Welcome Guest!
Create an Account
login email:
password:
site searchcontact usabout usadvertise with ushelp
Message Board
BobcatAttack.com Message Board
Ohio Football
Topic:  College Football Union

Topic:  College Football Union
Author
Message
OhioStunter
General User



Member Since: 2/18/2005
Location: Chicago
Post Count: 2,516

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 1:24:24 PM 
Here we go...

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/chi-northwestern-football-players-labor-union-20140128,0,182603.story
Back to Top
  
OhioStunter
General User



Member Since: 2/18/2005
Location: Chicago
Post Count: 2,516

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 1:33:30 PM 
As I read more about this, wouldn't one need to be considered an "employee" to file with NLRB? So the next question is, are athletes seeking to be considered "employees"?
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 4,067

Status: Online
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 1:56:55 PM 
OhioStunter wrote:
As I read more about this, wouldn't one need to be considered an "employee" to file with NLRB? So the next question is, are athletes seeking to be considered "employees"?


By any reasonable definition, they are employees.
Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 2:09:24 PM 
Oh yes, it would be "unreasonable" to think otherwise. Of course, any student athlete or even student participant of some organization is therefore also an "employee," like cheerleader, band member, graduate assistant, resident assistant, etc. I'm sure the Chicago branch of the NLRB will be eager to sign them up, to uh, help them avoid becoming victims of the evil university.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 4,067

Status: Online
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 2:31:25 PM 
Robert Fox wrote:
Oh yes, it would be "unreasonable" to think otherwise. Of course, any student athlete or even student participant of some organization is therefore also an "employee," like cheerleader, band member, graduate assistant, resident assistant, etc. I'm sure the Chicago branch of the NLRB will be eager to sign them up, to uh, help them avoid becoming victims of the evil university.

The bolded examples are employees.

NCAA athletes provide a large portion of the labor that leads to, in some cases, huge sums of money. That sounds like an employee to me.

Back to Top
  
Paul Graham
General User



Member Since: 1/18/2005
Location: The Plains, OH
Post Count: 1,424

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 2:31:31 PM 
Robert Fox wrote:
Oh yes, it would be "unreasonable" to think otherwise. Of course, any student athlete or even student participant of some organization is therefore also an "employee," like cheerleader, band member, graduate assistant, resident assistant, etc. I'm sure the Chicago branch of the NLRB will be eager to sign them up, to uh, help them avoid becoming victims of the evil university.


Never underestimate a conservative's knee-jerk desire to defend power and the status quo against justice and civility.

Yes, lets keep paying the coaches 2 million dollars per year (and continue to keep them as the HIGHEST PAID public employees in most states deadspin.com/infographic-is-your-states-highest-paid-employee-a-co-489635228). Yes, lets continue to let the big university's profit 10's of millions of dollars per year. Yes, lets let the bowl game crony capitalism persist and pay their "board members" 100K a year for being a well connected rich dude with the right skin pigment. Of course, lets keep ESPN and the other stations rich and happy.

But, when it comes to protecting the players rights, that's preposterous! The players, they should continue to make due with the compensation they've always received, college tuition! Even as the profits rise for the rest, they should just be happy to get a college education!

Forget about the ALL THE RISKS of playing this game that we now know about. Forget about the 30% of them that will NEVER GRADUATE and thus never really receive any real compensation. Forget about the INCREASING DEMANDS of year-around training.

This comes down to one simple word: exploitation. Do we want to be a society where the rich and powerful profit greatly on the hard work and physical risk of "amateur" athletes.

The answer should be an emphatic: NO.

 - Paul Graham (Chicago, IL)

Last Edited: 1/28/2014 2:31:58 PM by Paul Graham
Back to Top
  
mf279801
General User

Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Newark, DE
Post Count: 2,472

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 4:17:15 PM 
OhioStunter wrote:
As I read more about this, wouldn't one need to be considered an "employee" to file with NLRB? So the next question is, are athletes seeking to be considered "employees"?


Then I can only assume that the Northwestern Football team wants the University (Their employer) to retroactively withhold the appropriate federal, state, and local taxes from their "pay"?
Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 4:27:01 PM 
Paul Graham wrote:
Robert Fox wrote:
Oh yes, it would be "unreasonable" to think otherwise. Of course, any student athlete or even student participant of some organization is therefore also an "employee," like cheerleader, band member, graduate assistant, resident assistant, etc. I'm sure the Chicago branch of the NLRB will be eager to sign them up, to uh, help them avoid becoming victims of the evil university.


Never underestimate a conservative's knee-jerk desire to defend power and the status quo against justice and civility.

Yes, lets keep paying the coaches 2 million dollars per year (and continue to keep them as the HIGHEST PAID public employees in most states deadspin.com/infographic-is-your-states-highest-paid-employee-a-co-489635228). Yes, lets continue to let the big university's profit 10's of millions of dollars per year. Yes, lets let the bowl game crony capitalism persist and pay their "board members" 100K a year for being a well connected rich dude with the right skin pigment. Of course, lets keep ESPN and the other stations rich and happy.

But, when it comes to protecting the players rights, that's preposterous! The players, they should continue to make due with the compensation they've always received, college tuition! Even as the profits rise for the rest, they should just be happy to get a college education!

Forget about the ALL THE RISKS of playing this game that we now know about. Forget about the 30% of them that will NEVER GRADUATE and thus never really receive any real compensation. Forget about the INCREASING DEMANDS of year-around training.

This comes down to one simple word: exploitation. Do we want to be a society where the rich and powerful profit greatly on the hard work and physical risk of "amateur" athletes.

The answer should be an emphatic: NO.

 - Paul Graham (Chicago, IL)


Gee, "paul" do you support college athletics, in any way, shape, or form? By your persistent commentary on this web site, I'd say you do. So I guess you're part of the problem. Or can I assume you have found a new, righteous, inner "paul" who is immediately ending ALL support for college varsity athletics?

Good of you to stand up for all the little people, "paul," and represent justice and civility. The world needed a guy like you, and you stepped up. Way to go!
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 4,067

Status: Online
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 4:35:25 PM 
mf279801 wrote:
OhioStunter wrote:
As I read more about this, wouldn't one need to be considered an "employee" to file with NLRB? So the next question is, are athletes seeking to be considered "employees"?


Then I can only assume that the Northwestern Football team wants the University (Their employer) to retroactively withhold the appropriate federal, state, and local taxes from their "pay"?


If they get the back pay that would come along with that, I bet they'd be on board.
Back to Top
  
L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,496

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 4:39:07 PM 
This raises all sorts of interesting questions. For example, are they "employees" solely because of the scholarship? So, if there were no scholarship, they would not be "employees"? If a scholarship makes you an "employee", what about those on academic or need-based scholarships? Are they also "employees"? If it isn't the scholarship, but rather the fact that they play a sport, representing the school, are high school athletes also "employees"? Does it extent to non-revenue sports, too, so that swimmers or wrestlers are also "employees"?

“We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” ― Epictetus

Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 4,067

Status: Online
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 4:42:23 PM 
I'm genuinely curious and wonder if somebody who is opposed to college athletes receiving a stipend could enlighten me as to why they are so opposed. In my mind, it changes very little. Why the staunch opposition?
Back to Top
  
OhioStunter
General User



Member Since: 2/18/2005
Location: Chicago
Post Count: 2,516

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 4:44:55 PM 
L.C. wrote:
This raises all sorts of interesting questions. For example, are they "employees" solely because of the scholarship? So, if there were no scholarship, they would not be "employees"? If a scholarship makes you an "employee", what about those on academic or need-based scholarships? Are they also "employees"? If it isn't the scholarship, but rather the fact that they play a sport, representing the school, are high school athletes also "employees"? Does it extent to non-revenue sports, too, so that swimmers or wrestlers are also "employees"?


Agreed, this creates a whole new set of questions. What about student trainers, who work hard to take care of the players? What about band members? I was a cheerleader for four years. I received $50 per quarter as a stipend (which barely covered a textbook). Was I considered an employee? If so, that would have equated to about 20 cents an hour, well below minimum wage, even if adjusted for inflation.
Back to Top
  
OhioStunter
General User



Member Since: 2/18/2005
Location: Chicago
Post Count: 2,516

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 4:47:48 PM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
I'm genuinely curious and wonder if somebody who is opposed to college athletes receiving a stipend could enlighten me as to why they are so opposed. In my mind, it changes very little. Why the staunch opposition?


Would you add the stipend on top of the scholarship?

Where would the money come from to fund the stipend?

Who would be eligible for the stipend? Football players? Women's soccer? Band? Trainers?

Would a "starter" and a "bench player" get the same stipend?
 

If games went into overtime, would you need to pay overtime?

Last Edited: 1/28/2014 5:09:27 PM by OhioStunter
Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 4:55:11 PM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
I'm genuinely curious and wonder if somebody who is opposed to college athletes receiving a stipend could enlighten me as to why they are so opposed. In my mind, it changes very little. Why the staunch opposition?


Because of the myriad problems it creates, for starters. It's a slippery slope that will eventually create an enormous mire of red tape that will overwhelm the system.

For me, it also ignores the "pay" that athletes DO receive, a free tuition. For people of moderate means, that's a sizable chunk of money, and plenty of athletes are perfectly happy getting an opportunity to play for their school while "earning" a college education. To discount that, is to ignore the cost of college education for the rest of us.

There's also the concept of choice. No one is forced to accept the terms. If a player doesn't like the deal, don't do it. Fine.

The fact that most of these athletes do participate, seems to indicate the trade-off is a fair one. You get a college education, and even some exposure for potentially playing the sport professionally, if you're good enough. Again, if you don't like that deal, don't take it. Get out your wallet and pay for your own college education, like everyone else. 
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 4,067

Status: Online
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 5:23:35 PM 
Robert Fox wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
I'm genuinely curious and wonder if somebody who is opposed to college athletes receiving a stipend could enlighten me as to why they are so opposed. In my mind, it changes very little. Why the staunch opposition?


Because of the myriad problems it creates, for starters. It's a slippery slope that will eventually create an enormous mire of red tape that will overwhelm the system.

For me, it also ignores the "pay" that athletes DO receive, a free tuition. For people of moderate means, that's a sizable chunk of money, and plenty of athletes are perfectly happy getting an opportunity to play for their school while "earning" a college education. To discount that, is to ignore the cost of college education for the rest of us.

There's also the concept of choice. No one is forced to accept the terms. If a player doesn't like the deal, don't do it. Fine.

The fact that most of these athletes do participate, seems to indicate the trade-off is a fair one. You get a college education, and even some exposure for potentially playing the sport professionally, if you're good enough. Again, if you don't like that deal, don't take it. Get out your wallet and pay for your own college education, like everyone else. 


Sorry, but the bolded is garbage. There's a choice involved in baseball, but in basketball and football there isn't a choice. The NFL and NBA have basically colluded with the NCAA to create a free minor league system. There is not a free market available for these kids' services, like there is in pretty much any other industry in the world. If we were talking about, for instance, a gifted pianist you would think it was an affront to capitalism if some arbitrary governing body like the NCAA deemed that no gifted pianist could make money between the ages of 18-21. All that's there is the illusion of choice. And in many cases, the illusion that education comes first.
Back to Top
  
cc-cat
General User

Member Since: 4/5/2006
Location: matthews, NC
Post Count: 3,947

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 5:31:00 PM 
People often jump to, "they get their tuition paid for, that is there pay." "Boy, if I had gotten money..."  But this movement should be more than about money in a pocket. 

Are they getting an education?  Another thread touched on this.  Many of these kids (in the primary money sports) are admitted under "exemptions" and then are not educated when enrolled.  Often simply kept eligible.  Completing 4 years with 5th grade reading levels. 

Others have their scholarships taken away if they fall down the depth chart or get injured.  Others incur medical costs well after leaving campus.  The broader answers where the Universities/NCAA fail to be accountable is where this will be interesting.
Back to Top
  
C Money
General User



Member Since: 8/28/2010
Post Count: 3,420

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 5:57:05 PM 
This has the law nerd in me really excited, and it's crazy enough that it might just work. The Wagner Act offers a definition of employee that doesn't really define it, so you're back to the common law definition of employee, which is going to come down to whether the scholarships and stipends are wages. I really don't know the answer to that one.

Any hard core labor law experts want to opine?
Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 5:58:17 PM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
Robert Fox wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
I'm genuinely curious and wonder if somebody who is opposed to college athletes receiving a stipend could enlighten me as to why they are so opposed. In my mind, it changes very little. Why the staunch opposition?


Because of the myriad problems it creates, for starters. It's a slippery slope that will eventually create an enormous mire of red tape that will overwhelm the system.

For me, it also ignores the "pay" that athletes DO receive, a free tuition. For people of moderate means, that's a sizable chunk of money, and plenty of athletes are perfectly happy getting an opportunity to play for their school while "earning" a college education. To discount that, is to ignore the cost of college education for the rest of us.

There's also the concept of choice. No one is forced to accept the terms. If a player doesn't like the deal, don't do it. Fine.

The fact that most of these athletes do participate, seems to indicate the trade-off is a fair one. You get a college education, and even some exposure for potentially playing the sport professionally, if you're good enough. Again, if you don't like that deal, don't take it. Get out your wallet and pay for your own college education, like everyone else. 


Sorry, but the bolded is garbage. There's a choice involved in baseball, but in basketball and football there isn't a choice. The NFL and NBA have basically colluded with the NCAA to create a free minor league system. There is not a free market available for these kids' services, like there is in pretty much any other industry in the world. If we were talking about, for instance, a gifted pianist you would think it was an affront to capitalism if some arbitrary governing body like the NCAA deemed that no gifted pianist could make money between the ages of 18-21. All that's there is the illusion of choice. And in many cases, the illusion that education comes first.


It's not garbage, and there is a choice. They don't have to play NCAA ball. If they want to compete for the NFL and bypass the NCAA, I don't think anyone is stopping them. To your pianist point, no... I wouldn't think it an affront because the NCAA is not doing what you claim they are--holding these kids hostage to play football. The same 18-21 year old pianist is most often also going to college, maybe on a full scholarship to do so. While in college, they are also not likely earning money for their performances. Once they graduate and become employed, then they do make money. Same with a surgeon, same with a teacher, same with an engineer. 

If there's a market for 18-21 year old football players to make money playing football, I have no problem with someone starting up a league to do just that. But it's not the job of the NCAA or universities to do it. Their deal is play and get an education and a crack at professional ball. Take it or leave it.
Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 6:04:15 PM 
cc cat wrote:
People often jump to, "they get their tuition paid for, that is there pay." "Boy, if I had gotten money..."  But this movement should be more than about money in a pocket. 

Are they getting an education?  Another thread touched on this.  Many of these kids (in the primary money sports) are admitted under "exemptions" and then are not educated when enrolled.  Often simply kept eligible.  Completing 4 years with 5th grade reading levels. 

Others have their scholarships taken away if they fall down the depth chart or get injured.  Others incur medical costs well after leaving campus.  The broader answers where the Universities/NCAA fail to be accountable is where this will be interesting.


I can't necessarily argue, but to me, it's a bit outside the point. If you take the money/stipend thing out of the equation, I'm sure you'd get much agreement on the "fairness" of removing scholarships, level of education provided, testing, medical expenses, etc.
Back to Top
  
cc-cat
General User

Member Since: 4/5/2006
Location: matthews, NC
Post Count: 3,947

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 6:11:05 PM 
Not sure why it is outside the point.  Working conditions and benefits have always been issues addressed by unions.  If your point is that the issues outside the payment issue are "no brainers" that everyone agrees upon, then I wish I believed that, but Universities have not abandoned those "outside the point" issues as well.

as far as..."Their deal is play and get an education..."   see the other thread that addresses this issue.  It refers folks to this site:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/07/us/ncaa-athletes-reading-sc...

Many universities are abandoning the education piece - focused on maintaining eligibility.

Last Edited: 1/28/2014 6:15:15 PM by cc-cat
Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 6:23:59 PM 
cc cat wrote:
Not sure why it is outside the point.  Working conditions and benefits have always been issues addressed by unions.  If your point is that the issues outside the payment issue are "no brainers" that everyone agrees upon, then I wish I believed that, but Universities have not abandoned those "outside the point" issues as well.

as far as..."Their deal is play and get an education..."   see the other thread that addresses this issue.  It refers folks to this site:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/07/us/ncaa-athletes-reading-sc...

Many universities are abandoning the education piece - focused on maintaining eligibility.



I'm not looking at your points as something driven only by unions. I didn't think your first post was centered on the union as the solution. If that's what you intended, then I misunderstood. But again, on finding the "right" thing to do in terms of providing an education, etc, I think you would find common ground. To me, however, the upholders of "what is right," are they players, the player parents, alumni, and to a lesser degree, the fans. All universities are not in lock step on the issues you cited, so there is some choice on the matter, even aside from simply not participating. 
Back to Top
  
Speaker of Truth
General User

Member Since: 1/26/2011
Post Count: 441

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 6:27:11 PM 
Here is my take on a few of the points:

- They do not have a choice in the NFL and NBA.  You must be 2 years removed from High School to enter the draft(1 for hoops).  How is there a choice here?  Don't give me some garbage about playing in Europe or starting a new league here.  
- LC brought up a a great point with what defines an employee.  I think the counter would be that, most other people you listed do not have limitations on their pay.  If a science student on campus gets a full ride, he can easily get money from Company X to work for them on the side.  The biggest issue here is for walk ons.  
-  Why can't athletes get paid for their autographs or merchandise?  The argument seems to be that donors would abuse this and pay way over the regular value.  So do we punish athletes because donors are doing something wrong?  If Billy invents a flying car, wins the noble peace prize and is on scholarship, you better believe his autograph is worth a lot of money.  He is allowed to sell it...why can't athletes?
- Fox, you say plenty of athletes are happy just receiving the scholarship.  I agree but those are typically athletes who in a fair market system wouldn't be worth the scholarship.  If you are from moderate means and you get a scholarship to go to school, you should be proud and happy.  What if you were worth that scholarship plus some?  Then you would feel like you are being ripped off.  I'm sure in your job if you felt like you were not being paid your value, you would think it would be justifiable to ask for a raise and receive that.  Why is this any different?
- Too some extent you should be able to major or receive credit for playing a sport.  Make it some sort of practicum.  Some people come to school to further their sporting career, why make them pick an irrelevant major?  Have them take the core requirements that all students do.  This is no different than any other meaningless major on campus.  

Feel free to pick apart any argument I made....I would be more than happy to explain why I am right!!!!!











 
Back to Top
  
OhioStunter
General User



Member Since: 2/18/2005
Location: Chicago
Post Count: 2,516

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 6:28:30 PM 
cc cat wrote:
Not sure why it is outside the point.  Working conditions and benefits have always been issues addressed by unions.  If your point is that the issues outside the payment issue are "no brainers" that everyone agrees upon, then I wish I believed that, but Universities have not abandoned those "outside the point" issues as well.

as far as..."Their deal is play and get an education..."   see the other thread that addresses this issue.  It refers folks to this site:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/07/us/ncaa-athletes-reading-sc...

Many universities are abandoning the education piece - focused on maintaining eligibility.



Thanks for providing that link. Providing student-athletes that can't even read with scholarships -- and not actually educating them when they are at school -- is wrong.

So will an athlete's union improve that situation or make it even worse since their main goal will be to protect the athletes?
Back to Top
  
cc-cat
General User

Member Since: 4/5/2006
Location: matthews, NC
Post Count: 3,947

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 6:33:11 PM 
OhioStunter wrote:
cc cat wrote:
Not sure why it is outside the point.  Working conditions and benefits have always been issues addressed by unions.  If your point is that the issues outside the payment issue are "no brainers" that everyone agrees upon, then I wish I believed that, but Universities have not abandoned those "outside the point" issues as well.

as far as..."Their deal is play and get an education..."   see the other thread that addresses this issue.  It refers folks to this site:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/07/us/ncaa-athletes-reading-sc...

Many universities are abandoning the education piece - focused on maintaining eligibility.



Thanks for providing that link. Providing student-athletes that can't even read with scholarships -- and not actually educating them when they are at school -- is wrong.

So will an athlete's union improve that situation or make it even worse since their main goal will be to protect the athletes?


Don't know but puts a little reality in the argument that "the university provides them an education."  Universities bring in many of these kids to win games and put fans in seats and TV rights on contract lines.  Their interest/drive to provide them an education is often a fallacy.
Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: College Football Union
   Posted: 1/28/2014 6:47:38 PM 
the123kid wrote:

- They do not have a choice in the NFL and NBA.  You must be 2 years removed from High School to enter the draft(1 for hoops).  How is there a choice here?  Don't give me some garbage about playing in Europe or starting a new league here.  


They do have a choice. They don't have to participate. In most cases, we're not talking about world-class athletes. We're talking about "good" athletes, who will almost certainly not make a professional living out of playing sports. For the ones who are world-class, playing 3-4 years on a full ride will hardly hurt them before they go pro. And, if they're smart, they'll pick up a good education while they're on campus so they can make a living in case injury knocks them out of the game. 

the123kid wrote:
- Fox, you say plenty of athletes are happy just receiving the scholarship.  I agree but those are typically athletes who in a fair market system wouldn't be worth the scholarship.  If you are from moderate means and you get a scholarship to go to school, you should be proud and happy.  What if you were worth that scholarship plus some?  Then you would feel like you are being ripped off.  I'm sure in your job if you felt like you were not being paid your value, you would think it would be justifiable to ask for a raise and receive that.  Why is this any different?
How do you make that evaluation, that you're worth that scholarship plus some? If they are truly worth more, then they should be a shoe-in to the NFL, NBA.  In my job, if I feel I'm worth more than I'm getting paid, sure, I'll ask for more. But I won't necessarily get it. They only way these athletes will get it, is if they prove it on the field. They've got 4-5 years to get that done. And they'll receive a scholarship, good coaching, sometimes world-class facilities, and an experience of a lifetime.










 

Last Edited: 1/28/2014 6:50:31 PM by Robert Fox
Back to Top
  
Showing Replies:  1 - 25  of 143 Posts
Jump to Page:  1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6    Next >
View Other 'Ohio Football' Topics
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             



WHO'S ONLINE
There are 303 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com
302 Guests
1 Registered User:
 Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
There are no other users looking at this page.




Copyright ©2025 BobcatAttack.com. All rights reserved.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties