Not to speak for him, but when jeebus says the market has already decided, I assume he means that there is no "minor league" or 18-20 year old league that has started up for players who don't want to go to college. And there's absolutely nothing standing the way of that if someone wanted to do it.
I don't think the non-existence of a minor leagues means that one wouldn't or couldn't succeed in the free market. IMO the only reason one doesn't exist in the NFL is because the league and the NCAA discourage it. The NFL doesn't have to have an organized minor league, because the NCAA does it for them. But if the NCAA did have to pay players for their services, maybe it wouldn't be so profitable for them, and maybe the NFL would then want a minor league system.
The NBA used to allow players to get drafted right out of high school. Then there were a large number of "busts" that the owners shelled out a lot of money for that didn't pan out. After that, the NBA said no mas. We're not going to spend this money on unproven talent. Now they can't be drafted until the owners have seen them play a year of college ball. It doesn't eliminate busts, but it's reducing the percentage. At least the NBA has the D-League, and maybe that will turn into a true minor league system. We'll see. Even if it does, there will still be a place for college basketball, and it would be the same for football. There would still be athletes who want the education and want to play sports for their school. If they chose to do it for the scholarship, then that would be their choice. But the way it's set up now, these kids are forced to go to school with no real other options, and I think that's shitty.
I agree there are plenty of 18-20 year old football players who don't want to go to college. So why do they go to college then?
Also, not to get into some kind of legal argument, but I'm surprised you'd say that an independent contractor and an employee are effectively the same? When someone hires you, you still aren't their employee. Also, independent contractors don't unionize... That's part of the point.
I didn't say they were the same. I said the effect is the same. An independent contractor provides a service to someone in exchange for money (usually). Unionization really has nothing to do with it for purposes of this part of the discussion. I'm talking about the macro here, not the micro.
But I had to look back and see if that "slave labor" comment was for real... Did you mean that? Slaves? Really? Why do you minimize all the things they do get? I know if I could have played a sport for a free education rather than having to work shitty jobs in the summer to pay for it myself, I'd have done it in a heartbeat and been happy about it. Just like tons of other kids who work their butts off and hope they're good enough to make it.
Don't fall for ZrinDak's ploy man. I didn't say NCAA football players were the same as slaves.
But take away the racial connotation and the sensationalism, and tell me that this is not "slave labor." You do a job for someone for no trade-able commodity. The "compensation" you do get is an education, that is non-transferable (which you may or may not need), and they give you food and a place to stay, again non-transferable. Oh and they provide all the equipment you need to do your job to the best of your ability. You work your butt off, are risking life and limb, and must follow every order and schedule given to you.
Yes, I am minimizing all the things that they get... because the things that they get are totally self-serving for the school. The school gets to claim they're students, so they don't have to pay them. The education that they get... first, the value of the education is completely over-inflated. Second, most of those professors don't care whether the athlete actually attends classes or not, or whether they learn anything. They'll give the athlete whatever grade they need to complete the course and keep the athlete in the system. So really, what is that kind of education worth?
The university doesn't lose anything, because the program pays the school for the cost of the players' tuition. Not to mention a bunch of rich boosters provide millions upon millions of dollars to the school for facilities and scholarships.
Of course, there are certain students who take their education seriously, and yes, getting that education is a benefit, especially for those who will not make millions... which is most of them. But I don't think the burden of that should fall on the backs of the players who don't care about the education and will make millions anyway.
Anyway, you said they weren't asking for actual pay, but that is their end game, right?
I don't know what this specific union's end game is. I can tell you I'm in favor of players being treated fairly according to free market principles, and not exploited to the tune of billions, probably trillions, to further the interests of the universities.
I will admit it's personal for me because I was a walk-on and didn't have a scholarship... I didn't have a rich family, and I knew I would have time to devote to my sport and to work to make spending money. I figured out real quick I wasn't going to be able to do that. And I paid for my school through loans. So even if I had a scholarship and my room and board were covered, I wouldn't be able to play and have any kind of social life.
