Tons of implications to this decision, the obvious one being that players could bargain for a salary. Right now it seems like NW players are saying they want things like safer conditions, but payment will be sure to follow, if not here then at other schools. Evidently this only applies to NW right now, and state schools will have to go through a slightly different process, but if this survives appeal, the precedent will have been set. The SI article brings up an interesting point, as athletes in states with right to work laws may find it harder to unionize. That could set up an interesting tension, where schools have to pay players anyway to remain competitive with schools in states where it is easier to unionize. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out. Maybe the lawyer types can weigh in. Blah blah blah blah word limit.