Employer prerogative

So, you still think the relationship between high-end college athletics and those who make all the dough it rakes in isn't strictly employer/employee, except for the fact the employees don't get paid?

The Blog would like to enter this into evidence.

To summarize, the employees (Louisville's players) said they didn't want to play in the NIT, reasonably noting they were worn to a frazzle by all the turmoil swirling around the program this winter. The employers (UL's administrators) essentially said, "Sorry, we already accepted a bid conditionally (without considering your wishes, of course). So, because you're going to school on our dime -- and because, let's face it, we could make a little more jing off the postseason exposure, meager as it is in the NIT  -- you're playing."

Question: If this were truly about education and not commerce, and the workforce at places like Louisville were truly more students than athletes, would it have gone down this way?

Methinks not.