NLRB says Dartmouth basketball players are employees & can unionize…
- Thread starter Maroon Eagle
- Start date
They’re not going pro, so they better apply to Murphy’s, Lou’s, and Ramunto’s
Is dartmouths men’s basketball team turning a profit? i can at least understand players at big time programs arguing this. Seems like a bold move to take the position of “I lose you money every year; I want you to treat me as an employee.”
^^^^this is the only comment that matters. This ain’t the first domino….but it definitely won’t be the last until they get a wrap on this nonsense.
Can't wait until a team does this and goes on strike and the school cancels their scholarships and nil deals.
I’m sure the Dartmouth leadership is worthless and cowardly, but if they weren’t, it seems like it would be really easy to tell the players they aren’t going to spend more money on a money losing sport posing legal fees. If they want to be employees, then they can be employees and there can be laid off when their “division” is shut down for losing money. If they want to be student athletes, the school will continue spending money on the extra curricular activity they are playing.
Yeah, if this is Alabama football that's one thing. Seems Dartmouth's most likely response to this (pending appeal and final decision by a court of authority) would be just to cancel the season and/or shut down the program.
People tend to focus on the top football programs when this topic of unionizing, NIL, etc comes up, but this yellow brick road leads to a fat man behind a curtain for the vast majority of college sports programs out there.
Disagree. Professional sports are much better with unions than without, unions are probably necessary to get the college elites to agree to things like salary caps and profit sharing and other pro-competitive measures.
The current system benefits a small handful of players. Union will force that benefit to spread out some, which will be better for the game, and for schools like Mississippi State.
Agree. This is probably the only hope to bring some sanity to college sports. Force the schools to treat them as employees and let them unionize. Then you can collectively bargain a system that is reasonably fair to schools, players and fans.
I see what you did there by labeling college sports as professional. I don't think this is what most college football fans want. If it ever truly moves to a professional model, I think most will check out. I've explained numerous times why I personally don't think it will happen (they are still schools, Title 9, etc.).
Most MSU fans are not checked out of college sports, no matter what they say. They are checked out of MSU college sports, unfortunately. If we had the funds to compete with the big boys, nobody would care about NIL. But it's essentially the same system we've always had, with us at a little bit bigger disadvantage.
But back to being professional - I honestly think it all folds at that point. If I was the NFL, I would immediately lower the age requirement to be drafted, and promptly do away with this minor threat to them.
Yeah I don't understand people complaining about the Wild West of NIL and then get upset at something like this. College Football needs some sort of structure and if that's unionization and eventually collective bargaining agreements - that's better than the current state.
Question, why does college football need structure and not the other sports? And it seems like to me we could solve a lot of it by simply fixing the calendar (portal windows), and finalizing a 16-team playoff.
You are right to an extent but overlooking one key attribute of college sports. College supporters not only will support the program via ticket purchases and private donations, they'll pay the players themselves to obtain a competitive advantage. Pro fans don't do this. Will college athletes ever be officially paid enough to make college fans say "okay they are getting paid enough, I'm done"?
Probably not. Jim Bob from Enterprise has his identity tied up with Alabama football - so he's going to keep writing those checks even if his favorite line backer gets an official union negotiated salary.
And for some dumbass reason we decided to amplify this quirk through the establishment of collectives with some corporate window dressing on it. That's the part that needs an overhaul. But I'm not sure there is a way as long as there are Jim Bob's from Enterprise.
They should all have structure, protections for players, and policies that support competitive balance.
We have never had competitive balance in college sports. It's never been about that, ever, ever, ever. It's about your school being a winner. And in that, is some of the greatness of it.
I don't get why so many people want this. You already have the NFL.
You don't understand why people on a Mississippi State message board might support rules and policies that would help out poorer SEC schools be more competitive with richer SEC schools?
I understand that what is best for MSU generally isn't what's best overall for college sports. This is probably another one of those times.
We want this because it's the new reality. Things aren't going back to the way they were, so this is about making the best out of the current and future situation.
I get why it may seem that way but I don't see the trend toward that. I do eventually see a bigger stipend (that may would depend on TV money), free-for-all NIL and free-for-all transfer portal. The only constraints would be the portal calendar.
Of course, stipends based on TV money would create an unfair advantage for the big conferences, so that increased stipend may have to be across the board. That may be what pushes us into splitting the P5 and G5 divisions. But I'm betting that just stays the same, and some G5 teams may elect to go back down to FCS. I honestly think a bunch of G5 teams will ante up if it comes to that. Maybe not SMU level ante up, but they'll fund the increased stipend.
I would love to have a decent conversation on the legal reasoning for this decision. You know, have that instead of the usual 'college athletics is broken because it isnt how it was!' posts.
- Is this ruling at least partially based on the fact that Dartmouth does not offer athletic scholarships because the Ivy League Conference is non-scholarship based?
- I wonder what compensation the NLRB Regional Director is referring to when she said Dartmouth players perform work in exchange for compensation. They arent on scholarship, so...
- How will this expand out over time? Will cheerleaders be paid? Will members of a university's marching band or orchestra be paid?
- If members negotiate terms that conflict with current NCAA rules, will the school have to follow the union's terms and knowingly violate NCAA rules, or else just not even field a team in that sport?
- Will players be full time employees, part time employees, seasonal employees, or perhaps even casual labor? The categorization will be hugely important because it will guide much of what each side 'owes' to the other under a changed system.
Sankey and pals better get out in front of this with their little task force or whatever. Podcast I hear yesterday has it right - none of these cases alone will change things, but if nothing is done, sooner or later some big court somewhere will issue a ruling that will stand, and then, it will all be finished.
That is not what anybody truly wants deep down, for college sports. I can assure you of that.
That is not what anybody truly wants deep down, for college sports. I can assure you of that.
I think this is one of the reasons the task force was formed. SEC and Big 10 are going to have a much bigger voice in how college sports work at the top level than they did before.
Latest posts
-
Lookalike thread: Boise State
- Latest: BulldogBlitz
-
Get unlimited access today.