I guess I should stop being shocked at the general acceptance that labor in this country is fungible and worth next to nothing.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Pac 12 players threaten opt-out of 2020 CFB season unless health and safety and other demands are met
- Thread starter Jens1893
- Start date
I guess I should stop being shocked at the general acceptance that labor in this country is fungible and worth next to nothing.
Since when did 17 and 18 year old kids getting a free scholarship and all the other benefits that come with it mean next to nothing? I’m sure the employment opportunities are just booming for them and plenty of them just pass up being a scholarship athlete huh?
This is exactly my point. All college athletes are easily replaceable, right? Why, they're lucky to even get a scholarship. They should just be happy and STFU.
This is the same mindset that the plutocrats want you to have about your job--you're lucky to have it, don't dare ask for more of anything.
Good. You get it. Labor is worth zilch to management/owners without a market of consumers. Goes for Econ as well as D1 athletics.
By all means: let’s continue to subjugate these young men and their (mostly black) bodies because...reasons.
You’re right- it sure seems simple.
Most D1 athletes are white, FYI. Race baiting.
somebody
Well-Known Member
In the revenue sports?
You are right; most (!56%) of D1 athletes are white.
However, I 've seen the argument over and over again that if we pay football players that it will negatively impact other sports because the other sports (outside of Men's Basketball) don't produce a profit. In fact, that's pretty much always been the case- one example from this article shows that LSU's football program counted for nearly $100M of LSU's $145M AD revenue in 2018. Further, LSU only accounts $12M of their $37M from media sharing to football- if it was more accurate, it would not be a stretch to say that football accounts for ~$112M of $145M in revenue, which is north of 77%.
Guess what? Only 37% of D1 football players are white. Moreover, men's basketball is the only other program at nearly all D1 schools that turns a profit. Only 23% of D1 men's basketball players are white.
When the vast majority of revenue comes from those two sports, and yet those athletes receive the same benefits as other athletes it's accurate to use the word "subjugation" to describe what's being done to those athetes' bodies, and it's even more stark when you think that the revenues football and basketball athletes produce are being used to provide benefits to other student athletes, the vast majority of whom are white.
I guess you got me, though- black players only just under half the players in those sports. I guess I should have said "predominantly black bodies" instead of "mostly black bodies."
Can we stop with the racial commentary as it pertains to this issue? It really has nothing to do with the issue at hand.
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
Agreed. I think the reason why there are so many is linked to problems in America. But the fact the divide exists is not a reflection on the colleges or the NCAA. Colleges do not recruit black athletes because they’re black and they certainly don’t recruit black athletes because they’re racist and want to hold them back. It’s a ridiculous notion. That’s my peace, I’m done as there are 3-4 posters obsessed with making this a racial problem when it’s simply athletes vs the NCAA.
somebody
Well-Known Member
You've been one of the primary, if misguided, voices in that discussion. And before you disagree, look a couple of post up at you non-prompted question.
Do you really think that recent BLM protests have nothing to do with this issue coming to a head at this particular time?
Do you really think that recent BLM protests have anything to do with CFB players wanting to get paid?
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
It’s a perfectly valid question as the reasoning behind this is steeped deep in American history. There are not overwhelmingly large amounts of black athletes simply because the NCAA is a racist machine that only offers predominantly black kids scholarships.
I have no doubt that the political moment in this country motivated this statement by Pac 12 athletes. I also find it sort of disingenuous to couch their request as "wanting to get paid" by ignoring their concerns about their health.
I have a hard time seeing college football players as “labor” as opposed to volunteer participants. If ADs made zero revenue from football would players still be playing? Of course they would. They’re playing because they were HS football stars and want to continue at the next level, because they get to be BMOC and get all the perks that being a D1 football player comes with, and they get to play in front of tens of thousands of fans every game and be on TV. For some, it’s their best chance at becoming an NFL player, and for others it’s their way to get a college education. There are kids all over the country hoping they have a chance to play college football every single year despite not having a paycheck associated with that participation. If my job stopped paying me would I keep showing up - hell no. I’m labor, they are not.
Are walk-ons similarly entitled to pay? They’re not even getting scholarships now but they are still putting their bodies on the line and they are paying to play. Are we paying them too?
Unless and until kids stop accepting scholarships to play football every year and programs can no longer field teams, I don’t see what incentive their is for college football to change how they “compensate” athletes.
Are walk-ons similarly entitled to pay? They’re not even getting scholarships now but they are still putting their bodies on the line and they are paying to play. Are we paying them too?
Unless and until kids stop accepting scholarships to play football every year and programs can no longer field teams, I don’t see what incentive their is for college football to change how they “compensate” athletes.
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
They definitely go hand in hand as they feel they have a voice right now they didn’t before.
I agree with the timing of this particular movement, but I find it disingenuous to suggest that this is a new idea, solely motivated by BLM. Anyways, the discussion at hand is about the feasibility of providing fair compensation, including health benefits, to CFB players from the extreme revenues being generated by the product that they help provide. Are you suggesting that this discussion should be centered around black athletes because they comprise 63% of D1 CFB players?
I don’t really think it has much to do with it, probably more to do with the NIL being tabled for 2020 and the fact that programs are bringing them back on campus during covid.
Last edited:
Sure, that seems to make sense considering that black men are the majority of CFB players. A better question would be whether that fact makes any difference in this discussion. I sense that you think it's irrelevant. I would say that the history of underpayment to black people for their labor in this country makes the race of the players relevant.
So all else being equal, if 100% of CFB players were white, the lack of fair compensation for the product they provide would be perfectly fine in your mind. Got it.
Good argument.
All else being equal, if 100% of CFB players were white, maybe they'd already be getting paid.
pcbuff
Well-Known Member
I can’t get my arms around how most of these demands could be met and still comply with title 9? It would require a total reset of salaries and power. If the kids boycott, I see the NFL offering an alternative like the NBA G League. While that will get some kids paid, it blows up the Olympic sports and eliminates the college experience for all athletes. I don’t see that as a good thing. It is a really complex problem and an us versus them narrative tied to race or social power structures will create new sets of winners and losers, which I’m not sure are preferable to status quo.
Ha, even better argument. So you actually believe the reason CFB players are not currently receiving fair compensation is because 63% are black and there is a racist agenda?Good argument.
All else being equal, if 100% of CFB players were white, maybe they'd already be getting paid.
GoldenSkier
Well-Known Member
Agreed- No revenue from CFB would kill the olympic feeders.
At the end of the day, with the NBA G league becoming a thing, I wouldn't be surprised to see a NFL "G league", but to me it seems like it would turn the NFL into a MLB style. Teams already rip through QBs, what's preventing someone like T Lawrence from getting tossed into the fire too soon? Bad regimes could totally sink development of teams so I think the NFL is more keen on keeping CFB alive. Would be interesting to know how much the NFL and NCAAF collaborate.
The only thing that could really help is the outrageous salaries that coaches make and cutting sports to the minimum requirement from the NCAA. Players can complain about outlandish facility spending but 1) they are part of the problem because every school feels like they have to one up to each other to stay competitive and 2) most of these are funded from donors and alumni. The players also didn’t mention anything about expenses that are deducted from revenue and then split between owners and players in professional sports. Getting rid of title 9 in athletic departments would solve the issue immediately though but I don’t see that happening.
Now if schools limited spending money on facilities and coaches focused that money towards players would they start going to those middle to bottom tier schools instead of the Alabama’s of the world? Maybe, I have my doubts though. And like I said above the facilities are largely financed through donations to the school so that isn’t revenue generated by players.
Overall it was a very misguided list of demands from the pac 12 (especially the endowment thing) and that is why you saw the big 10 players leave that off.
You answered your own question - the way these pay demands would be met is by eliminating all non-revenue sports. Some schools will hang on to basketball programs and some will relegate everything but football to club.
GoldenSkier
Well-Known Member
Did you come into this thread to stop the racial commentary then join in?
Fair. I guess I couldn't help but question what the BLM movement has to do with the feasibility of fair compensation in the sport of CFB due mostly to Title IX.
