StrangeSox

QUOTE (Soxfest @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 08:51 PM) Obama is just a dictator at this point. Totally.

I don't have a dog in this fight either way but I always enjoy a good shot at Upworthy.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 02:49 PM) Because it is predetermined and more people can plan for the date and location as opposed to a random city on an unspecified date. New York City has organized events every day this week. This can be completed because they know 500,000 will show up for he event. This is the same thing as to why the Kentucky Derby, Indy 500, and Daytona 500 are party atmospheres while Game 6 of the NBA finals is not...because there may or may not be a game 7 and then if there is a game 7 it is a little too late to organize the party. That's a very good point. Indy even built that giant JW Marriott for the superbowl, not something they could have done on a gamble that the Colts would make it. Almost like a mini-World Cup/Olympics this way.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 02:45 PM) Yes. Lightning, tornadoes in the area. Supposedly it is for fan safety. But is it really any safer for fans to sit 3 1/4-4 hours in temperatures potentially subzero? Or other typical cold weather winter conditions? It appears that will be avoided, but it another reason I don't understand actually wanting to play a game, especially with this much on the line, in bad weather. I wonder how the attendance at all the extra Super Bowl week stuff compares between when the game is held somewhere warm and when it's held in a cold weather city with a dome. I wonder how many fans have suffered hypothermia

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 02:08 PM) Maybe I'm crazy, but if that 100k gift is used toward tuition I'm pretty sure there are huge tax breaks for income that is tied to that. good catch

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 01:45 PM) The NFL makes a lot of money by playing a neutral site football game, which is why the Super Bowl is set up the way that it is. It isn't about weather and ideal conditions at all, otherwise the rest of the season and playoffs would contain the same considerations. I don't know one way or the other, but it's not obvious to me why having it at a neutral site increases revenue.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 01:43 PM) Again, if anyone else got a $100,000 (or more) gift, they would be paying taxes on it. If, hypothetically, student-athletes could begin receiving endorsements and outside income, they'd be taxed on it. If they received a gift of $100,000, they'd be taxed on it. If they received a scholarship, though, they aren't (as long as it meets certain IRS rules). Graduate students receive similar scholarships in addition to stipends and don't have to adhere to the NCAA's outside employment rules, either. They do not have to pay taxes on their scholarships. If my company gives me tuition reimbursement as a benefit in addition to my salary, it's not taxable as long as it's below a certain amount. If they are recognized as employees similar to how grad students are, some part of their scholarship may be taxable but the bulk of it would not under current law. I see no reason to spitefully change the IRS rules on scholarship taxation if athletes form a union.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 01:35 PM) Because the NFL has figured out a way to squeeze more money out of its finals. It isn't about the best game, it is about more money. I don't understand this comment.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 01:37 PM) At the end of the day, they want the best of both worlds. They want the free ride, and they want to get all of the benefits of work. If anyone else got a $100,000 gift, they would be paying taxes on it. Grad students get scholarships with stipends and union recognition without being taxed on the scholarship. It's also pretty odd to call it a "free ride" here. Athletic scholarships are provided in exchange for services, not out of the kindness of the university's heart.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 01:32 PM) See above. I think it's much easier to make the case that a grad student is an employee because you can pinpoint the service and the responding wage. I think it's pretty easy to pinpoint that service that players on a DI football team are providing for the school. If the coach is providing services to the university as an employee to justify over $2M/year in compensation, I don't know how you can argue that the players that are actually playing the game he's coaching aren't providing services to the university. I'll also reiterate that, at least right now, it's not about wages but about working conditions, health/safety and scholarship guarantees.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 01:24 PM) And if they do that, then frankly every student should be considered an "employee" of someone - the school, the state, or the government - because nearly every student receives some kind of aid to go to school (scholarships, grants, internal school grants, or general financial aid). Graduate student unions are already recognized and yet we haven't seen this slippery slope to "every student is an employee."

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 01:22 PM) Where does the right to sell your own likeness play into this? Presumably something like this would be argued for by the players' union rep with the NCAA, whereas currently they don't really have a voice.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 01:19 PM) It's interesting, I think sensibly there is a line between an academic scholarship and an athletic scholarship. But I can see a court not wanting to tread that line and imply that all scholarships are considered employment and leave students with rights. It depends on how that scholarship is earned, I would imagine. Most grad students and all athletes are clearly performing some sort of service to the university, whether it's TAing or outright teaching undergraduate courses or playing sports which can generate revenue and publicity/prestige for the school. That's not the same as someone who gets an academic scholarship for good grades but otherwise doesn't perform any services for the university.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 01:16 PM) good point. That scholarship would become pretty expensive if they had to pay taxes on it. Grad students can receive full-ride scholarships plus stipends (and work outside of school if they want, which can be very difficult to student athletes to do because of NCAA rules) without it being taxable income. They're pressing for various things, but they aren't arguing for big paychecks right now.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 01:11 PM) I'm guessing this gets kicked out pretty quickly. The NLRA gives rights to "employees." I doubt the players can successfully argue that they are employees of the NCAA or universities under the law. I thought prior cases have held that players are students, not employees. Yeah, grad students have a hard enough time getting recognized, this is definitely going to be a difficult fight.

It should be noted that this isn't solely or even mainly about NCAA DI football players wanting a weekly paycheck but about having some protections and guarantees in place and having a seat at the table when rules, regulations, health/injury issues etc. are being negotiated.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 11:50 AM) I don't think it will win but it will provide good footwork for what grounds need to be met for college players to get better treatment. It's especially difficult with college athletics because you're dealing with people who are going to be in the system for at most five years, more like 3-4 if they're actually good enough to move on to the next level. So you're going to be asking current athletes to take pretty big risks and sacrifices (if it got to the level of strikes or lockouts) for benefits they won't personally see because they'll be out of the system by the time changes are made.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 11:50 AM) So then they will have to pay income taxes on their education 'benefits'. And union dues on top of that. Have fun with that. I am sure that they have considered the legal ramifications.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 11:38 AM) Interesting, good luck. They're definitely facing an uphill battle in becoming a recognized union. What always stands out to me is how odd the modern union organization lines seem to be these days. These NW players are aligning with the United Steelworkers, back in December NYU grad students unionized with the UAW. They're basically just legacy names.

I see ss2k5 already posted this in the NCAA thread QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 10:37 AM) ChiTribSports ‏@ChiTribSports 3m NU football players seek to join labor union http://trib.in/1b0QmDE

QUOTE (BigEdWalsh @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 09:04 AM) Rest in Peace Pete. Thanks for all the great music!

Kain Colter starts union movement

Cold is good but sloppy conditions make for a sloppy game with flukey plays. With no real rooting interest, it can make the game more fun to watch, but if the Bears were in it I'd want it to be 70F with no wind and immaculate turf.

Stalinist Russia is preferable to many HOAs.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 08:37 AM) To be fair, it was a fan who asked the question. Stephen A. Smith wasn't too happy about it. It was a producer who let that question on the air though, right?