Again, the Steelers are a franchise of the NFL which is the controlling entity. Just give it up. The NCAA couldn't even enforce the rules it has so none of the schools are going to let them to negotiate with anyone.
If college players want to be paid like professionals…
- Thread starter Pitt666
- Start date
Won't they have to pay the woman salaries too? If they don't won't there be lawsuits?
I asked you which law would prevent college football players to join a union once employed. I will await your answer.
I did. You're just getting pounded in this thread so you're grasping for anything that might save you.
Only way they wouldn't have to make them employees would be if the schools got away with keeping things the same for everything but football but that seems unlikely. That's why I think (and I may be completely wrong) a lot of schools will just jettison football or just drop a level. I don't think a school like Pitt would suddenly drop $20 million in salaries to athletes to exist in a system that is tilted so far against them that they're never going to sustain success.
No you didnt. Its very clear that they will be able to join a union when they become employees. Dartmouth basketball players already have and they arent even employees yet.
You must be high. It is extremely obvious to everyone here that once the players are employees, they will join a union. I asked you to provide the law which states that these players will not legally be allowed to join a union when they are employees and you failed to do so. Saying you have already done so when you didn't doesn't cut it. Provide me the link for this law that doesn't exist. Thank you.
Holy crap! How dense are you? I literally explained that there won't be a national union but that the players would likely be subject to the existing unions that already represent school employees. I never, ever, not even once, suggested that they wouldn't be allowed to join a union. Am I high? Sadly, no, but even if I were, I'd still be able to understand and take part in a conversation. You however, are struggling with basic comprehension here or you're just disingenuously trying to put words in my mouth. Either way, just stop. You're on the wrong side of this one.
This is what I think too, I can see this thing. paying football players as employees killing college football at a lot of schools, rather than go into a financial hole paying players a lot of schools will drop football or drop to a lower level, in the end the top level might really be just 20-30 teams.
And I said there would be a national union formed. Your stance is that there won't be. Mine is that there will be. So considering that there will be a national union, I want you to link the law that would prevent employee college football players from joining a new national union.
You pay coaches less and have less support staff. What is the payroll for Pitt's coaching staff and army of support staff? Has to be near $15 million. Do they need to stay in hotels for home games or training camp? Costs can be cut in certain places.
I don't really know what paying 85 football players does to the profit/loss margin? I'm sure there are schools that will lose money and I wonder how many are willing to lose money to stay in big time football.
Cut some staff. Cut some sports. Do we need to paying a baseball coach $500K or even have a baseball team for a season that starts in February and ends before it gets hot?
Just cut academics, fire a few dozen professors, lol, I'm just saying, a lot of schools aren't going to blow everything up for football, especially if they will never compete and never be a NIL player.
I don't understand where you're moving the goal post to, now. There wasn't anything mentioned about the legality of forming a union.
There won't be cuts because that's nearly impossible in many situations. More likely schools would put more pressure on donors and raise ticket prices/booster fees and pay for as much of it as they can that way. If that's not really feasible, you just punt and move on. In Pitt's case, not having investment tied up in a stadium really makes it interesting. Wouldn't shock me at all if Pitt chose to be more like Creighton than PSU. Both have a respectable, overall, athletic footprint but they just go about it differently.
The interesting thing is that I know and work with people from PSU, ND, OSU, and Michigan, just to name a few. They all think that their NLI sucks. Every one of them. I am sure that it's all relative, but nobody is happy. Well, maybe Oregon is happy, but I know nobody from there.
The only reason there is a salary cap in the NFL is because the owners want to keep a big chunk of the revenue for themselves . The NFLPA is by far the worst pro union and their non-guaranteed contacts prove it .
you have zero idea what you’re talking about
NIL goes to players directly -
Schools and conferences are NOT going to start paying players a chunk of their TV revenue because there is NO national media contact , stupid .
As such - there will be no national union and no CBA .
The nfl has a media deal. Which goes to the owners whom the nfl commission works for .
You really have no idea what the hell you’re talking about .
The ncaa does not
Idiot
Well, the players are eventually going to be employees, correct? This is an obvious outcome. So you are saying that the professional college football players will be the only American pros who wont belong to a union. Riiiiight.
GOOD! I'd rather have more parity and uncertainty, rather than the players doing better because the richest teams can spend unlimited amounts.
That won’t be the case in college football - where conferences have the media deals and teams do as well .
There is no NCAA media deal -
They are just leeches who can’t actually enforce anything.
