Tennessee Just Drew a Salary Blueprint for College Sports.

For years, college athletes have been told that paying their athletes directly will be too complicated.

Tennessee’s boys’ basketball players only had a scheme to reply.

Three player representatives, working with Athletes.org and the University’s athletic officials, developed a proposed collective bargaining structure that includes contracts, transfers, medical care, injury compensation, and proposed hours that athletes can be called to work.

It’s not a contract signed. No one gets a new paycheck because of this document.

But the proposal matters because it moves the college-sports compensation debate beyond one familiar question “Should athletes be paid?” and tackles the harder one:

Once everyone has agreed they are, what should occur?

Follow the stories changing the games, from bold ideas to unforgettable moments, in our latest U.S. sports news.

Key Takeaways

• Tennessee players helped design a possible collective bargaining agreement.
• The plan would eliminate “school linked NIL” agreements, instead of paying athletes to play.
• Offers a salary cap, spending limit and minimum compensation.
• If players are injured, they would continue to receive their scholarships and guaranteed pay.
• The document is a model and may have a bearing on football and other college sports.

The Players Were Actually in the Room

Tyler Lundblade, Campbell Duncan and DeWayne Brown II were chosen by their teammates to represent the team from Tennessee.

They worked for several months with Athletes.org, a players association representing college athletes. The group then shared their thoughts with Tennessee athletics officials who had questions, voiced concerns, and discussed changes.

This process makes the project special.

The rules of college sports are usually announced to athletes. Players, you helped write them this time!

The team discussed the plan in September before it was made public November 10.

The entire Tennessee basketball CBA proposal is not legally binding, but it provides a close look at what players would be asking for if a formal agreement were to be a part of college sports. News

The greatest transformation: compensation for players.

Over the years, college sports have attempted to separate athleticism from compensation.

That was undermined by the advent of name, image and likeness agreements. Players would be paid for making a touchdown, shooting a shot or winning a game, but in this case the money was being paid for an endorsement, appearance or promotional work.

The Tennessee plan drops out the act.

The model also would eliminate university-affiliated NIL deals with revenue sharing and replace them with one athletic-services agreement. Compensation for the labour performed by a player as an athlete.

In simple terms: they would be given money to play.

Third party endorsement agreements may remain in place. The difference here is that there would be no need for schools to pretend that roster payments are social media partnerships or some sort of promotional event.

This would make the system more predictable, and difficult to conceal.

A Salary Cap With a Spending Floor

A salary cap typically gets the focus since it prevents the richest programs from spending too much.

The proposed minimum expenditure might be just as vital.

The Tennessee model would require a minimum amount that schools would have to be willing to pay the players. All athletes who are on the roster would be paid a guaranteed minimum, and freshmen would be paid from an established pay scale.

If the school had a negotiated system, but would prevent a floor, that would be a waste of their players and the school would cost them as little as possible.

The framework also provides for individual bonus pools. Players had the opportunity to receive extra compensation depending on whether they succeeded in the postseason, played a significant amount of time at the same school and/or played at the same school for several seasons.

That’s interesting with the transfer portal era.

Rather than airing complaints about athletes moving to a different school, the school could provide an open financial incentive to retain the athlete.

Injuries Would No Longer End the Deal

Rather, college athletes can also be physically vulnerable like professional athletes and may receive different treatment.

This proposal is an attempt to rectify that.

An injured player will continue to receive a guaranteed amount of compensation for the contract year and will have the player’s scholarship continued. Athletes also would be able to get a second opinion from a different physician without their own expense.

Medical assistance would be extended after a player’s last game. The model offers coverage for at least two years for sports-related injuries, extended coverage for veteran athletes, and lifetime coverage for catastrophic injuries.

Perhaps this section is the most crucial part of the document. A paycheck makes the news. Chronic medical care can make an entire life.

The Transfer Portal Would Get Clearer Rules

The transfer portal is one of the largest causes of confusion in college athletics these days.

Coaches don’t want to lose players without warning. Athletes do not like indefinite windows and limitations that can shift from year to year. The constant accusing of rival programs for contacting players before they log into the portal is a regular occurrence.

The model Tennessee is using calls for a 15-day transfer window that starts one week after the national championship. It also has anti-tampering rules, and a five-year eligibility clock.

It’s not about getting rid of player motion. To create some rules negotiated by both sides, and penalties that make the rules stick.

Schools that are found to be in violation multiple times could face significant monetary repercussions. Disputes would be subject to an independent grievance procedure, rather than being wholly decided by the same institutions that were involved in the complaint.

The Proposal Covers More Than Money

The term sheet also covers academic decisions and athletes’ time management.

There would have to be agreed upon team activities, and they would need to be monitored. The school may be liable to pay for a student to complete a program of study if a student’s eligibility is terminated because of athletic demands.

Agent commission on athletic-service contracts would be limited to 5 percent and agents would need to be certified.

Mental-health care would be confidential and not be part of the athletics chain of command, lessening the perceived risk of asking for help impacting playing time or team positioning.

These are not ostentatious enhancements. It is the specifics that decide whether a system will serve to protect the athletes, or just pay them.

What This Proposal Does Not Do

The document doesn’t instantly make Tennessee basketball players university employees.

It does not set a limit on salaries, nor will it require that another school or conference implement the same rule.

But there are tough challenges that lie ahead, too.

Should the sports departments negotiate as a group, or should football and basketball do it on their own? Is it possible to have a mandatory spending floor for all athletic departments? So who would act as the delegates for the sports people of the country? Would public and private universities function according to the same system?

Collective bargaining wouldn’t take all the conflict out of college athletics. CBA’s still don’t prevent professional leagues from having holdouts, grievances, lockouts and money disputes.

Bargaining can offer a known method of resolving those disagreements.

College Sports May Have Seen Its Future

College sports, as it was understood of the past, was a sport of amateurs. A confusing mix of revenue sharing, NIL, transfer rules and legal settlements is the new edition.

Tennessee is a nod to the familiar: contracts, negotiating conditions of work, medical assurances, rules that can be enforced.

It would appear that college sports would be more professionally run.

So many things are already done in college athletics, but we often don’t realize it.

Players train year-round. Coaches earn millions. Big deals are negotiated at conferences. Schools are increasingly cordinging athletes with more and more complex financial packages.

However, it wasn’t Tennessee players that made that a reality. It was as simple as writing it down.

Such an offer is never likely to be accepted as a formal proposal. It has shifted the focus, though.

College athletes don’t just ask for an “Invite” anymore.

They are here with their own design.