Game Changer..could be bad for Ohio?

http://my.chicagotribune.com/#section/544/article/p2p-797.../

wow.

Exactly. The decision will be appealed, without a doubt. If it holds up that the scholarship is compensation, I can't imagine how it isn't taxable, though.



Right to work doesn't affect whether or not people CAN be in unions, only whether or not they HAVE to be unions even if they don't want to be in one.  Thus, in a non-right to work state, if a player didn't want to unionize, but the bulk of his teammates did want to unionize, they can force the player opposed to unionization to play union dues.

You are correct, though, that not all states recognize the rights of state employees to unionize, which is a separate issue.

I think all scholarships (athletic, academic, and otherwise) are deemed "income" for Internal Revenue Code purposes, but there is a statutory exemption to the extent the scholarships do not exceed tuition, fees, etc. I ran into a problem in law school when the school disbursed one and a half years' worth of financial aid in a single calendar year (spring semester disbursed early January, fall semester in August, and 2nd spring semester in late December). I was lucky enough that my total income was still low enough that I didn't owe any tax on it, but I did have to report the excess as income.


But as for the unionization.......here's the nightmare scenario: Northwestern appeals the decision to the NLRB. The Supreme Court rules against the government in the Noel Canning case, holding that the recess appointments were invalid. Congressional gridlock prevents further appointments, and the NLRB comes to a halt due to a lack of a quorum. Football is cancelled.

This is quite the Pandora's Box. It is hard to guess all the things that will come from it.

I agree, Alan, but I might as well hope that my head becomes slightly less bald each time I look in the mirror,

An NFL D-League would seem like a way to allow the market to correct a lot of these problems. The mega-bucks conferences are a de facto D-League as it is. And therein lies the problem with creating an NFL D-League: barriers to market entry. And THAT leads us back to the anti-trust argument against the NCAA.

I agree, if this goes full circle, I think we see the formalized structure of what currently exists anyway.  The BCS schools become "union shops", stay in the NCAA and pay players.  The current mid majors and BCS schools like (ironically) Northwestern that can't afford to pay players get all the cast offs from BCS schools, form a new NCAA that makes no money and continue to operate as they always have, essentially making the MAC and schools like Ohio officially second tier...although a much more moral and pure second tier.

The problem is that many of the schools that you refer to are in southern states that do not allow public employees to unionize.

I tend to think that the public-private question is a distraction, as is the differences of laws allowing unionization in one state from another. You can't have a system that works one way for private schools and another way for public, nor one that works in the north only or in the south only. In the end whatever the system evolves into will be the same for everyone.

I think that some of the possible outcomes have been discussed above. One is that the big BCS football powers spin off their football programs and form sort on an NFL farm league, using the same facilities, hiring the same coaches, etc, probably even carrying the same team names. That will solve a lot of problems, and leave the players to unionize, if they want, and take on the owners of the new teams. This is kind of the direction those AQ schools want to go, anyway - they want to be free at last from the NCAA requirements, so something of this nature wouldn't surprise me at all.

With or without the above happening,  mf hits on another possible/probable outcome. It quite possibly could spell the end to athletic scholarships as we know them, not just for football, but for all sports. A university can't afford to have "employees" in any sport, not just football, because that opens up some major cans of worms. Thus, if this ruling holds up, I think that it is inevitable that all athletic scholarships will quickly cease to exist.

I can imagine a new system evolving from what we have. With all athletic scholarships eliminated, and only need-based scholarships available, the AQ teams would be in a situation of more, not less, power. Right now they can recruit 85 players, after which the non-AQ teams have an advantage as a player must choose between walking on at AQ-school, or taking a scholarship to non-AQ school. With no athletic scholarships at any school, there is no reason not to go to AQ-school.

One final comment - we have to realize that there is big money at stake, and there are creative people around. Some novel solutions could pop up. For example, suppose that somehow a new fund were created, say, the "Evil Empire Athletic Fund", and it awards scholarship to needy students who happen to play football, and just coincidentally play for OSU? Since the Evil Empire Fund was independent of the University, the players would not be being "paid" by the University. Since the Fund was charitable in nature, and since the players were doing no work for the fund, they wouldn't be employees of the fund, either....

The box of surprises has just barely been opened. There is much more to come, and we can just watch to see what happens.

No, though that could happen. I was thinking that a team might be called "Ohio State", and play in "Ohio Stadium", wearing scarlet, etc, but not be a part of the Ohio State University, but rather pay OSU rent to license the name, use the stadium and other facilities, etc.

Seriously, though, at this point, no one knows how it will all shake out.