Unverified Voracity Says Get Organizing Toot Suite
Sponsor Note. If you've got a business to incorporate or help run or sell or divide or recombine or create and elaborate series of shell corp… okay maybe not that last one uh what
Right! Richard Hoeg.
He will do all of those things for you except probably the last one. We do not need to send the authorities on a wild goose chase only to find out that the final shell corporation is named "You've Wasted A Lot Of Time LLC." They have important things they should be doing instead. Come on, man.
They're employees, for now. The National Labor Relations Board has been weirdly relevant to college football over the last few years, first shooting down an attempt for players to unionize and now throwing the doors wide open:
College football players and some other athletes in revenue-producing sports at private universities are employees of their schools, the National Labor Relations Board's top lawyer said in a memo Wednesday that would allow those players to unionize and otherwise negotiate over their working conditions. … Abruzzo notes that the act and NLRB law "support the conclusion that certain players at academic institutions are statutory employees, who have the right to act collectively to improve their terms and conditions of employment."
The NLRB tends to change radically depending on which party is in control of the executive branch so anyone fixin' to have a union should get on that horse as fast as possible and try to get something that can't just be swept away in the event the NLRB gets turned over and decides to reverse itself yet again.
As a bonus this lawyer bombed the most gag-inducing term in college sports:
NLRB general counsel Jennifer Abruzzo also threatened action against schools, conferences and the NCAA if they continue to use the term "student-athlete," saying it was created to obscure the employment relationship with college athletes and discourage them from pursuing their rights
I like this person.
This opens the door to seismic changes that will cause administrators to wail about the destruction of college sports while the general public says "Roll Tide" with little to no awareness of what the financial particulars are.
[After THE JUMP: good news and bad news from NFL Draft projections]
Moving up. Aidan Hutchinson is flying up draft boards. Kiper's latest:
5. Aidan Hutchinson, DE, Michigan
HT: 6-6 | WT: 265 | Previously: 13
In the preseason, I led off my write-up on the Michigan edge rusher with "I think Hutchinson could have a big year." Well, that's what he's doing. He has 5.5 sacks and a forced fumble in four games, showing powerful moves and relentless pursuit of quarterbacks. He looks outstanding so far. Hutchinson played only 144 defensive snaps last season before he injured his leg against Indiana and had to have surgery, and the Michigan defense cratered after he was hurt. He was outstanding as a sophomore in 2019, putting up 4.5 sacks and creating havoc in the backfield (10.5 total tackles for loss).
In less sanguine news, Jahan Dotson (PSU) and Garrett Wilson (OSU) are back to back at 8 and 9 with Chris Olave (OSU) at #12; secondary is going to get tested very abruptly at points this year. Erstwhile recruiting target and man-mountain Danile Faalele checks in at #22. Still mad we didn't pursue him just for the experience of having the giant man do giant man things.
The only other Michigan players to crack Kiper's top ten positional rankings are Andrew Stueber (#10 OT) and Dax Hill (#7 S). Not a particularly talent-laden year.
The Alabama-ing will continue until morale… nevermind. Mel Pearson's insane run of hockey recruits continues unabated:
Gavin Brindley to @umichhockey. The best penalty killer in the age group. Diverse skill set w/ pace and skill. Blows up gaps on the rush. Dangerous with possession and plays bigger than listed. Quick release w/poise. NZ'd 15th ranked 2004 1⃣5⃣ reports⬇️
— Neutral Zone (@_Neutral_Zone) September 30, 2021
https://t.co/DecyQImpsT https://t.co/9S097YKY9i
Brindley tendered with Tri-City after he didn't get picked for the NTDP and made the All-Rookie second team, which is extremely rare for players in their D-2 year. Those guys usually get eaten alive. (Last year's other exception: yep, Adam Fantilli, another second team All-Rookie pick.)
So as it stands next year's hockey class consists of 5 guys who are potential first rounders (Fantilli, McGroarty, Nazar, Casey, Brzustewicz) and a smattering of other guys who are not quite as highly touted but are likely to certain picks themselves (Brindley, Cerbone, Haskins). Bonkers.
Well that's a good idea. The NCAA is considering a joint Final Four:
The Division I Women's and Men's Basketball Committees during joint virtual meetings the past two months have begun exploring the possibility of holding both Final Fours in the same city in the future.
You may be thinking that someone had a bit of common sense. It's probably closer to the truth that the embarrassing disparities between the COVID versions of the men's and women's tournaments—full, elaborate weight rooms for the men while the women were given a set of two-pound pink weights and a coupon for Special K, IIRC—are easier to resolve if you can just point at one event where everything is literally the same.
But yeah I mean when I went to the Final Four in Atlanta there was a D-II championship game, I think, during the day off between the semis and the final. I almost went. Having more stuff is a winner.
Anonymous quotes! Adam Rittenberg profiles a number of teams facing prove-it games this weekend; Michigan is one, and we got some takes fielded from the safety of anonymity:
"Don Brown had a great scheme, but you knew where [Hutchinson] was," an FBS coordinator said. "He had his one bull-rush move, but that was kind of it. Now he's moving around, he's in space, he's in a two-point [stance], he's a lot more active than he's been in the past. That's a good plan for that kid. You can have protections for him, and then, OK, he's not lined up here?
"When he wins one-on-one, it's going to be hard."
Also Michigan's corners are "kind of average," which… I mean, yeah.
Area for improvement. UMHoops runs down burning questions as the season approaches, and calls out a major thing to look for as Hunter Dickinson enters his sophomore year:
Dickinson’s one-handedness wasn’t just a trend; it was a significant outlier that will take considerable work to correct.
Despite these limitations, we are still talking about a player who averaged 14 points and seven boards per game as a freshman.
Once the scouting report got out on Dickinson and everyone sat on his right shoulder his effectiveness dropped off a cliff. If he's going left with consistency in early games that'll be a great sign.
Etc.: MVictors on John Maulbetsch, who ate apple pies and defeated the world's strongest man. Bacon on his most recent book in the alumni mag. PFF interviews Aidan Hutchinson, who they are now saying is a top 5 prospect in the draft. Sunday Ticket and Redzone are weird products. HSR on this weekend's game.
September 30th, 2021 at 12:46 PM ^
Good luck trying to unionize a bunch of college kids who are only on the "job" for three or four years at a time. It will be like trying to load a thousand vaseline-slicked watermelons onto a truck with your gums.
I'm all for these kids having more rights and freedoms and the ability to get paid, but what's coming for college football in the not-too-distant future will not look anything like what has filled Michigan stadium for a hundred years. Who knows? It might be better, or not, but in any case these recent changes are seismic.
September 30th, 2021 at 1:22 PM ^
I think what you'll see is a few sub-pro-quality players stick around and run the union, like Kain Colter tried to do a few years ago. Then it's just a matter of new players joining the union and stepping into the CBA that has already been bargained to give them benefits.
And I don't think you'll notice a single difference from the stands, other than the fact that Michigan may now be able to get guys like Laquon Treadwell who in past years went elsewhere to get paid.
September 30th, 2021 at 2:28 PM ^
IF they unionize (which remains to be seen and I think is a very big if) there really could be some big changes to the game. They'll have a CBA with the NCAA (provided that organization still exists by the time this all is put together). They will of course negotiate pay and insurance etc. but what is to stop them from negotiating for "unlimited" eligibility. As long as the player is still employable by the school what is the point of limiting that persons eligibility to play? IF the player makes say 100k a year between pay and NIL money but isn't going to make an NFL or NBA roster why not collectively bargain an end to eligibility rules. They are no longer "student-athletes" they are employees just like the faculty and the janitors etc. who sign a contract and aren't forced out after 4 years of service. That would be a MASSIVE change to the sport.
September 30th, 2021 at 5:08 PM ^
Unions don't just get to do whatever they want.
September 30th, 2021 at 1:22 PM ^
That really isn't all that different from a lot of unions. And some players are there for 5 or even 6 years when eligibility doesn't run because of injury and red-shirting. The ones there for 3 years only are usually star players; they're much fewer and farther between. 120 teams and 90 players per team is more than 10,000 players in a given year.
That comes with a major caveat, though: The NLRB only has jurisdiction over private employers. A.k.a., Michigan players still cannot unionize under this GC opinion. The main question is whether the full board will in fact exercise its jurisdiction over private school players given the problems this could cause to athletic competition.
There's also apparently pending legislation in the three contiguous west coast states (WA-OR-CA) to allow public school players to unionize. So the PAC12 perhaps could fast become the best league, with Utah, Arizona, etc., plummeting to the bottom of the conference.
September 30th, 2021 at 1:41 PM ^
I think the way the NLRB would be able to impose some authority on the public schools would be to go after the NCAA and the leagues themselves, which are private, and say they have to change their rules for the public and private members of said leagues to be consistent. My guess is the states would start feeling additional pressure (as you noted above, the west coast states already are) to allow unionization at the public school level, even if I don't believe the public schools would be legally required to do so by the existing leagues/NCAA agreements.
It's going to be hairy but much like NIL legislation that popped up almost immediately after that was deemed valid my guess is if the NLRB adopts this recommendation we'd likely see similar legislation pop up.
September 30th, 2021 at 2:03 PM ^
I would be interested in how much regional differences might influence unionization. Whether--for example--it languished or was resisted more strongly in right-to-work states/the South. And what implications this could have for how the game and conferences developed apart. What might happen, for example, if SEC teams compensated players a little better to avoid unionization?
September 30th, 2021 at 2:57 PM ^
You absolutely could see a shift in the SEC/ACC compensation packages but if the private schools are bound by the NLRB then Duke, WF, Vandy, etc. would still have to comply and my guess is the leagues would have to figure out how to balance those requirements.
It's going to be interesting, but I also think these member schools are more used to dealing with unions and employee structures than us fans recognize.
September 30th, 2021 at 2:08 PM ^
But it's not clear to me how the NCAA could effectively regulate this kinda stuff, other than to say, "Listen, the CBA they negotiated at private School X is the minimum standard that applies to everyone else." The problem then being, how do you fairly decide which school is school X? Or, in the alternative, could they say, "We're aware of CBAs A, B, . . . and Z, and so the minimum terms of player agreements are [some fair midpoint of the terms of the several CBAs]"? Certainly seems like it would make the NCAA vulnerable to further antitrust charges. I know monopsony isn't technically antitrust but the last NCAA antitrust case started to trend in that direction.
Either way, it seems nearly as messy as the 50 states swiftly organizing a legislative response to allow players to unionize if the NLRB domino falls. It's not crazy to imagine, except for the political blowback in "redder" states. And imagine if the southern states held out and the NCAA didn't act. The SEC and ACC would probably implode.
Either way, this certainly has the potential virtually to eliminate the bottom half of the FBS (in terms of funding). I think it's safe to say that we have certainly not seen the end of conference re-alignment lol.
Another important takeaway is that if player unions don't get certified by the NLRB within the current administration, then they'll never happen. But if they do, then it would be a very bad and difficult business of unwinding those unions.
September 30th, 2021 at 2:54 PM ^
Yeah, I don't necessarily believe it'll be a fun process but I also think there would be a fair bit of discourse between the league and member schools, both public and private, if the NLRB passed this recommendation and made it binding. Because implementation would likely take some time so there would be areas of discourse. I also think the redder states might not be against it if they feel it creates a competitive advantage in terms of their football programs. Like, I believe Florida was one of the first to propose NIL legislation when that was coming up and that's a pretty right-to-work state.
The funding concern I'm less certain about. Those smaller schools have always struggled financially but there are a finite number of spots for athletes at the higher-profile schools and there will always be a demand for some level of competitive sports. If every team in, say, the Sun Belt or MAC has a parity in terms of their student-athlete unions that works financially for them doesn't mean they have to compete with the SEC-level deals. They don't already now.
September 30th, 2021 at 4:21 PM ^
stipulated: i know nothing about labor law.
that said - there are labor unions on campus right now, are there not? i was (and it's been a long time, so my memory is fuzzy on details), in the teaching assistant union when i was in grad school, and i think we were right on the verge of going on strike during my last year. again - memory fails...and i can't speak to whether it was a wildcat thing, or if we were recognized by the NLRB, but there was a presence.
i think that speaks to the "they'll never herd those cats together" aspect of some of this. students aren't limited to 4 years, obviously, but you can't tell me that duncan robinson and isaiah livers couldn't have organized a union in even a couple of years. and they would've been less interested in doing it from beginning to end during their time, than in simply moving the ball forward.
September 30th, 2021 at 6:05 PM ^
The grad union (GEO) is the second oldest grad student union in the country (after Wisconsin) and is an AFT local. The "almost" or "two day" strike seems to be a regular part of the bargaining process (I went through two iterations while I was at UM), so was almost certainly went through the mandated process (strike authorization vote of the membership, etc.)
September 30th, 2021 at 1:22 PM ^
Please don't distract Brian from his utopian dreams with, you know, facts and stuff.
September 30th, 2021 at 1:25 PM ^
Those weren't even facts.
September 30th, 2021 at 1:25 PM ^
I mean, the players are still "student-athletes" even when they're not playing games. They still attend classes, work out, prepare, etc. That's a big reason why athletes have been clamoring for more autonomy because being a college athlete, especially in football or basketball, is a 12-month-a-year process that requires a fair bit of dedication. And I mean, UM is still selling jerseys and marketing the teams in non-season times, so it's not like that spigot gets turned off.
September 30th, 2021 at 3:01 PM ^
I agree 100%. The line of reasoning of Brian et al is that calling them "student athletes" is a farce because "we all know they don't go to class" or "they aren't here to earn a degree just to get to the pros" or some other such bullshit. The facts are that the vast majority of athletes DO go to class, and ARE students - often good ones at that. Let's not forget that there are a LOT of "regular" students at U of M that don't go to class or get all As, without the incredible time commitment that a football or basketball player's schedule requires
September 30th, 2021 at 3:59 PM ^
No, it's a farce because "student-athlete" was explicitly coined as a term by the executive director of the NCAA in 1951 as a way to convince courts that football players shouldn't be eligible to file workman's comp claims when they were injured.
“We crafted the term student-athlete,” Walter Byers [NCAA executive director] himself wrote, “and soon it was embedded in all NCAA rules and interpretations.” The term came into play in the 1950s, when the widow of Ray Dennison, who had died from a head injury received while playing football in Colorado for the Fort Lewis A&M Aggies, filed for workmen’s-compensation death benefits. Did his football scholarship make the fatal collision a “work-related” accident? Was he a school employee, like his peers who worked part-time as teaching assistants and bookstore cashiers? Or was he a fluke victim of extracurricular pursuits? Given the hundreds of incapacitating injuries to college athletes each year, the answers to these questions had enormous consequences. The Colorado Supreme Court ultimately agreed with the school’s contention that he was not eligible for benefits, since the college was “not in the football business.”
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/10/the-shame-of-college-sports/308643/
September 30th, 2021 at 4:06 PM ^
My reading of Abruzzo's quote is that she's telling universities to no longer try to use "student-athlete" in an attempt to obscure that college sports are a business and that athletes are engaged in employment relationships, which is how the NCAA has used the term in legal (and legalistic) settings for more than a half-century.
October 1st, 2021 at 1:40 PM ^
Arguing in 1951 that colleges & universities weren’t in the “football business” was one thing.
but today, given the value of the TV deals, the bowl $, the AD budgets, that coaches’s compensation greatly exceeds that of college presidents’s, etc, I’d say it’s a lot harder.
September 30th, 2021 at 3:01 PM ^
Double post
September 30th, 2021 at 1:39 PM ^
So the athletes can't effectively unionize (which I think is a decent point. One reason the NFL union is relatively weak is the constant roster turnover and short careers) but the change unionization will bring will be seismic? Seem like contradictory statements.
September 30th, 2021 at 2:59 PM ^
The kids will be able to unionize. Some entity will realize the money making opportunity and set it up so it's an easy sign and pay process providing X,Y,Z benefits.
The question I have is will all of the "PAY THE PLAYERS THEIR MONEY" fans really be able to stomach the trickle down impact?
There will be no reason to keep the Big House clean of ads. I'm guessing it is not long before we see multiple logo ads on uniforms. I'm guessing eventually there are no more marching bands and you get the latest stadium rock presented by "fill in the blank of X local company".
Owners expect a return on their investment. You can't keep running a college based spending model when you are running a professional organization. Schools will need to leverage every last source of income to keep operating.
This isn't an extreme take, it's what has happened in every minor and professional sports league around the world.
September 30th, 2021 at 3:15 PM ^
Those are all examples that those in favor of paying players, in general, recognize as possible.
The one that they refuse to acknowledge is that Title IX lawsuits will almost immediately challenge any payment of male players above grant-in-aid as a violation. Once schools are sued and required to pay female athletes the same $$ as male athletes, the whole model collapses. All but the bluest of blue-blood programs will probably just end their male programs in revenue sports (think- Eastern Michigan football) altogether since they can't afford to pay the women and therefore their chance of competing in mens sports, while laughably small before, will be literally zero.
September 30th, 2021 at 4:57 PM ^
i hate to tell you this, but title ix isn't going to stop any of this from happening. how do i know this? because it hasn't - "student athlete" (to use a silly, silly term of art) stipends have already been around since 2015, with not a title ix lawsuit in sight.
September 30th, 2021 at 3:21 PM ^
I don’t see why it would be any different than a grad student union, which already exists. Some grad students barely interact with it in the few years they are in school, others are heavily involved in it and they aren’t deterred by only being around for 4 years or less. I’d suspect an athlete union would be similar.
September 30th, 2021 at 6:04 PM ^
The idea that a bunch of people who get treated like kings, have free food, free health care, free travel, free lodging, financial stipends, and now, the ability to earn unlimited funds on the side, need or should consider joining a union is literally hilarious
October 1st, 2021 at 8:28 AM ^
odds that you think exactly this about "literally" every single union in this country: one hundred percent.
October 1st, 2021 at 4:12 PM ^
Well since this is 2021 and not 1921, I lean in that direction. As do the overwhelming number of people who vote on joining a union or not over the last 30 years, and almost always vote no. It remains funny to me that ideologues among the elites favor other elites (the players) joining unions. The players are a group of elites with tremendous privilege, and you want them to gain even more privilege by unionizing.
October 1st, 2021 at 9:42 PM ^
yeah, fuck those players!
October 2nd, 2021 at 9:42 AM ^
Indeed, stating the reality that players are elites with benefits and income far above other students or indeed--almost anyone else in society at their age--is definitely saying fuck the players. Excellent critique
October 3rd, 2021 at 8:05 AM ^
don’t you just hate when people take one fact and generalize it to an entire argument? example: a poorly-informed nitwit seeing a palatial locker room and deciding that thousands of people are “privileged.”
September 30th, 2021 at 12:54 PM ^
Brian, Abruzzo isn't the decision-maker at the NLRB. She is the General Counsel and takes positions in cases before the Board, but the Board doesn't have to adopt them and often does not. Also, it was the Obama Board that issued the Northwestern decision in the first place. So don't get your hopes up.
September 30th, 2021 at 4:50 PM ^
Yeah - the Political Jab was unnecessary and unneeded but not shocking.
September 30th, 2021 at 7:22 PM ^
What will a federal employee decide next? The world waits...
September 30th, 2021 at 12:58 PM ^
What's the thinking Dax going pro after this season? Is that a sure thing or how likely is he to come back? Just wondering if he's made any comments
September 30th, 2021 at 1:11 PM ^
Great googlie mooglie…that Sunday Ticket/Redzone article is 3 years old
September 30th, 2021 at 1:14 PM ^
I thought Michigan Alumnus (now Alum) was the alumni magazine?
Also Red Zone Channel is all you need. No commercials and just the important bits, which is great bc I find the NFL pretty boring for the most part.
September 30th, 2021 at 6:12 PM ^
You don't even need that. Youtube has 15-25 minute highlight packages of every game that seem to consist of every score, first down, failed first down on a 3rd or 4th, or gain of 5 or more yards.
September 30th, 2021 at 1:21 PM ^
I somehow missed the Brindley commitment. Mel has legitimately been on a murderous rampage on the recruiting trail in the last few months between getting all the draft picks to come back and then recruiting every '5*' hockey recruit he can talk to
Also, a dual final four seems like a pretty good idea even if its probably happening because the NCAA got shamed. A theoretical schedule of women's semis, men's semi's, women's final, men's final in four consecutive days could be quite a draw. Thursday-Sunday or Friday-Monday would both work
September 30th, 2021 at 2:06 PM ^
Unless it was logistical, ie; having 8 teams in-house impairs the athletes from needed facilities, I am frankly baffled it hasn't always been this way.
Historically the women's bracket hasn't been much of a draw, you would think the NCAA would want to help their attendance and exposure out simply by being somewhere there are lots of basketball fans.
And I say this as one of those people who believes the market should dictate women's sports success/failure/salaries not some sort of "fairness".
September 30th, 2021 at 3:05 PM ^
Women's basketball was a decent draw this year; the finals picked up 4.08M viewers and was up from 2019, while the men's was down a bit. And the women's WS this year significantly out-drew the men's WS, so there definitely is a draw for it.
It does make sense from a logistical standpoint to bunch all 8 teams together, so I assume part of the reason was likely also that the NCAA wanted two cities bidding on those games. Like, I'm not sure if you'll make up the difference if you put them all in one area, though I guess we'll see.
October 1st, 2021 at 8:36 AM ^
it's an interesting discussion.
i love the women's college game, and i like when it (justifiably, in my opinion) gets more attention. on the other hand, putting it in the same venue, same weekend, would tend to highlight the differences to the troglodytes. "lol, the women can't fill the jerrydome, and they don't dunk."
maybe you do it for a few years and help jumpstart the attention for a while? i dunno.
September 30th, 2021 at 1:22 PM ^
I thought this quote from the "Michigan's gotta prove something" article illuminating as it seemingly goes against the conventional wisdom around these parts:
"They have not had to force the ball down the field and really put the ball in the quarterback's hands much," he said. "That's the benefit of winning games and winning them big. I think they have more confidence in the quarterback than it appears. There's people coming out and acting like it's an issue for him. I don't think it is. They just haven't had to win a game that way yet.
That's the UW's defensive coordinator Jim Leonhard saying it, so it may be a bit of gamemanship, but at the same time I think it highlights how a dispassionate observer might have a different take that fully-invested fans.
I don't know if the NLRB is actually going to take the position outlined here, though I do think SCOTUS spending time pointing out how they'd likely rule if this issue came back to them is meaningful. But we'll see - I do think the NCAA's tried-and-true pearl clutching may start falling on deaf ears.
September 30th, 2021 at 5:19 PM ^
I mean, he's not gonna say Cade sucks either. He also says in that article that they're absolutely going to try to make Michigan pass the ball, which is a pretty obvious strategy. We'll see. I didn't think the targeting hit his head really or even when he fell or that he looked rattled on the sideline when they cut away to him around when they kicked the FG, but the drop-off was obvious. Shouldn't be an issue this week.
September 30th, 2021 at 1:30 PM ^
Everyone keeps talking about how HD needs to add an outside shot to improve his draft status. I keep beating the drum that his number priority needs to be developing his right hand and gaining proficiency with more post moves. If he had the craftiness of Big Country he would be a bonafide All-American.
September 30th, 2021 at 2:05 PM ^
I think he's a pre-season All American, at least on one list, as it is. But i do think there's a real chance that he spends a year being frustrated by teams that have figured him out. Hope not.
September 30th, 2021 at 2:20 PM ^
They are two different things.
HD needs to add an outside shot to improve his draft status.
He can develop his right hand, gain proficiency with more post moves, be a bona fide All-American - and most of that will likely have ZERO effect on draft status.
September 30th, 2021 at 2:23 PM ^
Brian, you should've waited a couple hours.
Emmert in front of Congress today: Suggests there needs to be a a federal NIL framework and a law that doesn't recognize athletes as employees.
Baylor President says giving athletes pay, will cause them to cut non-rev sports.
Also "noteworthy" Rep Bucshon of Indiana suggests that an athlete could sign a deal with a foreign-owned company and then be influenced by the government of that country.
October 1st, 2021 at 1:46 PM ^
Baylor president: bwahahaha! SMU ‘had payroll to meet’ for its football team & this was after Title IX.
September 30th, 2021 at 2:46 PM ^
Regarding a joint NCAA final four. It’s a good idea.
As far as attendance at the women’s final final four, I’ll admit I wouldn’t go as a fan. I am not admitting this to put down women’s basketball. I have great respect for the athletes. I am a big fan of and enjoy watching plenty of other womens sports. In addition to the typical Olympic sports and Tennis, I love women’s soccer and like watching softball. But for some reason when I’ve watched the women’s final four or the WNBA it’s just not enjoyable. I have no reason why. Does anyone else share this anomaly?
Comments