# College Athletes Can Unionize **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [March 26, 2014, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628 "2014-03-26T20:04:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2014, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628/121 "2014-03-28T19:50:55Z")
I think one of the worst arguments in favor of the NCAA’s continued monopoly and refusal to pay students is that somehow, it would be bad if a few smaller schools can’t pay recruits the big bucks and attract them. First of all, enough schools will be around that will foster a healthy competition among schools for recruits. Second, who cares if the smaller schools and poorer ones can’t afford to lavish gifts on their players like the big schools? Isn’t that competition and free market? If McDonalds decides to pay their workers $15 an hour and the best ones flock there instead of Burger King, we say good, let them survive or fall on their own. But the fact is that the NCAA colludes to keep operating costs low artificially by refusing to pay players. I want those smaller schools to go back to just being schools. What do I care if Boise State can’t get recruits over USC? ---
**Author:** ![etv78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/d78d45/32.png) [@etv78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/etv78)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2014, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628/122 "2014-03-28T20:10:28Z")
> [@Odesio](#): > > I believe the NCAA places some pretty serious restrictions on jobs that can be held by student athletes. No doubt this is to prevent a booster from giving the star player a cushy summer job for $40k but it does prevent legitimate work. Which is why I have no issue if an athlete wants to work in the off-season. ---
**Author:** ![etv78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/d78d45/32.png) [@etv78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/etv78)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2014, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628/123 "2014-03-28T20:16:04Z")
> [@pulykamell](#): > > How many college athletes do you know? 😕 The vast, vast, vast majority do not end up with 50x living wage. Nobody is worrying about them. They worried about the superstars that people come to watch. ---
**Author:** ![etv78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/d78d45/32.png) [@etv78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/etv78)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2014, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628/124 "2014-03-28T20:19:29Z")
> [@aceplace57](#): > > Students are there for an education first and playing sports is secondary. The number of starting players that ever get a pro offer (in any sport) is very low. > > Colleges should be emphasizing that any student athlete must maintain a passing GPA. They can’t cut classes. etc. > > Unionizing a college team is a bad joke. They aren’t paid and they shouldn’t be. It sends the wrong message. The majority of athletes will never make a dime in pro sports. Why fool them into thinking its a sustainable income by paying thbelieve I college? > > I played for a small college b-ball team. Thankfully I knew the pro scouts weren’t looking at me. I was like most guys. Too slow and not agile enough for the pros. And people in this thread believe I’m delusional? Seriously, can I have some of what you’re smoking? The players we’re talking about are the elite D-1 players, not D-3 scribe. ---
**Author:** ![That\_Don\_Guy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/that_don_guy/32/538_2.png) [@That\_Don\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/That_Don_Guy)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2014, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628/125 "2014-03-28T20:55:14Z")
> [@etv78](#): > > The players we’re talking about are the elite D-1 players, not D-3 scribe. Are you telling me that a majority of Northwestern’s scholarship football players are considered “elite”? I doubt that even 1/3 of them will ever play a down in even a preseason NFL game. There is a problem if “the only players that matter” are the football and men’s basketball players at the major conference schools; this would give the schools the impetus to break away from the NCAA and form their own association, resulting in, "Okay, here’s God’s own number of billions of dollars for the rights to Big School Athletic Association’s football and men’s basketball championships that go to just those schools…oh, and NCAA, you can just lump your football and men’s basketball tournaments into the existing contract (baseball, softball, men’s ice hockey, women’s basketball, wrestling, men’s lacrosse, men’s & women’s soccer) for which we throw scraps at you…what’s that? Some of your schools can’t afford to offer sports any more? Then the best players can transfer to a BSAA school. Wait - what? The BSAA only offers the “popular” men’s sports (football, basketball, baseball, ice hockey. lacrosse - any more and they would be overwhelmed with women’s sports because of Title IX), and your men’s tennis players and gymnasts have nowhere to go? To quote Deep Thought (from _The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy_), ‘Who will that inconvenience?’ " Also, there’s nothing new about “football first” mentality; wasn’t this what led to the West Point cheating scandal of 1950? ---
**Author:** ![etv78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/d78d45/32.png) [@etv78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/etv78)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2014, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628/126 "2014-03-28T22:42:42Z")
I’m not worried about school that actually give a crap about academics. I worry about the state schools, which will subject to this ruling by Christmas, and their illiterate players taking BS classes to be eligible. ---
**Author:** ![Enginerd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/bcef8e/32.png) [@Enginerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enginerd)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2014, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628/127 "2014-03-28T23:07:45Z")
> [@etv78](#): > > I’m not worried about school that actually give a crap about academics. I worry about the state schools, which will subject to this ruling by Christmas, and their illiterate players taking BS classes to be eligible. But that’s what happens now. You’re arguing for the system that allows - even requires - them to take BS classes in order to maintain a fiction that they’re students first and athletes second. ---
**Author:** ![Omniscient](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omniscient/32/3290_2.png) [@Omniscient](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omniscient)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2014, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628/128 "2014-03-28T23:20:55Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > What do I care if Boise State can’t get recruits over USC? Why the heck would what you care about matter. This is the problem with all the bigotry and unfounded anger in this debate. No one seems interested in actually solving the problem in a way that puts ALL the athletes best interests in mind while also ensuring that the schools can field sports teams without marginalizing their mission. Instead it’s all about ghetto football players and football factories, when they are the minority in spite off what ESPN wants you to believe. ---
**Author:** ![Carmady](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f04885/32.png) [@Carmady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Carmady)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2014, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628/129 "2014-03-28T23:35:14Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > I think one of the worst arguments in favor of the NCAA’s continued monopoly and refusal to pay students is that somehow, it would be bad if a few smaller schools can’t pay recruits the big bucks and attract them. First of all, enough schools will be around that will foster a healthy competition among schools for recruits. Second, who cares if the smaller schools and poorer ones can’t afford to lavish gifts on their players like the big schools? **Isn’t that competition and free market?** Yes, which is exactly the problem. Schools should not be competing in the free market as sports franchises. That is a fundamental flaw of college sports that may not have a solution. The top priority should be to protect the students and the educational function of the school. In a time of skyrocketing tuition and teacher layoffs, where the median school loses nearly 10 million dollars a year on sports already, it would be crazy to start having schools compete in a free market as sports franchises. Third parties should be able to pay athletes whatever they want imo. Professional teams should not require athletes to go to college first. But the top priority, by far, is protecting the students and their education. Competing as a free market sports franchise is extremely dangerous for them. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2014, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628/130 "2014-03-28T23:41:02Z")
Making big time sports wholly professional in the context of a free market will drive many (perhaps even a majority) of schools to revert to truly recreational sports. There is no question of their going all-out to compete with the big football schools for top talent because it will quickly become impossible. They’ll just have to give up competitive sports and let their teams become honest-to-goodness amateur teams. That’s a good thing. ---
**Author:** ![etv78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/d78d45/32.png) [@etv78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/etv78)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2014, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628/131 "2014-03-28T23:59:26Z")
> [@Enginerd](#): > > But that’s what happens now. You’re arguing for the system that allows - even requires - them to take BS classes in order to maintain a fiction that they’re students first and athletes second. No I’m arguing that their scholarship is all they deserve from the school. They should absolutely be allowed off-season jobs, and ability to capitalize on their likenesses. ---
**Author:** ![PhillyGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ed655f/32.png) [@PhillyGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PhillyGuy)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2014, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628/132 "2014-03-29T01:10:17Z")
> [@etv78](#): > > They should absolutely be allowed off-season jobs, and ability to capitalize on their likenesses. These sounds like good topics for collective bargaining. The schools are hardly likely to do this voluntarily. It seems to me that you are opposing the only practical means – unionization – to achieve goals you yourself support. P.S. If you do support unionization, I apologize. My impression from your previous posts is that you oppose it. ---
**Author:** ![etv78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/d78d45/32.png) [@etv78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/etv78)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2014, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628/133 "2014-03-29T01:19:13Z")
I’m very pro union. My dad was in one, I hope to be in one after Grad School. I oppose people who will have obscene incomes in their future feeling the need to bite the hand feeding them. ---
**Author:** ![Enginerd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/bcef8e/32.png) [@Enginerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enginerd)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2014, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628/134 "2014-03-29T03:17:55Z")
> [@etv78](#): > > I’m very pro union. My dad was in one, I hope to be in one after Grad School. I oppose people who will have obscene incomes in their future feeling the need to bite the hand feeding them. The players who are going to go on to make loads of money don’t need the union as much as players who aren’t, and there are a lot more of the latter than the former. ---
**Author:** ![etv78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/d78d45/32.png) [@etv78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/etv78)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2014, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628/135 "2014-03-29T03:27:45Z")
But the ones who aren’t NFL bound seemingly are more likely to actually graduate. If not, I’m not going to feel sorry for them. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2014, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628/136 "2014-03-29T03:47:42Z")
1. There’s no reason for you to believe that players who fail to make the NFL are “more likely to graduate.” That would mean that every player who prioritizes football over studying is likely to make the NFL, and that’s a ridiculous assumption. 2. “Likely to graduate” doesn’t necessarily mean that they leave school with something worthwhile. 3. You’re still ignoring people who are left with life-debilitating injuries and whose scholarships are yanked as soon as they are unable to play. 4. They don’t need you to feel sorry for them. What they need is the same right you have, to bargain for compensation without a cartel of employers unilaterally deciding what you will (or, rather, won’t) get paid. ---
**Author:** ![etv78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/d78d45/32.png) [@etv78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/etv78)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2014, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628/137 "2014-03-29T03:55:23Z")
I agree scholarships should be for 4 years, and honored in event of catostrophic injury. I had no cite about graduation rates,so I hedged. If guys want a useless major, once again I won’t weep for them. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2014, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628/138 "2014-03-29T04:13:56Z")
> [@etv78](#): > > I had no cite about graduation rates Have a boo at the reported decision for the graduation rate and the average gpa. ---
**Author:** ![Omniscient](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omniscient/32/3290_2.png) [@Omniscient](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omniscient)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2014, 6:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628/139 "2014-03-29T06:17:41Z")
> [@Carmady](#): > > The top priority should be to protect the students and the educational function of the school. In a time of skyrocketing tuition and teacher layoffs, where the median school loses nearly 10 million dollars a year on sports already, it would be crazy to start having schools compete in a free market as sports franchises. Why characterize it this way? Schools “lose” millions every year in engineering labs too. The school is spending that money so college kids can enrich themselves in athletics. Something every bit as valuable as any other field of study. ---
**Author:** ![Carmady](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f04885/32.png) [@Carmady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Carmady)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2014, 7:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628/140 "2014-03-29T07:05:13Z")
> [@Omniscient](#): > > Why characterize it this way? Schools “lose” millions every year in engineering labs too. The school is spending that money so college kids can enrich themselves in athletics. Something every bit as valuable as any other field of study. That’s a good point. The “losses” on athletics are still more than most departments, and schools already spend 3 to 6 times more per athlete than on other students, but athletics shouldn’t be denied money completely. My main point is that there needs to be _protection_ for the students. A competitive sports program that does poorly can unexpectedly lose a lot of money. It is unlikely that the history department will accidentally lose 30 million dollars a year because they didn’t perform well enough. But Rutgers has recently lost 30 million dollars a year on sports by not performing well enough, and that money comes from the education of the other students. Maybe athletes can be paid purely by percentage of profit. The key point is avoiding the risk that usually comes with running a free market sports franchise. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/college-athletes-can-unionize/684628.md?page=8)