to be a bit compulsive in your art or craft or whatever you do." Steve Martin

              by Kristin in WA on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 08:09:35 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I don't think the hide rate was necessary. (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                cville townie, burlydee, JesseCW

                The response was harsh but understandable. Trashing an entire class of people and stating that they shouldn't be allowed basic economic rights is a pretty ugly thing to do.

                It's best to just ignore that sort of thing, but it's not just disagreement. It's saying because these people play a contact sport, then they should be "othered" and denied the right to organize for fair compensation.

                I stopped hide rating, personally. I don't have time for the drama.  

                You can do whatever you want to us, but we're not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America.

                by Eric Stratton on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 08:21:30 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Look over there! (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              There's nothing about supporting the right of all workers to organize that obligates someone to ignore some groups of workers.

              When they're on the field and at practice, they're workers.  The vast majority of those arguing that players right to organize shouldn't be respected are also arguing that they well compensated in the form of scholarships.

              There's no reasons for any of us to kid ourselves.  The overwhelming majority of them would not be playing if they weren't being compensated for their labor.

              What do you call a person paid in company script to do dangerous and demanding work?

              I use the word "worker".  

          •  Northwestern made about $245M... (5+ / 0-)

            ...over the last 10 years on their football program, according to NPR this AM.

            "Democrat" is a noun. "Democratic" is an adjective. "Republican" is an idiot. Illigitimi non carborundum. Regardless of Party.

            by TheOrchid on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 08:11:25 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  OK. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              But what about their share of the Big Ten Conferences TV money? Where exactly does that money go? And is the $254 million before or after the coaches get their considerable paychecks?

              It's important to also consider the fact that, while other Big Ten schools such as Michigan and Ohio State make alot more than Northwestern, they need all the schools who participate in the league in order to fill their schedule.

              There is quite a bit of fuzzy math going on here, I suspect.

              You can do whatever you want to us, but we're not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America.

              by Eric Stratton on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 08:25:59 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Oh of course, there's no money in football. (10+ / 0-)

        How anyone can be so painfully naive is beyond me. Big time Division I college football is a fucking cash volcano. They are swimming in profits. They do use alot of fuzzy math to hide this fact. They are very effective con men. But the idea that so many people buy this is really amazing.

        So you're clear, no one is talking about the softball team. Athletes in those sports aren't making any money for anybody, and they should be happy with whatever scholarship they might be getting. If not, then they should move on.  And no one is going to be cutting paychecks for the boys playing at small Division III schools. The numbers you site only work when ALL of those unprofitable programs are figured in... and even then they're almost certainly omitting major revenue streams to give that massive fucking lie a semblance of truth.

        What we are discussing is football being played at major conference schools. Colleges in the Big 10, Pac 12, SEC, Big 12, ACC and a few independents such as Notre Dame. Those programs are raking in obscene amounts of money from football, and the players that make it possible for them to do so aren't being fairly compensated. This is a problem. That is the issue.

        You can do whatever you want to us, but we're not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America.

        by Eric Stratton on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 09:28:20 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  It is underpay. And the equivilent of less (5+ / 0-)

        than minimum wage for a job that takes a tremendous toll on the bodies of these young people - and often on their futures.

        This ruling doesn't require and won't mean the end of Basketball and Football (I love that these sports are so important, they actually get their very own capitalization!)  It simply means that the players have some rights - if they're injured, they'll entitled to some compensation; if an injury means their future playing is over, they won't be shit out of luck.  They might not have to work at their sport long hours whenever the coach wants them to, with absolutely no power or control and no compensation for it.

        This ruling doesn't say "schools can no longer make the astronomical monies they've previously made off these players efforts" or "coaches can no longer be paid the huge salaries".  It simply says the players are employees and have a few rights.  Just like Walmart, the schools will continue to make huge amounts of money while underpaying the athletes; it just won't be able to run roughshod over them quite as much.

        I would be interested, though, in an explanation of why you consider it fair and reasonable that basketball and football athletes have an obligation to earn money to pay for the sports of others?  Besides, of course, that it's what's been happening for so long that everyone feels entitled to be receiving the benefit from their efforts?

      •  Compare that supposedly free $100k education (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Buckeye Nut Schell, Dirtandiron

        to the $5 million going to the coach, athletic director, etc.  A more equitable and less corrupt system would do a much better job of supporting athletics as a whole.

      •  The problem with your thinking is (4+ / 0-)

        that you have schools like the University of Kentucky who admit basketball players that they know are going to leave after one year, and are just being recruited to play basketball and create revenue. They are not being recruited as student athletes.

        I'm no philosopher, I am no poet, I'm just trying to help you out - Gomez (from the song Hamoa Beach)

        by jhecht on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 07:29:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  College athletics is a plantation system. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Athletes work long hour little compensation & are legally bonded to their employer (let's call it what it is). If not slavery, then it's definitely a form of indentured servitude. In this system every party but the players who do the toil get rich.

      •  If your scholarship (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        and education is based on performance then it is a job. Whether they pay you in semesters or bit coins, they are clearly giving you compensation for labor, IMO.

        And daddy won't you take me back to Muhlenberg County Down by the Green River where Paradise lay. Well, I'm sorry my son, but you're too late in asking Mister Peabody's coal train has hauled it away. John Prine

        by high uintas on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 12:13:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  My granddaughter is a student-athlete at a US (28+ / 0-)

      College. She has a backbreaking schedule, the whole team does. I'm all for unions. My grandson was working at a non-union job where they exploited him until he was injured. Now he is on workman's compensation at a very young age. I'm all for unions for him too.

      To thine ownself be true

      by Agathena on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 08:37:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  So (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      remove the scholarships and instead offer kids who play football 30k a year in wages?

      This might be an interesting read for everyone.

      To summarize: minor league ball pays shit.

      •  Remove the athletic scholarships... (0+ / 0-)

        and put all that money and more into needs-based scholarships.  All students have to meet the same minimum academic standards and the process for awarding scholarships is completely blind as to whether the applicant is an athlete or not.  You'll still have thousands of students who will want to play football, basketball and non-revenue sports.  Financially disadvantaged students will have greater opportunities for a college education even if they aren't athletes.  Students won't lose scholarships if their athletic performance isn't what the coaches expected.  If professional sports believe the system isn't bringing in some of the top prospects they can go ahead and fund their own developmental leagues.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site