I think the logic unions have in pro sports is that not everyone gets the same but there are some minimums with some sort of structure for performance bonuses that are individual or team based. The top players are willing to give up a little to make sure their teammates are cool. What I meant by parity is more across the league so that a single billionaire doesn't 'buy' the Ivy championship. Again, people can make collective decisions that are better for their sport...no guarantee they will, but there's at least some chance.pcowlax wrote: ↑Fri Mar 08, 2024 8:10 pm Totally agree, those are all things that I can see players asking for. My question is what are they offering? Once they are, in essence and perhaps in practice, employees, these are essentially demands of their employers. In negotiations, they would ask for these and in return they would give….? What? I’m not sure how students are supposed to negotiate with the school in this setting. Do they threaten to strike? That would obviously be hollow. Sue the school? Not so sure about the parity issue. Those who aren’t getting as much would like that sure but the higher earners would now be better compensated employees who have earned a higher salary, not sure why they would be arguing for the right to make less. Certainly not so much of an issue in the Ivy League but a huge issue in other conferences where some football players are making millions a year and others nothing (which it would be hard to argue is unfair if they are employees earning different salaries based on different earning power for their employees based on their star power and worth to the team). An utter mess.
As to what an Ivy player or team 'gives' is that they're willing to spend the time and energy at that school versus another, or dropping altogether. Obviously players are willing to do that now, but we're going to see base level of $10k and $25k and more...going to all players on opposing teams, on top of scholarships...we're still going to be drawing those who value the academic opportunity over immediate $, but I think what an Ivy union will do is better demand other things to match the quality of the rest of the experience than individual athletes can negotiate for themselves.
I'm less convinced that $ will be what the Ivy unions emphasize versus other aspects of student-athlete experience. Most Ivies go out of their way to Not support the athlete experience differentially from other students, despite those time demands; there's been real pressure that direction from the rest of the campus...it's more philosophical than actual $ when you close your cafeteria because practices go later than what the cafeteria union is willing to work; ok, then find an answer to make sure your athletes get the good nutrition they need, without having to run across campus to get to the one cafeteria left open for that last half hour of possible overlap, or change the practices times...or.....and there's a real issue with how to deal with actual problem coaches. If we're honest about it, we all know horror stories at our alma maters have gone on way too long...(not an Ivy specific thing, more a college sports thing). A union can push to solve these things while insulating the individual athletes from blowback...