Not really. I'm guessing Title IX will limit how much the football players can get, by forcing them to share the wealth. Labor laws do not necessarily conflict with title IX, we'll probably just reach a situation where the football and basketball players are told that they can't carve their sports out, that they also have to let all the other athletes into their union.

It would still be a win for them, even if you have to pay all the women and olympic athletes an equal share, its still a lot more than what they get now.

I don't believe colleges are required by law to provide equal access to part-time employment. If what you're saying is true, it's potentially going to impact all work study programs, not just athletics.

Welp. Finally might kill the NCAA as we know it in favor of a professional college league. Maybe someone has experience running a professional football league and will step in to help.

So would there be a scenario when a D-I FBS school axes all men's sports but football and basketball just to keep the ability to offer 85 scholarships?

In case anyone is wondering, this still has a long way to go. Northwestern will appeal to the national NLRB. They will probably lose there, then they'll sue the NLRB, and slowly appeal that all the way up to the SCOTUS.

4-5 years later if they lose everywhere, then things will get interesting.

Title IX doesn't care if you call it wages, meal money, a stipend, or a scholarship. They can't pay football players more than everyone else, and labor laws will be fine with that.

If college players are employees who can unionize, what would likely happen is the school will say "look folks, we can only afford to pay you all $X. Any higher than that, and we'll just cancel sports and you can all strike. Also, Title IX requires that you get the same, so your pay is X divided by the number of athletes."

nope. They would have to offer 85 women's scholarships as well. Whether or not a student is an employee is not relevant to title ix, they only care about athletic opportunity, and that everyone gets the same compensation, however you define compensation.

Let me restate what I asked earlier: if an athlete unionizes, can he seek legal retribution once said institution decides to expel him?

Yes.

"If anyone tries to start a union, we'll fire your ass" is something that employers thought of a long, long time ago. There are very stiff penalties for that.

What could possibly go wrong?

This IS valid, but the one thing that always seems to get overlooked is that the kid is getting a free "education" from the school he/she is at. No, they won't be set up for life, but it is something to not sneeze at.

good. Now whatever happens they can at least say they were a represented stakeholder.

Membership in the NCAA is voluntary. A school could break away if they wanted. Addicted to money that NCAA and associated contracts bring.

Right, they are serfs. Serfs had no chance for improvement. College athletes are much more equivalent to apprentices, and are learning valuable life lessons, plus get personalized training in their sport. Go price out the cost of a full time personal trainer and get back to us. Add in room/board/tuition/books, and a future that has considerably more earning potential simply from getting a degree.

They get a free education worth 100k+ it's their own fault if they don't take advantage of it. They get to party,bang hot college chick and be treated like campus heroes while getting to play a game.

They also get a free internship/audition for the career lotto where they can make more money in 1 year than most people do in a lifetime.

serfs my ass