Rumors about ECNL girls admitting one or more top GA clubs for 24-25 season.

whatithink said:
For unions I was referring to the Pros, although Dartmouth College men’s basketball team just voted to create/join one. NIL money changes everything, not least with the top players being able to earn substantially more in College than in their rookie contract for example.
Click to expand...
They don't have athletic scholarships, thus why they want to form a union. If you have a 40,000 per year scholarship, put in 25 hours per week for 40 weeks, you are making $40 per hour. No need for a union.
 
socalkdg said:
They don't have athletic scholarships, thus why they want to form a union. If you have a 40,000 per year scholarship, put in 25 hours per week for 40 weeks, you are making $40 per hour. No need for a union.
Click to expand...
What happens when you have a partial scholarship or no scholarship at all?

Are you making less than minimum wage?
 
Carlsbad7 said:
They're saying that if NCAA continues to lose court cases the entire concept of "amateur" sports in college could disappear.

If NCAA goes away and colleges are forced to pay players as employees they'll likely drop many of the different sports if they keep any at all.

If colleges drop sports the only outlet will be playing pro.

Currently girls youth soccer isn't setup for developing players to play professionally. With boys there's MLS Next and MLS Acadamies which serves this function.
Click to expand...

Yes. The podcast said those things about the NCAA, amateur sports, and players being treated as employees. Those specific concepts were explicitly spoken about on that podcast episode.

How does that relate to ECNL needing to "pivot or fail" and GA being prepared "for the long haul" in the context of the podcast?
 
Noticer said:
Yes. The podcast said those things about the NCAA, amateur sports, and players being treated as employees. Those specific concepts were explicitly spoken about on that podcast episode.

How does that relate to ECNL needing to "pivot or fail" and GA being prepared "for the long haul" in the context of the podcast?
Click to expand...
Maybe nothing, maybe something, maybe everything.

ECNL as an organization has primarily functioned as a platform for getting players in front of college recruiters and coaches.

GA although it currently is just a copy of what ECNL (showcases, ID events, champions cup, etc) was put together by the people that previously implemented DA. DA was created to make American players able to compete on the national stage. If you know anything about soccer people it's that they don't like losing and have no problem waiting for the next chance to win. The people that created DA are the same ones that created GA and MLS Next. They're also the same ones in charge at US Soccer.

Who knows what could happen next. But there's some strong indicators if you know the history of the people involved.
 
Carlsbad7 said:
Maybe nothing, maybe something, maybe everything.

ECNL as an organization has primarily functioned as a platform for getting players in front of college recruiters and coaches.

GA although it currently is just a copy of what ECNL (showcases, ID events, champions cup, etc) was put together by the people that previously implemented DA. DA was created to make American players able to compete on the national stage. If you know anything about soccer people it's that they don't like losing and have no problem waiting for the next chance to win. The people that created DA are the same ones that created GA and MLS Next. They're also the same ones in charge at US Soccer.

Who knows what could happen next. But there's some strong indicators if you know the history of the people involved.
Click to expand...
You're implying GA will fold like DA did before it and "the people" will start another stronger org. Idk. It feels like GA will hang around as a 2nd tier option which leaves the people you were referring to in a weird spot.
 
Noticer said:
You're implying GA will fold like DA did before it and "the people" will start another stronger org. Idk. It feels like GA will hang around as a 2nd tier option which leaves the people you were referring to in a weird spot.
Click to expand...
I highly doubt they'd make the same mistakes twice.

NWSL is the key to however things go for youth girls soccer in the future. Eventually they're going to want to start up Acadamies. Eventually they'll implement a homegrown rule. (Like all the other big leagues) Once this happens NWSL will be forced into partnering with youth soccer. The easiest way to do it would be to copy what's already been implemented with MLS Next but applied to girls.
 
whatithink said:
Thanks for the link. I don't buy their premise that the pendulum has swung and that players have all the power now, i.e. their intro problem definition was that players used to sit if the coach said so but now they will move. They did refine that with the old way wasn't great either. Some odd comments that players now are not learning resilience (related to sitting) or whatnot, and what lessons are they learning. I'd say they are learning that if you are in a job but not getting the opportunities or compensation that you deserve, then you should move, i.e. it's the same and actually a very good life lesson.

Their resolution seemed to be federal legislation, although they don't see that happening.

I think we have an odd relationship to sports in the US. We pride ourselves on being capitalists and "letting the market decide", except in sports where we are all in with unions (players), collective bargaining, closed leagues (cartels), and basically quasi socialism.
Click to expand...
Some of us Americans take pride in strong unions as a general rule! Capitalism only works when labor has equivalent bargaining power.
 
Larzby said:
Some of us Americans take pride in strong unions as a general rule! Capitalism only works when labor has equivalent bargaining power.
Click to expand...

We like to believe that we do, but there aren't nearly as many Americans involved in unions as we might think, or as many as were in the past.


14.4M (~10% of workers) is where we are at this point. It was at 20% of workers in 1983. 32.5% of public sector workers are union members, while only 6% of private-sector workers are in unions. Defending the public sector unions as capitalism working as it should requires some mental gymnastics about the relationship between government and the people.
 
socalkdg said:
They don't have athletic scholarships, thus why they want to form a union. If you have a 40,000 per year scholarship, put in 25 hours per week for 40 weeks, you are making $40 per hour. No need for a union.
Click to expand...
Not sure what point you are making, i.e. are you saying that any college athletes without scholarship should form/join unions, and if you have a scholarship for less than the equiv of $40 an hour, you should form/join a union?

I'm pretty ambivalent about it. I think colleges are for education. College sports should be club or intramural. The highest paid public employee in most states shouldn't be the college football coach etc.

If pro sports want a development platform, then they should pay for it just as MLS does with their academies. If the US Olympic federation want a development platform, they should pay for it by telling the international committee that they are taking a very large slice of the US TV rights for winter/summer to do it.
 
whatithink said:
Not sure what point you are making, i.e. are you saying that any college athletes without scholarship should form/join unions, and if you have a scholarship for less than the equiv of $40 an hour, you should form/join a union?

I'm pretty ambivalent about it. I think colleges are for education. College sports should be club or intramural. The highest paid public employee in most states shouldn't be the college football coach etc.

If pro sports want a development platform, then they should pay for it just as MLS does with their academies. If the US Olympic federation want a development platform, they should pay for it by telling the international committee that they are taking a very large slice of the US TV rights for winter/summer to do it.
Click to expand...
I'm saying any player getting scholarship money is already getting paid, thus no need for union. At even a 50% scholarship they are still getting $20 per hour. The reason Dartmouth wants the union is that the school doesn't give athletic scholarships. The thing is they knew this going in, they probably got a healthy amount of scholastic scholarship that might only have been available to athletes, as well as entrance to the school that allowed them to jump over other applicants since they were recruited for the basketball team.
 
socalkdg said:
I'm saying any player getting scholarship money is already getting paid, thus no need for union. At even a 50% scholarship they are still getting $20 per hour. The reason Dartmouth wants the union is that the school doesn't give athletic scholarships. The thing is they knew this going in, they probably got a healthy amount of scholastic scholarship that might only have been available to athletes, as well as entrance to the school that allowed them to jump over other applicants since they were recruited for the basketball team.
Click to expand...
Yes . . . . Jumping over other applicants for the chance at an Ivy education is massive
No . . . . Ivys do not provide merit or talent money to atheletes or anyone else. Ivy's provide only financial need-based money. (There are a few exceptions to this rule; Cornell Mens Hockey for one.)
 
socalkdg said:
I'm saying any player getting scholarship money is already getting paid, thus no need for union. At even a 50% scholarship they are still getting $20 per hour. The reason Dartmouth wants the union is that the school doesn't give athletic scholarships. The thing is they knew this going in, they probably got a healthy amount of scholastic scholarship that might only have been available to athletes, as well as entrance to the school that allowed them to jump over other applicants since they were recruited for the basketball team.
Click to expand...
ok, but whether they get paid commensurate with what they generate is up to them to determine and advocate for, via a union of that's the route they choose. Knowing something going in is irrelevant, circumstances changes etc and nothing stays locked in for very long, e.g. when you take a job do you expect the pay to stay the same for the next 4 years, do you expect bonuses if your performance drives more revenue for the company etc.
 
Larzby said:
Some of us Americans take pride in strong unions as a general rule! Capitalism only works when labor has equivalent bargaining power.
Click to expand...
hmmm... that is funny.. and here i was thinking unions were against capitalism and for socialism. Kinda how it works everywhere else as well as their voting patterns.
 
tjinaz said:
hmmm... that is funny.. and here i was thinking unions were against capitalism and for socialism. Kinda how it works everywhere else as well as their voting patterns.
Click to expand...
what if I told you that mercantilism (hence capitalism) come from the same root as Bolshevism (hence socialism/communism)
 
Noticer said:
what if I told you that mercantilism (hence capitalism) come from the same root as Bolshevism (hence socialism/communism)
Click to expand...
Agreed. Capitalism is not a Free Market system. It ia a heavily regulated system in favor of Corperations and Finacial Institutions.
 
Heard from a few people here in MA that South Shore Select is joining ECNL (from GA) with an announcement as early as tomorrow. I would have put this in the "when hell freezes over category." We'll see soon enough I guess.
 
Code said:
Agreed. Capitalism is not a Free Market system. It ia a heavily regulated system in favor of Corperations and Finacial Institutions.
Click to expand...
What we have in our current system is socialism for the corporations and entrenched interests and everyone else gets to fight for scraps in the "free market"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top