The Uniqueness” of humanshttpswww.ted.comtalksrobert_sap.docx

The “Uniqueness” of humans
https://www.ted.com/talks/robert_sapolsky_the_uniqueness_of_
humans
In the following TEDs talk, neurobiologist Robert Saplosky
talks about his 30 years of experience being around baboons and
the like, and how it has changed the way he looks at other
human beings. By working with these monkeys, he has come up
with the basic building blocks that define all species as unique.
These building blocks are; aggression, theory of mind, the
Golden Rule, empathy, pleasure in anticipation and gratification
postponement, and culture. For each block, he goes into an in-
depth explanation of what makes us no longer unique and the
part in which humans are unique. -Document your
understanding below and be sure to include examples. (Image:
https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/b/two-cute-baby-baboon-two-
cute-baby-baboon-sitting-wood-playing-104315962.jpg)
-Document your understanding below and be sure to include
examples.(How are humans and other animals the same? How
are they different?
1. Aggression
2. Theory of mind
3. The golden rule
4. Empathy
5. Pleasure in anticipation and gratification postponement
6. Culture

1
Running head: SPORTS
Question one
The selected stadium is the MetLife Stadium. The stadium is
located in East Rutherford New Jersey and is part of the greater
Meadowlands Sports Complex. The stadium was constructed by
the Jets and the Giants in a joint venture. The construction of
the stadium was exclusively from private funds and amounted to
$1.6 billion (Sandler, 2011). This made it the most expensive
stadium on the planet at the time of its opening.
Question two
The naming rights of the stadium is part of its folklore. Initially
the stadium was known as the New Meadowlands Stadium.
However, in the year 2011 MetLife, which is a New York based
insurance company, acquired the naming rights. The renaming
of the stadium to MetLife was part of a 25 year deal. The
naming rights cost MetLife Insurance a total of $400 million for
the entire 25 year period (Sandler, 2011). The money from the
naming rights was split between the Giants and the Jets who
initially financed the building of the stadium through private
funding.
Question three
The state of New York does have the jock tax. This is a tax that
is usually levied against travelling individuals. Professionals or
athletes who visit a given state and earn money within the
jurisdiction of that state are taxed according to the provisions of
that state. The tax especially targets professional athletes. They
usually have public travelling schedules as well as salaries. To
this effect it is easy for states to determine the amount of money
that they earned while in those specific states and tax them
(Ekmekjian, Wilkerson, Bing, 2011). The jock tax leads to a lot
of money being collected from professional athletes and other
travelling professionals. This is money that can be used in the

public funding of stadiums.
Question four
States with professional sports teams tend to benefit heavily
from the jock tax. These professional sports teams are likely to
attract competition into the state. This means that other teams
from other states are likely to come into the state to play these
professional teams. This gives the state in question a unique
opportunity to collect more money from players from all teams
that come into the state. The professional sports teams in the
state act as a magnet for other teams and create an avenue
through which the state in question can earn more money
through the jock tax.
Question five
A negative externality is defined as a cost that is suffered by a
third party in a given financial transaction. When it comes to
casinos the parties most affected by the negative externalities
are the families of the gamblers. When a person goes into debt
due to gambling they usually bring this problem to their
families (Nower, Caler, 2016). Family members can also lose a
lot of money as a result of their gambling habits. This is money
that is taken right out of the hands of their families and put into
the hands of the casinos. The fact that the family has to suffer
because of the transaction between the gambler and the casino
is a good example of a negative externality.
Question six
Hosting spring training can be quite advantageous for given
towns. There are dedicated fans that are willing to travel
extensively to watch their favorite teams play. When a given
town hosts spring training then there is likely to be an influx of
fans into the town. They are likely to spend money in their
capacity as tourists. This revenue helps to boost the economy of
the town. The spring training also increases the level of
visibility of the town and places it more in the national sporting
calendar.
References

Ekmekjian, E. C., Wilkerson, J. C., & Bing, R. W. (2011). The
Jock Tax Contest: Professional Athletes Vs. The States -
Background And Current Developments. Journal of Applied
Business Research (JABR), 20(2). doi:10.19030/jabr.v20i2.2202
Nower, L., & Caler, K. (2016). Addictions:
Gambling. Encyclopedia of Social Work.
doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780199975839.013.832
Sandler, A. (2011, August 19). MetLife Inks Deal To New
Meadowlands Stadium Naming Rights. Retrieved from
https://www.businessinsider.com/metlife-meadowlands-stadium-
naming-rights-2011-8?IR=T
List of varsity esports programs
spans North America
Mar 15, 2018
• Sean MorrisonESPN.com
•
• Facebo okVarsity collegiate esports began in 2014 when
Robert Morris University in Illinois announced a
scholarship-sponsored League of Legends team. Since then, the
scene has ballooned to include around
125 programs, with a national governing body known as the
National Association of Collegiate Esports
as the main home for most of those organizations.
This is the list of known NACE members and other institutions
with varsity programs in

North America. It is updated weekly.
Last updated on Feb. 11, 2019.
SCHOOL LOCATION ATHLETICS
Albright College Pennsylvania Division III
Alma College Michigan Division III
Ashland University Ohio Division II
Averett University Virginia Division III
Barton College North Carolina Division II
Bay State College Massachusetts N/A
Becker College Massachusetts Division III
Bellevue University Nebraska NAIA
Benedictine University Mesa Arizona NAIA
Boise State University Idaho Division I
Brescia University Kentucky NAIA
Campbellsville University Kentucky NAIA
Catawba College North Carolina Division II
Cazenovia College New York Division III
Central Christian College of Kansas Kansas NAIA

Central Maine Community College Maine NJCAA
https://www.facebook.com/dialog/share?href=http%3A%2F%2F
www.espn.com%2Fesports%2Fstory%2F_%2Fid%2F21152905&
app_id=116656161708917
https://www.facebook.com/dialog/share?href=http%3A%2F%2F
www.espn.com%2Fesports%2Fstory%2F_%2Fid%2F21152905&
app_id=116656161708917
Central Methodist University Missouri NAIA
Centralia College Washington NWAC
Cincinnati Christian University Ohio NAIA
Coker College South Carolina Division II
College of St. Joseph Vermont Division II/NAIA
Columbia College Missouri NAIA
Concord University West Virginia Division II
Cornell College Iowa Division III
Culver-Stockton College Missouri NAIA
Dakota Wesleyan University South Dakota NAIA
Defiance College Ohio Division III
Delaware Valley University Delaware Division III

DeSales University Pennsylvania Division III
Dickinson State University North Dakota NAIA
DigiPen Institute of Technology Washington N/A
ECPI University Virginia N/A
Edinboro University Pennsylvania Division II
Embry Riddle Aeronautical University Arizona NAIA
Florida Southern College Florida Division II
Fontbonne University Missouri Division III
Full Sail University Florida N/A
Georgia Southern University Georgia Division I
Georgia State University Georgia Division I
Grand View University Iowa NAIA
Harrisburg University Pennsylvania N/A
Hartwick College New York Division III
Hawkeye Community College Iowa NJCAA
Illinois College Illinois Division III

Illinois Wesleyan University Illinois Division III
Indiana Institute of Technology Indiana NAIA
Iowa Central Community College Iowa NJCAA
Jarvis Christian College Texas NAIA
Juniata College Pennsylvania Division III
Kansas Wesleyan University Kansas NAIA
Keuka College New York Division III
King University Tennessee Division II
Lackawanna College Pennsylvania NJCAA
Lambton College Ontario OCAA
Lebanon Valley College Pennsylvania Division III
Lees-McRae College North Carolina Division II
Limestone College South Carolina Division II
Lourdes University Ohio NAIA
Marietta College Ohio Division III
Maryville University Missouri Division II
McPherson College Kansas NAIA
Menlo College California NAIA

Miami (Ohio) University Ohio Division I
Midland University Nebraska NAIA
Misericordia University Pennsylvania Division III
Missouri Baptist University Missouri NAIA
Missouri Valley College Missouri NAIA
Molloy College New York Division II
Morningside College Iowa NAIA
Mount St. Joseph University Ohio Division III
Mount Vernon Nazarene University Ohio NAIA
New England College New Hampshire Division III
New Mexico State University New Mexico Division I
Northern Virginia Community College Virginia NJCAA
Northwest Christian University Oregon NAIA
Ohio Northern University Ohio Division III
Ohio State University Ohio Division I
Oregon Institute of Technology Oregon NAIA

Park University Missouri NAIA
Pratt Community College Kansas NJCAA
Principia College Illinois Division III
Randolph-Macon College Virginia Division III
Robert Morris University Illinois NAIA
Rogers State University Oklahoma Division II
Schreiner University Texas Division III
Shawnee State University Ohio NAIA
Shenandoah University Virginia Division III
Siena Heights University Michigan NAIA
Southern New Hampshire University New Hampshire Division
II
Southwest Baptist University Missouri Division II
Southwestern College Kansas NAIA
Southwestern Oregon Community College Oregon NJCAA
St. Ambrose University Iowa NAIA
St. Clair College Ontario OCAA
St. Louis College of Pharmacy Missouri NAIA
St. Thomas Aquinas College New York Division II

St. Thomas University Florida NAIA
Stephens College Missouri NAIA
Stevenson University Maryland Division III
SUNY Canton New York Division III
Talladega College Alabama NAIA
Texas Wesleyan Texas Division II
Thomas College Maine Division III
Tiffin University Ohio Division II
Trine University Indiana Division III
Union Community College New Jersey NJCAA
University of Akron Ohio Division I
University of Antelope Valley California NAIA
University of California-Irvine California Division I
University of Jamestown North Dakota NAIA
University of Missouri Missouri Division I
University of Mount Union Ohio Division III

University of North Texas Texas Division I
University of Oklahoma Oklahoma Division I
University of Pikeville Kentucky NAIA
University of Providence Montana NAIA
University of Rio Grande Ohio NAIA
University of Saint Mary Kansas NAIA
University of South Carolina-Sumter South Carolina NJCAA
University of South Carolina-Union South Carolina NJCAA
University of Texas at Dallas Texas Division III
University of the Cumberlands Kentucky NAIA
University of Utah Utah Division I
Upper Iowa University Iowa Division II
Wagner College New York Division I
West Virginia Wesleyan College West Virginia Division II
Western Kentucky University Kentucky Division I
Wichita State University Kansas Division I

http://www.athleticbusiness.com/college/ruling-northwestern-
players-cannot-
unionize.html?eid=235807042&bid=1153010
Ruling
Northwestern Players Cannot Unionize
by Stuart Goldman
August 2015
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruled in a
unanimous decision that Northwestern
University football players who receive grant-in-aid
scholarships cannot form a union, a ruling seen
as a victory for the NCAA.
According to a press release from the NLRB on Monday, the
board “did not determine if the players
were statutory employees under the National Labor Relations
Act (NLRA). Instead, the board
exercised its discretion not to assert jurisdiction and dismissed
the representation petition filed by the
union.”
Related: Northwestern Football Players Cast Historic Union
Vote

The NLRB ruled that asserting jurisdiction would not promote
labor stability due to the nature and
structure of the 125 NCAA Division I Football Bowl
Subdivision (FBS) teams. The NLRB does not
have jurisdiction over 108 FBS state-run colleges and
universities. Asserting jurisdiction over a
single team, in this case Northwestern, would likely have
ramifications for those other member
teams, the NLRB ruled. Every school in the Big Ten Conference
is a state-run institution, with the
exception of Northwestern.
The NLRB said its decision applied only to the players in this
case and opened the possibility of
reconsidering the issue in the future.
In January 2014, Northwestern football players filed a petition
for a representation election with the
NLRB’s Region 13 office, seeking representation by the College
Athletes Players Association for the
purpose of collective bargaining.
players-cannot-unionize.html?eid=235807042&bid=1153010

players-cannot-unionize.html?eid=235807042&bid=1153010
players-cannot-unionize.html
players-cannot-unionize.html
http://www.athleticbusiness.com/featured-writer-blogs/stuart-
goldman.html
https://www.nlrb.gov/news-outreach/news-story/board-
unanimously-decides-decline-jurisdiction-northwestern-case
http://www.athleticbusiness.com/governing-
bodies/northwestern-football-players-cast-historic-vote.html
https://www.nlrb.gov/sites/default/files/attachments/basic-
page/node-3034/Northwestern%20Fact%20Sheet%202015-
08.pdf
Appeals Court Rules NCAA Violated Antitrust
Laws
by Rustin Dodd The Kansas City Star
September 2015
Share on facebookShare on twitterShare on
google_plusone_shareShare on email
AthleticBusiness.com has partnered with LexisNexis to bring
you this content.
Copyright 2015 Independent Publishing Company
All Rights Reserved
Anderson Independent-Mail (South Carolina)

Rustin Dodd The Kansas City Star
In the ongoing and contentious fight over compensation for
college athletes, the NCAA scored a
narrow split decision in federal appeals court Wednesday.
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled NCAA schools
must compensate student-athletes only
for the full cost of attendance, striking down a proposal that
would have paid athletes an additional
$5,000 per year in deferred compensation for use of their
likenesses. The ruling stated that cost of
attendance was sufficient.
The decision upheld a federal judge's ruling from last year,
which said the NCAA's use of college
athletes' names, images and likenesses violated antitrust laws.
But the latest outcome in what has
become known as the O'Bannon Case can be seen as a victory
for the country's biggest athletic
conferences and those that seek to protect the collegiate athletic
model and limit compensation for
athletes.
"Today, we reaffirm that NCAA regulations are subject to

antitrust scrutiny and must be tested in the
crucible of the Rule of Reason," a three-person appeals panel
wrote.
The panel continued: "In this case, the NCAA's rules have been
more restrictive than necessary to
maintain its tradition of amateurism in support of the college
sports market. The Rule of Reason
requires that the NCAA permit its schools to provide up to the
cost of attendance to their student-
athletes. It does not require more."
Immediately following the ruling, NCAA president Mark
Emmert said in a release: "We have not
completely reviewed the court's 78-page decision, but we agree
with the court that the injunction
'allowing students to be paid cash compensation of up to $5,000
per year was erroneous.' Since
Aug. 1, the NCAA has allowed member schools to provide up to
full cost of attendance; however, we
disagree that it should be mandated by the courts."
The decision comes after years of legal wrangling in the case,
which is formally known as "O'Bannon

http://www.athleticbusiness.com/more-news/appeals-court-
rules-ncaa-violated-antitrust-laws.html
http://www.athleticbusiness.com/search?lang=en&query=o%27b
annon
v. NCAA." A lawsuit over antitrust laws, the O'Bannon case has
come to symbolize the greater fight
over increased compensation for student-athletes.
The lawsuit, which began after former UCLA basketball star Ed
O'Bannon saw his own likeness
used in an NCAA basketball video game, has sparked a wave of
change in NCAA
athletics, including greater autonomy for members of the so-
called "power five" conferences. Earlier
this year, that autonomy led schools from the power five
conferences to offer full cost of attendance
to student athletes, which essentially amounts to enhanced

scholarship in the neighborhood of
$2,000 to $5,000 per year, depending on the school.
Those payments will continue. But while the NCAA has adopted
"cost of attendance" scholarships
for some schools, college sports leaders have dug in their heels
and fought for every inch in the
battle over student-athlete compensation. Among those voices
resistant to change: Big 12
commissioner Bob Bowlsby, who has said that the loss of the
collegiate model could cause
irreparable harm. Others have sounded similar warnings.
"I think you'll see men's Olympic sports go away as a result of
the new funding challenges that are
coming down the pipe," Bowlsby said last year. "I think there
may be tension among and between
sports on campus and institutions that have different resources.
It's really unknown what the
outcomes will be."
From that viewpoint, Wednesday's ruling could save college
athletic departments millions over the
coming decade. But the legal fight over college athlete

compensation is just beginning.
APPEAL from 1B
October 1, 2015
Copyright © 2015 LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc.
All Rights Reserved.
Terms and Conditions Privacy Policy
http://www.lexis-nexis.com/lncc/about/copyrt.html
http://www.lexis-nexis.com/terms/general
http://www.lexis-nexis.com/terms/privacy
Athletes Challenge NCAA Limits
on Compensation
Former athletes in Division I men’s and women’s basketball and
top-
division football are seeking to end a cap on what they may
receive for
participating in college sports
Sept. 4, 2018 11:46 a.m. ET

https://www.wsj.com/articles/athletes-challenge-ncaa-limits-on-
compensation-1536075964?mod=hp_lead_pos10
College athletes mounted their latest and strongest charge
against the idea that they
are amateurs as they began a court challenge on Tuesday of the
NCAA’s power to
limit their compensation in a multibillion-dollar industry.
Former athletes in Division I men’s and women’s basketball and
top-division
football are seeking to end the NCAA’s cap on what they may
receive for
participating in college sports: generally, little more than
tuition, room and board.
The plaintiffs in “In Re: National Collegiate Athletic
Association Athletic Grant-in-Aid
Cap Antitrust Litigation” say the NCAA’s rules violate U.S.
antitrust laws by
artificially depressing athletes’ compensation. Previous
litigation by athletes sought
to stop the NCAA from profiting from their name, image or
likeness without sharing
the proceeds, but in this case they’re seeking to change the
basic relationship
between college sports leaders and participants.

Newsletter Sign-up
The NCAA says compensation limits are necessary to maintain
the distinction
between college and professional sports, and that letting schools
pay athletes
unlimited sums would erode college sports’ appeal to the
public. NCAA officials say
athletic scholarships and the chance to earn a college degree—
in many cases worth
a few hundred thousand dollars—are ample compensation for
what they say is an
amateur pursuit.
“What sets college sports apart is that the competitors are
students and not paid
professionals,” NCAA lawyers wrote in their prepared opening
remarks, released
ahead of Tuesday’s trial start. They warn that a “competition
between athletes
recruited and paid based on the value of their performance, on
one hand, and
athletes who compete just as part of their student experience
and a way to maintain

it, would readily degenerate into an uninteresting and
potentially dangerous
mismatch.”
The class-action case will be decided in a bench trial in U.S.
District Court for the
Northern District of California in Oakland, and is expected to
last several weeks. A
ruling is expected weeks or months later.
College sports’ annual revenues have skyrocketed in recent
decades, boosted by
escalating fees paid by TV networks to broadcast games. The
NCAA earned more
than $1 billion in revenue last year, mostly from the men’s
basketball tournament.
Its associated athletic conferences together earned billions
more, largely through
broadcast-rights fees for football games.
In their prepared opening remarks, plaintiffs’ lawyers wrote that
“the schools
compete against one another without limitation to attract top
coaches and trainers
and administrators, to construct the largest stadia and the most
lavish suites, and to

secure the most lucrative broadcast and sponsorship and
licensing agreements. In
the multibillion-dollar business of D-I basketball and FBS
football, competition is
stifled only—and entirely—when it comes to compensating
athletes for their
services.”
The current case will be decided by Judge Claudia Wilken, who
four years ago ruled
for NCAA athletes in a similar but more limited antitrust case.
That case, headlined
by former UCLA basketball star Ed O’Bannon, was sparked by
an NCAA-licensed
videogame that featured animated likenesses that mimicked
actual college athletes
without compensating the players.
The NCAA says compensation limits are necessary to maintain
the distinction between college and
professional sports. PHOTO: SAM CRAFT/ASSOCIATED
PRESS
Wilken’s ruling in O’Bannon resulted in schools being allowed

to award the full cost
of college attendance to athletes. Some schools began giving
athletes stipends,
generally worth a few thousand dollars, above their scholarships
to pay expenses
that scholarships didn’t cover, such as laundry or transportation.
The O’Bannon case set a precedent favorable to future plaintiffs
in that it ruled that
the NCAA violated antitrust laws. Yet the decision also largely
preserved the current
college-sports model so the NCAA also claims it as a kind of
victory.
“As was demonstrated in the O’Bannon case, the NCAA will
show that our rules are
essential to providing educational opportunities to hundreds of
thousands of
student-athletes across the country,” Donald Remy, chief legal
officer of the NCAA,
said in a statement last week. “Allowing paid professionals to
replace student-
athletes on college campuses would change the face of college
sports as we know it.”

Skeptics—or realists—point out that a shadow market already
exists for college
athletes’ services. A criminal case working its way through U.S.
federal court alleges
that shoe-company representatives and others connected to
college sports arranged
kickbacks and bribes to induce high school recruits to sign with
certain schools.
A win by the plaintiffs in this case could bring bidding for
players into the light.
AthleticBusiness.com has partnered with LexisNexis to bring
you this content.
http://www.athleticbusiness.com/college/in-stipend-era-varying-
attendance-costs-debated-
br.html?eid=235807042&bid=1113249
In Stipend Era, Varying Attendance Costs
Debated
Copyright 2015 Dayton Newspapers, Inc.
Dayton Daily News (Ohio)
DAYTON - A new era for NCAA Division I athletics starts
Aug. 1.
Beginning then, universities across the country can offer

stipends covering the cost of attendance for
student-athletes. This means they will receive their normal
scholarship money to cover tuition, room
and board and books, plus extra money to cover the cost of
travel home on the weekend, buy pizza
or a new iPhone, go to the movies or whatever.
The amount of money colleges and universities will hand out to
the student-athletes varies. The
number of athletes receiving those benefits at each school will
also vary.
Men's and women's basketball players on scholarship at the
University of Dayton will each receive a
stipend of $1,250 per year, Athletic Director Tim Wabler said.
All 380 scholarship athletes at Miami University will receive a
stipend, Miami
University AthleticDirector David Sayler said. That's $1,800 for
out-of-state athletes and $800 for
athletes from Ohio.
Wright State has not decided on an amount it will offer athletes,
Athletic Director Bob Grant said, but
athletes on scholarship in men's basketball and at least an equal
number of women's athletes will
receive the stipend. That's how all schools in the Horizon
League are handling the issue.
"This is not a monstrous deal for us," Grant said. "It doesn't
change how we do business. It doesn't
change our mission statement."
Ohio State will decide this month how much it will offer
athletes, Athletic Director Gene Smith told
The Columbus Dispatch in May. Like Miami, the number will

vary depending on whether an athlete is
from Ohio or elsewhere.
According to a study of the cost of attendance in the Big Ten by
PennLive.com, Ohio State's cost of
attendance in the 2014-15 school year was $2,454. That ranked
eighth in the conference.
One of Dayton's top rivals, Virginia Commonwealth, expects to
spend close to $500,000 annually on
stipends, or on average $4,100 per student, according to a report
in the Richmond Times Dispatch.
attendance-costs-debated-br.html
attendance-costs-debated-br.html
The numbers run all over the board, Grant said, and that makes
it problematic when it comes to
recruiting. How does a coach explain the difference to a student
who may just pick the school with
the higher figure?
"The numbers are everywhere," Grant said. "I can't speak for
the other Horizon League schools, but
I think everyone's thinking, 'What's right? What's fair? What's
appropriate?' We know we're not going
to spend with the big boys. I don't want it to happen. We don't
need it to happen."
Miami's scholarship budget will grow by about $375,000, Sayler
said. The Mid-American Conference
has generated new revenue with an ESPN agreement worth
reportedly $8 million per year through

2027 and through the College Football Playoff.
"We're just taking money from those sources and using them for
cost of attendance," Sayler said.
"For us, it wasn't that big of a hit. Other schools are struggling
more with their decisions."
Miami will stand out from some of those schools by offering the
stipend to all scholarship athletes.
"We just think fundamentally if a student at Miami gets a full
scholarship, they're entitled to cost of
attendance," Sayler said. "I think we're one of the few (in the
MAC) that's doing it for everybody, but I
don't know final numbers. I'd say we were one of five or six that
are doing for everybody."
More Dayton athletes could receive the stipend in the future.
Wabler said UD has not taken a
position on that yet as it awaits the results of the Ed O'Bannon-
vs.-NCAA case.
The former UCLA star filed an antitrust class-action lawsuit on
behalf of Division I football and men's
basketball players. A judge ruled in favor of O'Bannon last
year, opening the door for the cost-of-
attendance stipends to be paid and for athletes to earn up to
$5,000 per year of eligibility for use of
their names, images or likenesses. That money, under the ruling,
would be placed in a trust and
given to the athletes when they leave school.
The case is currently under appeal.
"I would expect that appeal to be acted on this summer," Wabler
said. "Right now we're moving

forward with men's and women's basketball. It may be expanded
to other sports. We're waiting to
see how the appeal of the court case plays out."
Wabler sees this as the next step in changes coming to NCAA
athletics. In 2014, the NCAA
approved a rule change allowing schools to provide unlimited
meals and snacks for athletes.
Previously, athletes were limited to three meals per day or a
food stipend.
In January, the NCAA increased the amount of money provided
to the families of athletes for travel
to the College Football Playoff championship game.
"Now you add the cost of attendance stipend," Wabler said.
"Then we'll see where else it goes. It's
going to be driven by the large five conferences, what makes
sense from their end. And there are a
number of court cases out there that could impact the NCAA
and the institutions and the student
athletes. There's a sea change potentially coming over the next
two to five years. We'll see how it all
plays out."
attendance-costs-debated-br.html?eid=235807042&bid=1113249
In Stipend Era, Varying Attendance Costs Debated
Olympic Athletes Ask: Should We Start a Union?
A sexual-abuse scandal highlighted the powerlessness athletes
have long felt within the U.S. Olympic Committee; they and
athletes elsewhere seek a louder voice
By
Rachel Bachman

Feb. 26, 2019 10:09 a.m. ET
Chicago
Meetings of the Athletes’ Advisory Council, an athlete-led
group within the U.S. Olympic Committee, are usually routine
affairs. But at a gathering of the group here last weekend, in the
basement conference room of an airport hotel, the presence of
two very different attendees highlighted fault lines in the U.S.
Olympic movement.
On one side of the room sat Sarah Hirshland, hired months
ago as CEO of the USOC to excavate it from the wreckage of a
years-long sexual-abuse scandal in gymnastics.
On the other side sat Don Fehr, the union executive director
who led Major League Baseball players through brutal but
successful fights against ownership in the 1990s. Fehr was
invited by the council to answer questions and advise athletes
how to seize more control in a decision-making system some
say they’ve been largely shut out of.
“Just having him here, it lends a different level of credibility,”
said Han Xiao, a table tennis athlete and chairman of the
athletes’ council. “It recognizes that [athlete] leadership is
serious.”
The push for more compensation and influence by athletes long
considered “amateurs” is building in several corners of the
sports world, including college athletics. Now it’s extending to
Olympic sports, where an expanding global movement seeks to
treat athletes like the professionals many of them have become.
“It feels almost like there’s an Arab Spring taking place,” said
Norm Bellingham, an Olympic kayaker in the 1980s and ’90s
and a former chairman of the Athletes’ Advisory Council who
attended last weekend’s meetings. “Waiting for the people in
power to implement appropriate changes is something athletes
are less and less willing to tolerate.”
· Winter Olympics Wind vered a volution
Women are stretching the boundaries of what was thought
possible with their jumps, while men are nailing quads in
bunches. Oh, and the Americans no longer reign supreme.

CLICK TO READ STORY
· Gender Gap Women’s Curling Team e way
In the coming months, for example, a subgroup of the AAC will
study options for amplifying athletes’ voices. That includes the
possibility of forming something like a union, a step that
athletes have taken in some other parts of the world. In
Germany, for example, athletes have founded an independent
athletes organization to support and bolster athletes’ rights.
Asked to comment on the prospect of unionization, the USOC
provided a statement from Hirshland that stressed the
importance of “meaningful athlete participation and
contribution” and the desire to “modernize our governance.”
The athletes are seeking ways to maximize their earnings with
fewer restrictions imposed by the bureaucracy of sports
governing bodies.
In December, for example, three elite swimmers sued the sport’s
international governing body, FINA, under antitrust law,
alleging that FINA’s restrictions on non-FINA meets hurt
athletes’ earning power and destroy competition. The named
plaintiffs are Americans Michael Andrew and Tom Shields, a
2016 Olympic medalist, and Hungary’s Katinka Hosszu, a four-
time Olympic medalist and FINA’s 2018 female swimmer of the
year.
According to a January news release from FINA, swimmers are
free to participate in independent events but organizers must
seek approval to have records recognized.
Earlier this month, a nonprofit organization called Global
Athlete was launched to address the balance of power between
athletes and sports leaders. It grew out of athletes’ frustration
over what they viewed as lax treatment of Russia in the wake of
its doping scheme at the 2014 Sochi Olympics.
As sports have become more professionalized, national and
international sports leaders still treat athletes like amateurs,
athletes say. They want more agency in what’s become an
international business with billions of dollars at stake.
In the worst cases, athletes fear that not having a seat at the

table can jeopardize their safety. Former USA Gymnastics
doctor Larry Nassar pleaded guilty in 2017 to federal child-
pornography and state sexual-abuse charges and is serving an
effective life sentence in federal prison. That scandal is “the
worst example we’ve seen to date of how powerless athletes are
feeling in the system,” Xiao said.
An investigation by the law firm Ropes & Gray into the Nassar
scandal found that “as the USOC evolved toward a more
traditional corporate governance model, it did not meaningfully
involve athletes in decisions or policy-making.”
NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman, center, and NHL Players'
Association Executive Director Don Fehr, left, during an event
in 2016. PHOTO: GENE J. PUSKAR/ASSOCIATED PRESS
Olympic athletes have long rebelled against the strictures of
Olympic federations.
In the 1970s, runner Steve Prefontaine rebelled against the
AAU’s ban on athletes accepting prize money for races, lest
they lose the amateur status then required to compete in the
Olympics. Federation and Olympic rules eventually relaxed,
allowing Olympic athletes to earn prize money and sign
endorsement contracts.
In the 1980s, the USOC’s “diffuse governance structure
encouraged grass-roots participation and consequently, athletes
had a ‘huge voice’ and a ‘significant presence,’ ” former USOC
employees told Ropes & Gray.
But as the USOC professionalized its leadership setup, it didn’t
always treat athletes as professionals. USOC leaders and
athletes transitioned to, as one former employee told Ropes &
Gray, a “hierarchical business relationship.”
The USOC bylaws require that athletes make up at least 20% of
the voting power of the board and 20% of all USOC committees
and task forces. Some athletes say that’s not enough.
Fehr, now executive director of the NHL Players Association,
spoke briefly at the AAC’s public meetings—in introducing
himself, he said he’s “spent 40 years representing elite

athletes”—and declined to comment on his private discussions
with the AAC. Xiao declined to say what was discussed in a
session involving Fehr that was closed to USOC staff and
media.
Hirshland was conciliatory in her comments to the group, saying
she’d heard athletes lament, “ ‘You take us, you use us and
when you’re done with us, you spit us out.’ We will fix that.”
Susanne Lyons, chairwoman of the USOC board and also in
attendance, told the group, “We are eager to change. We want to
change, and we want to know what it is you want us to do.”
Katie Uhlaender, a four-time Olympian in the winter sport of
skeleton who attended the AAC meeting, said she wasn’t moved
by Hirshland’s pledges.
“Frankly, the athletes are seen as products,” said Uhlaender.
She said meaningful change most likely would come from
outside the USOC, in the form of help from Congress, which
continues to investigate the organization in the wake of the
Nassar scandal, or from professional advocacy.
The Athletes’ Advisory Council is run by volunteers, who cycle
through as they retire from competition and often must hold
down day jobs, making it difficult to tackle complex issues over
time.
Olympic athletes need to be more like partners with the USOC,
Xiao said. He pointed to professional sports leagues and their
established player representatives as a possible model.
“Crises happen in all these other sports all the time,” he said.
“But in the end I think athletes feel empowered and
enfranchised because they have a seat at the table.”
Write to Rachel Bachman at rachel.bachman

The Uniqueness” of humanshttpswww.ted.comtalksrobert_sap.docx

The Uniqueness” of humanshttpswww.ted.comtalksrobert_sap.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from wsusan1

More from wsusan1 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

The Uniqueness” of humanshttpswww.ted.comtalksrobert_sap.docx