Klatt Picks Blake for #2 RB; Great Rant on UM Culture v. Pay to Play
Great show from Klatt this week. 40 min long so here are a few Michigan highlights.
Comments on Blake start here:
https://youtu.be/jKdpHDjq5tc?si=QL0qCuSH6a66cv8j&t=522
This starts with a great clip of JJ and Chop Robinson jawing at each other after a play. Then Joel goes on to explain how we beat PSU that day avoiding Robinson and bludgeoning their D:
https://youtu.be/jKdpHDjq5tc?si=KoxgTufoq0EQ_bDv&t=1034
And here's where he uses Saban's comments to describe Michigan's selfless, Championship culture:
March 11th, 2024 at 10:37 AM ^
"Pay to Play" is out. It's "Pay for Work"
Only if every other student playing a sport, instrument or similarly participating in a university activity that requires hours of effort (and not directly connected to coursework or curriculum) is also considered an employee doing "work".
You want to pay the players for being on the field? Pay the band members, too.
Simply because some people will pay large sums to see the efforts one group while not paying to see the efforts of another *does not* create a definition for "work".
This is school sport, an after-school activity and very much "play".
You think the players want to be paid for just being on the field? What nonsense is this? I’m all for the paying the band members too. No issues with that.
I'm saying if the university wants to wade into the complex issue of what student sports/activities are going to be considered as "paid work" versus others, then get ready for a quagmire of problems to arise.
Great point, the band should get part of the millions/billions of TV revenue as well.
They put in almost as many hours in prep as the players, they perform for 100k+ crowds as well as for TV, they have travel and other requirements imposed on them just as the players do, and they also have safety/health concerns during their practice & events (I once saw a Flugelhorn/mellophone player run down from behind by a band director on a golf cart while marching, and have heard stories of worse elsewhere).
Why is one considered "work" and not the other?
Because one brings in about $60M directly from TV contract payouts, and the other does not.
The AD action of hosting games brings in that money - which goes far beyond simply the student athletes participating. If anything, one can rationally argue that the student players are the customers: they are being being provided the service of having a football team (and the associated support structures & systems) made available to them by the university.
Again - it *doesn't matter* if the result of the action by an individual adds net revenue to the university or not for it to be considered "work" requiring payment. The issue is fundamental and you should not fixate upon the numbers (whether the program nets $60M/yr or runs a deficit every year) - that is not the basis for defining employment.
one can rationally argue that the student players are the customers
Sure, you can argue it, but it's a dumb argument.
it *doesn't matter* if the result of the action by an individual adds net revenue to the university or not for it to be considered "work" requiring payment
You're missing the forest for the trees. Sure the marching band could strive for employment status, but it's unlikely that it would be beneficial for them in any way. There's only a small group of students (men's football and basketball) where they would come out ahead.
Turns out volunteer work is still work.
And school sports aren't technically "volunteer"... especially for walk-ons?
I'm sorry. The band is cool and all, bit I don't show up to a game to watch the band play instruments, I show up to the game to watch the football players play football.
Fine, it is merely a very convenient (and relevant) example for the purposes of discussion - the point is that whether or not someone is considered an "employee" doing "work" has nothing to do with the net revenue (or deficit) of that action.
Sure, most people don't pay to watch the band perform... yet that can just as easily be defined as "work" (in the legally binding sense) as what the players do.
yet that can just as easily be defined as "work" (in the legally binding sense)
Right now, the band and the players are in the same boat. They're students who are eligible for scholarships. Neither are getting paid.
As it stands, only one is ALLOWED to be paid by the school. That's the band. The reason the players can't is not because of any laws, it's because of the NCAA.
If the NCAA gets rid of that rule and schools start paying players to play (or work) that in no way obligates them to pay the band members.
I'm very confused about what point you've been trying to make here. Paying the band and paying football players aren't remotely related.
The only reason paying football players and paying women's gymnastics is related is because of Title IX. And no one, to my knowledge, has satisfactorily worked out how that's going to work.
The players ARE paid by the school, just not very much. They get “full cost of attendance” scholarships that amount to ~$2-4K per year.
So it’s legal and they do it, why isn’t it more? Because the NCAA is a monopoly (or a cartel?) and they don’t want to pay anymore than they have to.
If the students become employees, minimum wage laws go into effect and the schools would have to pay the players at least $7.25/hr. At 20 hours per week, even assuming they work 52 weeks a year, that’s $7,540 annually. Considering UofM players are getting $75k in annual benefits, $7540 seems insignificant.
So the next question is, how much of the $60M TV revenue is due to the name on the back of the uniform and how much is due to the name on the front? I think it’s worth mentioning that the university gets about $3 of the ~$20 you are paying for licensed UofM gear. If you split that with the player, they’re not getting rich on legitimate NIL. If the player can take advantage of a wealthy alum with a massive inferiority complex, more power to them.
March 11th, 2024 at 11:06 PM ^
They get “full cost of attendance” scholarships that amount to ~$2-4K per year.
So, an additional scholarship that is permitted by the NCAA, but not wages? Thanks for the additional info. Still not sure what this has to do with paying the marching band.
I love the band and it's one of the major reasons I prefer going to the games but they are rarely televised.
They deserve zero and should get zero. If the M band dissolved tomorrow not one single person would stop coming to or watching the games
This one girl from band camp might stop coming.
Probably her mom, too.
They should get a cut. Their work contributes to the unique experience of going to a Michigan football game. Take the band away, and it’s not the same Game Day experience.
And if the faculty go on strike next Fall semester, it also would not appreciably affect the crowd turnout at football games. That doesn't mean they also don't do "work" for the university.
You are arguing about the *value* of the work different members of the university perform... but fail to address the matter of it it is (or should be) considered "work" as an employee.
The band provides the same service as the football team, which is entertainment.
March 11th, 2024 at 10:01 PM ^
And the marching band is the one that was actually *intended* to be an entertainment product at all.
Are you a WNBA player?
Fun fact: The Michigan Marching Band is a class. Band members get course credits (though whether or not the credits/grade/both count towards their degree depends on the program). Feels like a job sometimes, but it's a class.
Ok - then exchange the marching band for the cheer squads or something else. There are numerous other examples that could be cited for this particular thought experiment (which is becoming more than just a hypothetical discussion as the months pass).
I don't think it matters in this context. Anyone who contributes to the game day experience is working towards that end. I'm not necessarily addressing the issue of getting paid or not, just that everyone from the people who prepare the meals at the stadium to the players to the ushers to the band members all contribute to the fan (consumer) experience. If there is payment, you'd pay some more and others less based on the estimated value of their contribution (like any other workplace). But they all contribute to the product that's being sold.
March 11th, 2024 at 10:03 PM ^
Trying to draw lines about which student activities should be considered as "employment" and which student activities should be "volunteer extra-curriculars" is going to cause problems everywhere.
March 11th, 2024 at 10:50 PM ^
You put out nectar for butterflies and...
March 11th, 2024 at 10:38 AM ^
If there's a bigger media supporter of Michigan football than Joel I've never seen them.
He's definitely the anti-Thamel.
March 11th, 2024 at 11:05 AM ^
I think he just calls it like he sees it and in the last few years there has been a lot of good at Michigan to see. I don't think he is a homer but he covers us a lot so has gotten to know us better than Thamel and the others.
March 11th, 2024 at 11:27 AM ^
Yes. He’s intelligent and even minded so of course he loves Michigan. :-)
I value his honesty and informed perspective.
March 11th, 2024 at 12:10 PM ^
I think Klatt calls it right on lots of issues. I listen to many of his podcasts and almost always agree with his perspective.
When you go 15-0 and 40-3 over the last three years, there are a lot of positives or you would not have had that level of success.
March 11th, 2024 at 12:16 PM ^
You're right, but listen to Klatts in-game coverage of the 2016 & 2017 Ohio State games, and you may start to agree with mgro. He was calling ref shenanigans in a way that, say, Musberger never ever would have.
March 11th, 2024 at 12:22 PM ^
He's not so much a Michigan homer as he is a B1G Ten homer, because he's a Fox guy as opposed to Thamel being an ESPN guy, and the networks have all but officially taken sides in the conference propaganda wars. As you said, Michigan has been the class of the B1G recently, so of course the pro-B1G analyst will speak glowingly of us. He'll do the same thing with Ohio State if they're kicking ass next year.
It's sad and stupid that this is where we're at with broadcast journalism. Each network and its employees basically openly declaring allegiance to a conference.
We are the National Champions. There's usually a lot of good things to say about the National Champions.
Joel actually played and understands the game. Thamel is just a shitweasel.
March 11th, 2024 at 11:37 AM ^
Rich Eisen has entered the chat.
March 11th, 2024 at 11:44 AM ^
Rich Eisen is the anti-Thamel.
March 11th, 2024 at 11:38 AM ^
While I do think he generally has a lot of respect for Michigan, I think he also remembers who signs his checks and how much money that company has invested in the Big Ten (and, by extension, Michigan). There's a reason that quite a few Fox analysts were calling for slowing down, letting the facts come out and making a determination then. Even Urban Meyer was slow to rush to judgment on the situation.
Meanwhile, ESPN isn't making a cent off Michigan or the Big Ten for the foreseeable future. What incentive did they have to not lay into Michigan whatever chance they got?
March 11th, 2024 at 11:46 AM ^
The B1G had no problems letting their analysts slam us when the suspension came out. They would probably draw more viewers if Klatt created controversy.
March 11th, 2024 at 12:32 PM ^
Joel Klatt is a Colorado homer who brought up Kordell Stewart during a Michigan broadcast.
March 11th, 2024 at 12:37 PM ^
So what? That's his school.
March 11th, 2024 at 12:47 PM ^
Well Klatt did go to school at Colorado. So there is that....
Sure, but people are acting as though he's some kind of Michigan fan. At best, he hates Michigan less than the average person. Nobody who actually likes Michigan would bring up Kordell Stewart during a Michigan broadcast. That's troll material.
ugh, dreaded double-post
Living up to your name Redux!?
March 11th, 2024 at 10:56 AM ^
I'm curious if the market ultimately levels out due to schools getting burned by kids taking the money and running as Steve Miller would say. Best case scenario is collective bargaining allowing a player to get market value at any school versus having to go to the highest bidder to get that value. Patrick Mahomes gets his full value if he's in Kansas City or New York or anywhere in between.
March 11th, 2024 at 11:25 AM ^
The market will absolutely mature. People got hyped up early, and as a result too many players are not being paid commensurate with the competitive value they add. That goes both ways - there's great players getting underpaid and busts making 7 figures.
The market is not healthy right now. It will get better - eventually the incentives will more toward pay for performance, or pay for being a starter. I think Michgan's (seeming) plan this offseason was good - we got out the bag to retain starters. Those players had proven value, and they proved that with their play and with the (one assumes) inducements they were being offered elsewhere.