• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

HuskerMax readers can save 50% on  Omaha Steaks .

Cancelling the college football season is about union busting, not health


Red Reign said:
I don't buy that
Click to expand...
I'm not lock step with the articles opinion, but there are some points there that make you go hmmm.

The B1G and PAC12 are the conferences that had the player "demands". They are the first two leagues to cancel the season. If this decision was truly all about health, why are the schools bringing students back to campus at all? Are non-athlete students immune to the virus? You can implement all the social distancing and PPE you want on campus during the day, but when nighttime and the weekends come, let's just say, kids will be kids.

While it's not necessarily good timing on the players part for wanting demands, don't think for a minute that those who have money don't want to keep their money. There are some plausible points made in the article that the university presidents could use COVID as cover to cancel the season, get their collective heads wrapped around how a players union would impact them and how to respond. I'm not trying to go "fever swamp" on this, yes I do think the university presidents factored the health of the students into the equation, along with liability as well.
 



I say pay em, cap the salary at what a scholarship cost and let them decide.

only rule is that they have to be a student of the university.
 
Whether or not there is any truth to this, what would stop players from all conferences from getting together somehow and making their voices heard on this issue? From everything I'm reading, the players want to play. I suppose it'd be nearly impossible without a great leader, or group of leaders, and just the logistics of it would make it difficult. Seems like now would be an excellent time to do it, though. Call it a union or whatever you want, it seems like they could somehow create a college player's "union" like they have in the NFL and take more control over their college football careers. Maybe I'm all wet, who knows. Just wondering about the possibilities.
 
Last edited:




Red Reign said:
I don't buy that
Click to expand...
I don’t buy that it is even close to the real reason. But I would bet it was discussed. These chancellors are a bunch of lawyers.

liability and lawsuit are the 3rd and 4th most common thoughts that run through their minds. Not far behind is unionization.

The real reason is covering the arse.
 
A lot of conflicted reporting and the like lately. That just tells me there are serious decisions being made and not everyone is in lockstep.
Though, it will be interesting to see what info leaks out over time, if any, that validates some of this stuff though.
 
I didn’t buy it as it was initially being reported, but a little deeper look makes it possible or even probable that the ‘union’ conversation actually elevated the liability concerns. It’s one thing to get sued by individuals, but it’s another level of concern to be sued by a collective body. I don’t see the cancellations as an effort to ‘bust the union’, rather it may be a reaction to all the talk of a college ‘players association’ coupled with the institutions perceived level of risk related to COVID. I also think politics played a role in all of this but won’t get into that here.
 



If their goal was to bust the union they literally made the exact wrong decision. It would have been better to tell them to f off and challenge them to sit out if they don't want to play.

Cancelling is only going to reinforce their opinion that they need a union to fight for them.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top