Does anyone think this might actually happen?

Outside The Lines -- Northwestern Wildcats football players trying to join labor union - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/10363430/outside-lines-northwestern-wildcats-football-players-trying-join-labor-union)

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/press-releases/ncaa-responds-union-proposal

Unless they can get a paid subdivision going in this process, seems unlikely to go anywhere

If it did, most universities would drop there sports programs like a bad habit. I could see it now every college player acting like Johhny Football demanding they be paid millions.

It will happen within the next 5 years. Many people already want to pay athletes which will make them employees.

Time to pay college football players -- changing times, money say so - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/general/writer/gregg-doyel/23838595/its-time-pay-college-football-players-changing-times-money-say-so)

It will happen within the next 5 years. Many people already want to pay athletes which will make them employees.

Time to pay college football players -- changing times, money say so - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/general/writer/gregg-doyel/23838595/its-time-pay-college-football-players-changing-times-money-say-so)

I am fine with paying players, but their were 342 schools in the BCS subdivision (I am not sure if they kept the name with the playoff format), of which it was reported only like 10% of which made any real profit as the system has been. OU is one of the few that makes a ton of money and could afford to pay players but do you think the ones that do not are going to go along with that, it is a good way to become even less competitive. Being a payed backup that will rarely or never play starts looking better to some than a star of a second rate team.

Slight correction - there are 125 in the FBS division but your point is probably still valid.

The NCAA has made teams from top to bottom more competitive by essentially having an salary cap (set at $0) but what happens if they allow players to receive $25,000. Are a lot of these schools going to be able to dole out $2.5 million per year in player wages? That is just the football team and I assume they will have to pay all athletes and thanks to Title IX my guess is they will have to pay them the same amount of money so the volleyball teams will also make $25,000 per player.

The result is that there might be 50 programs that can support that kind of spending and the rest will have to go back to Division 2 or Division 3, and most likely Division 3 where college sports isn't much more the intramurals - and I would be okay with that.

Title 9 does not require equal funding, it kind of requires a close approximation of the ratio of the student bodies male:female ratio, but apparently allows them to drag their feet for a long time as long as they at least can show some improvement on that.

I was assuming that if they pay football players $X someone will sue under IX that all athletes should get paid.

^ this is why it wont happen

I was assuming that if they pay football players $X someone will sue under IX that all athletes should get paid.

Since pay should not have been a topic when it was written and nothing about equal spending per athlete even in comparable sports, it seem hard to see how it could be covered. Besides I doubt it will be a flat amount, at best I could see a capped 'stipends' between 0 and X,000. With many either paying less or nothing at some positions, then perennial powerhouses probably maxing out to get top recruits.

Schooled: The Price Of College Sports - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/movie/schooled-the-price-of-college-sports)

Not sure if any of you have watched this documentary, but its one of the best in terms of how the NCAA was formed and what it is up against today.

Since pay should not have been a topic when it was written and nothing about equal spending per athlete even in comparable sports, it seem hard to see how it could be covered. Besides I doubt it will be a flat amount, at best I could see a capped 'stipends' between 0 and X,000. With many either paying less or nothing at some positions, then perennial powerhouses probably maxing out to get top recruits.

I suspect we will find out for sure over the next 5 years.

I suspect we will find out for sure over the next 5 years.

Maybe we would know if they sue, or an idea how strong the case is but if both sides fight it out as much as possible, it could easily be in the courts more than a decade. I believe the US record for case to get through the entire process is almost 60 years.

If they can't afford to buy medical insurance; will they be able to pay union dues? Would union dues include some kind of medical rider protection?

Just posing this question; I'm not against unions, I've worked on both sides of the aisle as a union building representative and an administrator having to work with the unions on behalf of management.

Agree that players need some kind of medical protection. College football players are taking a risk if they are participating without some kind of insurance. If a union could provide this protection in their dues payments; there are possibilities.


http://www.thunderfans.com/vforum/images/smilies/okc.gif "Oklahoma City looks oh-so pretty... ... as I get my kicks on Route 66." --Nat King Cole.http://www.thunderfans.com/vforum/images/smilies/okc.gif

Kind of off topic but I wish many of todays athletes had the mindset of an amateur golfer. They get no money if they win a pro tourney. They are playing for experience, pride, and respect, and know the pay day will come soon enough with hard work and dedication.

And yes I know golf vs football isn't even close in terms of $$$ to a university it's is just a different mindset.