This is a pretty flawed statement, essentially the players are the product. You dont have to go to college to play major league baseball.
Baseball has a minor league system decades old in place. It is expensive and inefficient. How many minor league ball games are on TV? Baseball is also much different in its physical demands. A 17-18yo can go to the minors , compete, grow and after several years enter the majors in his mid to late 20s and have a career. None of that is so in football except for a few exceptional players. College football is the NFL minor league at no cost to the NFL. Without the school ties that the fans feel loyalty to and passion for I doubt minor league football would attract the attention and $ college ball does. I also doubt the NFL is interested in creating a minor league. It would be a minor league that has less responsibility to the player than a college does (if it follows the pattern of BB), run through more players without results and leave the discarded players much worse off than if they spend a few years in school. SO many ignore the value of the time in school provides, even to those who don't graduate. If you bother to follow the graduation rates college athletes including FB graduate at a higher level than the general population. Many get medical care and health care they wouldn't already have. They have mentors and a structured environment that allows them to grow up. At 17-20 few are mature enough, physically, mentally or psychologically to be on their own playing football in the NFL. It has been estimated that the value of a college education throughout life is several million $$. Much of the argument for unionizing players and paying them is due to those from the fringe. Those like Johnny Football who bring so much to the school that it seems unfair they don't get a share or the very few who are injured and not helped by the school. The vast majority are not in either class. It also forgets that college football and basket ball fund 90%+ of college athletics. Without the shared revenue there would be no women's sports or minor men's sports. The college scene would be much darker. There is room to make the current system more responsive (its happening as we speak) rather than junk it and see what rises from the chaos. Be careful of what you ask, for it may not be what you truly want.
My question is - how would the union be funded? Usually, members pay dues which funds the union, so how would college athletes afford membership dues?
1. The NFL should create a developmental league. The early exits to the NFL are evidence that many high-schoolers are using the NCAA merely as a stepping stone to the NFL. It makes the whole idea of scholarships into a joke and it turns colleges into an unpaid NFL development league. Let the high school football players that have no interest in college go directly into minor league pro football if they have the stuff. 2. College football should be for student athletes, as it was originally. If a high school player accepts a college scholarship he should be obligated to attend for four years or until he gets a degree, whichever comes first. The NFL should refrain from recruiting any NCAA players except for seniors. If a player flunks out or quits college, he can join the minor league football league, but the NFL would not promote him to the majors until the end of his four-year college obligation. 3. College football players get full-ride scholarship that covers all their tuition, fees, books, lodging, training, and meals. But this does not give them any cash for dates, snacks, gas money, tickets home, magazines, or other college activities. They are not allowed to work any part-time jobs either. They should be paid as student workers for the 20 hours a week they spend in practice to give them some pocket cash. Students on full academic scholarships are permitted to get paid as student workers up to 20 hours a week, so it should also be that way for athletes.
I like the basis for the decision. It makes a very good argument. The decision was based on the time they devote to football (as many as 50 hours some weeks), the control exerted by coaches and their scholarships, which was argued to be a contract for compensation. With that level of commitment, it's difficult to say that their primary role is a student and that's not even taking into account the millions of dollars they generate for schools. The motivation of the Northwestern players allegedly was not money, but restricted practice time and healthcare. They sport the NCAA's best graduation rate at 97%. The ruling applies to Northwestern only and collective bargaining rules in public universities apply only at the state level. If the NCAA was smart, they'd get a jump on this and start working on a plan to restrict practices, provide good healthcare and kickback a little spending money each month to student athletes. I can't see this falling in their favor in the court of law where passionate and emotional opinion s matters very little. It also ignores the law of greedy bastards who don't give a shit about the people whose backs they make their money off of...
I'm all for medical coverage for those injured for as long as they need it, but not for pay. They are paid, it's called a college education, it's not the university's fault kids leave early.
What you are going to end up seeing is a bunch of universities killing football at their respective schools. The big boys will be able to afford this but the little guys aren't.
I'm pretty sure any injury they get is treated with the best care possible and they don't have to pay for it. I'm with you though, they get the opportunity to get a quality education, it isn't anyone's fault but their own if they place all their eggs in a basket full of footballs and not make the most out of what is given to them.
