Tennessee preparing for the future with salaries for athletes.

#10
#10
jaguinn5 said:
They still have to get into college. Academics will matter as much or as little as it matters now.
Click to expand...
Not if college athletes become employees.
They could have the option to take classes, but it wouldn't necessarily be a requirement.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tango
#11
#11
jaguinn5 said:
They still have to get into college. Academics will matter as much or as little as it matters now.
Click to expand...
Oh really? Do other UT employees have to attend classes?

I'm willing to bet Coach Heupel doesn't, nor Donde Plowman, nor the folks who clean their offices, nor their secretaries, nor numerous employees of UT.

What makes you think the courts will let UT treat athlete employees differently than other employees of UT?

What makes you think the courts SHOULD treat athlete employees differently?
 
  • Like
Reactions: freedom fighter, Raebo and S.C. OrangeMan
#12
#12
This doesn’t have to be like a random person taking a job at UT.

Lots of students do work programs - work at the bookstore, library, administration, etc.

When I was in school I worked afternoons in the IT and AV group and was a student employee that was paid by the university.

This would look the same but with a bigger paycheck.

It’s really not that complicated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol_guy, USMC-TNVOL, tennrich1 and 3 others
#14
#14
1world1love said:
This doesn’t have to be like a random person taking a job at UT.

Lots of students do work programs - work at the bookstore, library, administration, etc.

When I was in school I worked afternoons in the IT and AV group and was a student employee that was paid by the university.

This would look the same but with a bigger paycheck.

It’s really not that complicated.
Click to expand...
Were you a full-time university employee? Doubtful. Work-study is not usually full-time.

I'd assume, if they're going to pay athletes, they'll want them working their job full-time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: S.C. OrangeMan
#15
#15
SayUWantAreVOLution said:
Were you a full-time university employee? Doubtful. Work-study is not usually full-time.

I'd assume, if they're going to pay athletes, they'll want them working their job full-time.
Click to expand...
Why would the distinction matter? There are already limits to the time an athlete can spend on team activities, just as there are for student work programs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KHVol
#16
#16
1world1love said:
This doesn’t have to be like a random person taking a job at UT.

Lots of students do work programs - work at the bookstore, library, administration, etc.

When I was in school I worked afternoons in the IT and AV group and was a student employee that was paid by the university.

This would look the same but with a bigger paycheck.

It’s really not that complicated.
Click to expand...
If you filled out a FAFSA form, for Federal Work -Study, it's a sure bet many of these guys will make too much money to qualify.

Nico is, after all, reportedly making millions now and I doubt he takes a pay cut.
 
  • Like
Reactions: S.C. OrangeMan
#17
#17
1world1love said:
Why would the distinction matter? There are already limits to the time an athlete can spend on team activities, just as there are for student work programs.
Click to expand...
Those requirements likely become moot if you're paying players. Because of the disparity of salaries, they'll not be hourly employees, I'd bet.

The NCAA or SECB1GAA is not going to look to get sued.

WHY would someone with a job let themselves be FORCED by their employer to go to school and study something other than their chosen field, which is sports?

Would you let your employer tell you: you have to go to school and study history or something, even though we pay you to be an accountant?
 
  • Like
Reactions: livefaith and S.C. OrangeMan
#19
#19
SayUWantAreVOLution said:
Those requirements likely become moot if you're paying players. Because of the disparity of salaries, they'll not be hourly employees, I'd bet.

The NCAA or SECB1GAA is not going to look to get sued.

WHY would someone with a job let themselves be FORCED by their employer to go to school and study something other than their chosen field, which is sports?

Would you let your employer tell you: you have to go to school and study history or something, even though we pay you to be an accountant?
Click to expand...
The student work model is just one example. PhD students work in labs and receive a stipend. They often work way more than full time. They also have to be students. They can be independently wealthy and still receive a stipend and still be required to do the coursework.

There are plenty of ways to pay students.
 
#20
#20
1world1love said:
The student work model is just one example. PhD students work in labs and receive a stipend. They often work way more than full time. They also have to be students. They can be independently wealthy and still receive a stipend and still be required to do the coursework.

There are plenty of ways to pay students.
Click to expand...
Yes. IN THEIR FIELD OF STUDY!

If you think it's okay to employ someone full-time AND force them to study in an entirely different area of work, why?

The notion of trying to keep these players as students erodes VERY QUICKLY after you employ them as athletes. If not immediately, as soon as they unionize and start collective bargaining.

Paying them directly will really put the "student" part of the equation in legal jeopardy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: S.C. OrangeMan
#21
#21
Brave Volunteer said:
The next domino to fall will be academic requirements. They will no longer be "student" athletes.
Click to expand...

The football players will all be asked to major in video games and take classes in how to negotiate for a new car and what pitfalls to avoid when buying a new house for your parents. The university wants to support these poor, delicate souls--so put upon with their full scholarships and $6K in payments already--called football players.

So the NCAA has proposed that schools pay HALF of their student-athletes $30K? White should undertake the responsibility of telling the other half, "Gee, sorry. You're very talented--more so than many of our football players--and certainly smarter, but unfortunately you're a woman and you play volleyball." Or "you're an Olympic-quality athlete, but it's swimming." Sure, football makes all the money--but the players don't have squat to do with that. That's strictly because of network decisions to televise games. Yes, there is demand for football on TV--but again, it has nothing to do with players. If money is paid to student-athletes, the first to get it should be non-revenue student athletes--MOST of whom are not even getting full scholarships. The NCAA gives 15 full schollies to basketball when five of the players almost never play and meanwhile you've got talented starters in non-rev sports who are still paying for room/board. It's BS. Basically, there is an effort by greedy parties to professionalize college football but keep the cover of it being "college." Forty or more football players will be getting good money to stand on the sidelines every year.

When Plowman says that the university must be "agile" to prepare for the future, she really means that fans/donors must by show increased agility when it comes to pulling their bank cards out of pockets and purses.
 
#22
#22
SayUWantAreVOLution said:
Yes. IN THEIR FIELD OF STUDY!

If you think it's okay to employ someone full-time AND force them to study in an entirely different area of work, why?

The notion of trying to keep these players as students erodes VERY QUICKLY after you employ them as athletes. If not immediately, as soon as they unionize and start collective bargaining.

Paying them directly will really put the "student" part of the equation in legal jeopardy.
Click to expand...
No it won’t. Nobody is forcing anybody to do anything. My wife had a job in a lab but was an English major. No fafsa or restrictions.

And the university can provide stipends for athletes pursuing a degree in any field of study for any reason. There is no legal issue with that. There just isn’t.

If the funding was provided by the NIH, that would be different. It’s clear this will be donor funded and so they can construct whatever mechanism they want.

As long as the athlete agrees to the conditions and taxes are paid, there is zero problems with this.
 
#23
#23
1world1love said:
But this will not make NIL go away, or otherwise change much about recruiting. NFL players have no limits on endorsements and neither will college or high school athletes.
Click to expand...
This may not make NIL go away, but NIL will go away or something else w9ll replace it in the near future. Then the "paid Athlete" will take over and who knows what will happen then.
 
#25
#25
VOLINVONORE said:
This may not make NIL go away, but NIL will go away or something else w9ll replace it in the near future. Then the "paid Athlete" will take over and who knows what will happen then.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I mean collectives may go away, but NIL as an idea will not. NIL is just being paid for use of your name, image, or likeness. So endorsements, royalties, etc

That will not go anywhere, and so those things will still be used to recruit athletes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77 and S.C. OrangeMan
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top