Ahead of the CFP championship, college athletes question what being treated as employees might entail.

ATLANTA — Kardell Thomas believes that the issue at hand lies not with the individual colleges but rather with the overarching system that has influenced his journey as a college athlete. His experiences serve as a powerful narrative for the ongoing debate concerning the formation of unions for student-athletes in this rapidly evolving landscape.

Over a span of five years, Thomas signed with four different colleges, a journey that was heavily impacted by the struggles he faced after the passing of his father, Karl, in 2023 due to kidney complications. Although Thomas did not specify which school, he shared that he was promised support during his father’s health decline, support that ultimately did not materialize. On top of that, his career was marred by injuries and speculation surrounding his character, including unfounded rumors about substance use, despite him never failing a drug test. Frequent transfers raised doubts about his durability and reliability.

After navigating through programs in Louisiana, Florida, and Missouri, Thomas’s journey culminated at Colorado under the leadership of Deion Sanders, although he found himself scarcely participating during his final eligibility season. Reflecting on his situation, Thomas mentioned, “If I could’ve had NIL in my third year, I could’ve bought my dad a kidney, and maybe he wouldn’t have died,” referring to the transformative impact of name, image, and likeness (NIL) payments in college sports.

As college athletes consider the potential benefits of founding a players’ association, Thomas stands among approximately 4,000 athletes who are part of an initiative aimed at shaking up the current dynamics in collegiate sports. Athletes.org recently convened over 50 student-athletes for discussions leading up to the national championship game featuring Ohio State and Notre Dame. This organization positions itself as an emerging players’ association for college athletes, striving to make a significant mark in a space that has so far largely been controlled by the NCAA without formal representative groups.

Among the attendees was Grant House, a swimmer from Arizona State, whose case has become pivotal in addressing some of the most pressing issues within college athletics, including revenue distribution, NIL payments, and Title IX implications. House emphasized that his involvement is not solely for personal recognition, stating, “I did this for these guys around me and all around the country.”

Also involved in this movement is Diego Pavia, a quarterback who transitioned from junior college to Vanderbilt and is advocating for expanded eligibility options for athletes, and Sedona Prince, whose viral video showcasing inequities in facilities during the women’s March Madness tournament in 2020 continues to resonate within the college sports community. Prince expressed her desire for substantive changes to ensure that athletes, particularly in terms of financial security, gain equitable opportunities.

The notion of treating athletes as employees evokes concern among college leaders while simultaneously appealing to the athletes themselves. Jim Cavale, co-founder of athletes.org, clarified that while their goal isn’t strictly to classify players as employees, a significant majority of attendees expressed interest in exploring the implications of such a model. “It’s about how athletes are treated, and they’ve been treated like employees for a long time,” he remarked.

The possibility of classifying athletes as employees is seen by some in the collegiate athletic scene as potentially disastrous, fearing it could force colleges to make severe budget cuts if they were required to offer salaries and benefits. Recently, there have been pauses in two legal actions advocating for this employment model at Dartmouth and Southern California, which has caused a temporary sigh of relief among college administrators.

Cavale contended that the transition to an employment framework need not be detrimental to all facets of college athletics and that the experiences of athletes vary significantly across sports and schools. He noted that some players might prefer to avoid an employment designation due to the tax implications that could emerge.

Despite House and Prince’s involvement in legal proceedings, they recognize that the resolutions will primarily be negotiated by legal professionals, governing bodies, and NCAA leadership. House reflected on the constant changes over the past few years, emphasizing the need for versatility in finding solutions that are materially beneficial to all stakeholders involved.

Prince hopes for greater financial commitment from colleges towards athletes, ideally aiming to maximize the permissible payouts, while expressing skepticism about such changes occurring without pressure. “Historically, over and over, unless you force their hand to make a change, they’re not going to do it by themselves,” she said, voicing a wish for a fair and equitable system.