NCAA proposing new college athletics subdivision rooted in direct athlete compensation | Page 3 | The Boneyard

NCAA proposing new college athletics subdivision rooted in direct athlete compensation

Dizzy21 said:
I do wonder how many times we have to be rejected for people to understand that basketball is not taking us to the promised land...
Expand ...
Well it sure ain’t football right now !
 
WrenchFan69 said:
Can we cut women's track without cutting football? We are essentially at the minimum of women's scholarships to match football as it is. Men's track probably gets what 10-15 total scholarships to split up? Maybe that's enough to cut women's tennis in matching scholarships.

I think we're more likely to opt out if we're keeping football.
Expand ...
If we opt in, there is no way we are dumping millions into track and golf salaries and ditching football when football and basketball are the only reasons we would opt in.
 
LBird33 said:
Well it sure ain’t football right now !
Expand ...
Right now, sure. If it's not eventually football, then we never get in. Basketball people better be supporting that football team and hoping that changes. Instead they keep thinking that some day miraculously the Big 10 and SEC will see the err of their ways and suddenly by some convoluted circumstances start dumping money on UConn because they cannot live without them.
 
This is just a proposal that will get debated in committee for at least another year. Schools might just choose which sports to pay the athletes and which sports not to pay. We could focus all of our money on the hoop teams.

tOSU has an athletic budget of 250 million, yet other than football we have better hoop, hockey and baseball teams. It’s not all about money.
 
Dizzy21 said:
If we opt in, we are not cutting football. Men's and women's track and field will be cut first I assume. They already started cutting back on it this year. 120+ athletes, equal guys and girls. Not something that gets the University a ton of national attentional widely.
Expand ...
Have a hard time believing that cutting track & field w/ a combined 30.6 equivalency scholarships (18 women’s/12.6 men’s) across diverse student demographics will be on any table. (I count under 95 total athletes across both teams)

today.uconn.edu

UConn Receives Historic Gift to Support New Student-athlete Success Center - UConn Today

Former Student-Athlete Trisha Bailey ’99 (CLAS) Commits Lead Gift for Major Renovation and Expansion Project
today.uconn.edu today.uconn.edu
 
.-.
NE Football said:
This is just a proposal that will get debated in committee for at least another year. Schools might just choose which sports to pay the athletes and which sports not to pay. We could focus all of our money on the hoop teams.

tOSU has an athletic budget of 250 million, yet other than football we have better hoop, hockey and baseball teams. It’s not all about money.
Expand ...
This is a good point. I feel like this is the negotiating position of the biggest schools. It probably won't be this severe.
 
WrenchFan69 said:
I don't know enough about Title IX. Can an exception be made that favors benefits over "equality?" If the option is women's athletes at 30 schools get paid but another 100 schools cut women's sports, that doesn't benefit women as a whole. And for the schools opting out, the women who would have competed at the D1 level are now competing at a lower level of competition inherently. That's a raw deal for every women's athlete except for those at schools with big football money
Expand ...
No. There's three tests. One of this is absolutely about money and resources spent on womens sports in proportion to campus enrollment. The other two are proportionality in participation to campus enrollment and a hypothetical polling of campus interest in sports. The last one has never been tested by either side of the ledgermain.
 
Unreal how farcical and disconnected these guys are from promoting and maintaining a healthy sport that thrives on growth of competition in a level competitive environment. I despise these idiots for ruining another national pastime.
 
shizzle787 said:
There is not going to be a breakaway. If these schools leave the NCAA, the won't have the 1,100-school legal liability shield. That means if they get sued, they can't spread the settlement around 1,100 ways.
Expand ...
They won't need it.
 
huskymedic said:
Have a hard time believing that cutting track & field w/ a combined 30.6 equivalency scholarships (18 women’s/12.6 men’s) across diverse student demographics will be on any table. (I count under 95 total athletes across both teams)

today.uconn.edu

UConn Receives Historic Gift to Support New Student-athlete Success Center - UConn Today

Former Student-Athlete Trisha Bailey ’99 (CLAS) Commits Lead Gift for Major Renovation and Expansion Project
today.uconn.edu today.uconn.edu
Expand ...
Maybe they do not cut track and field, but they certainly are not going to opt in to pay the athletes in track and field and women's rowing 30k a year and drop football, the only way into the big leagues. Maybe they opt out and cut football and give up on the power conference dream, but my point is more that they are not going to opt into paying the athletes 30k a year to not be in a power conference. We all know that without football, B10 and SEC are out of the question.
 
This is the best news UConn could get short of a B1G invitation. It can opt in to what will be the new P5 and not have to worry about getting invited to a conference. It can play in the Big East forever, sign a GOR and just play independent football at this new upper level. A stable Big East with a long term commitment from UConn will be even more valuable than it is now. UConn football’s media value will also increase just by UConn opting into this. UConn will be able to recruit and directly compensate the players needed to be successful.
 
.-.
HartbeatHusky said:
This is the best news UConn could get short of a B1G invitation. It can opt in to what will be the new P5 and not have to worry about getting invited to a conference. It can play in the Big East forever, sign a GOR and just play independent football at this new upper level. A stable Big East with a long term commitment from UConn will be even more valuable than it is now. UConn football’s media value will also increase just by UConn opting into this. UConn will be able to recruit and directly compensate the players needed to be successful.
Expand ...
And play against who exactly? If it gets whittled down to just a few power conferences and an independent UConn in football, we would not be able to fill a 5 game schedule—never mind a full 12 game schedule.
 
uconnyankee said:
So will those in new tier be competing only with the other schools in all sports?

Hard to see UConn playing TN or Clemson if their players are professional and UConn’s aren’t.

Conversely, is this the point where bb fans realize without football, UConn is not getting seat at big boy table.
Expand ...
More importantly, this makes COLLEGE sports dead
 
shizzle787 said:
This is a good point. I feel like this is the negotiating position of the biggest schools. It probably won't be this severe.
Expand ...
No, this is the NCAA proposal.

This is just the starting point for the P2 to begin negotiations.
 
UConnSportsGuy said:
And play against who exactly? If it gets whittled down to just a few power conferences and an independent UConn in football, we would not be able to fill a 5 game schedule—never mind a full 12 game schedule.
Expand ...
In this proposal the opt-out tier still gets a seat in the playoffs. Lower tier teams will want a shot at us and we’ll be a patsy for other opt-in teams. Shouldn’t be any harder to make a schedule - maybe even a little easier.
 
Dizzy21 said:
Right now, sure. If it's not eventually football, then we never get in. Basketball people better be supporting that football team and hoping that changes. Instead they keep thinking that some day miraculously the Big 10 and SEC will see the err of their ways and suddenly by some convoluted circumstances start dumping money on UConn because they cannot live without them.
Expand ...
That’s the whole point. Heck until 15 years ago outside of Kentucky the SEC looked at basketball as a way to kill time between football season and spring football practice. Outside of Michigan State and Indiana the Big 10 did the same. Now, well, ask an Alabama fan if they’d go to the Spring Red-White game or the SEC basketball tourney.
 
.-.
If this happens, UConn will definitely opt in. Big time sports, particularly football and hoops, are essential to maintaining elite status as a university. I think the state will consider some radical ideas, like eliminating the in-state tuition rate for Storrs campus.
 
Paying college players has always sounded better in theory than it does in reality. That's not to say that it couldn't or shouldn't happen; just that it wouldn't be nearly as lucrative for the players as people think. This isn't pro sports or even minor leagues. The revenue created by college sports is a direct function of student-athletes being unpaid, and there is no way to maintain anywhere near that level of revenue if they are being paid. That leaves the student-athlete to choose between making a little more money while their sport nosedives in popularity or accepting the limitations of the current system. Most have traditionally chosen the latter, but mounting political pressure to spread the wealth at whatever cost may override that preference.

NIL is obviously a sham designed to circumvent Title IX. It's pay-for-play, with a different label to make it a little easier for old-school fans to swallow. Nothing that wasn't already happening before, but with a lot less risk attached.

As a proponent of basic fairness, I don't like the idea of slimy TV executives raking in the lion's share of a billion dollar pie anymore than the next guy. But if the alternative were that appealing, it would have happened a long time ago.
 
BlueandOG said:
If this happens, UConn will definitely opt in. Big time sports, particularly football and hoops, are essential to maintaining elite status as a university. I think the state will consider some radical ideas, like eliminating the in-state tuition rate for Storrs campus.
Expand ...
Yeah! I mean can you imagine anyone going to Harvard or MIT or Chicago. Heck, MIT and Chicago, they are D3. They’ll never be considered elite. .
 
freescooter said:
Yeah! I mean can you imagine anyone going to Harvard or MIT or Chicago. Heck, MIT and Chicago, they are D3. They’ll never be considered elite. .
Expand ...
Let me know when uconn is uchicago.

Reality. Athletics is the advertising front door. The question is how much do we want to spend on advertising. That's how much you spend on football.
 
The more I read of what the proposal is the more it seems like it's just made for the top half of the SEC and Big 10. The rest of the college football world can't compete with those budgets period.
 
The more I read of this it sounds like it won't even be an official subdivision. As long as UConn and the entirety of the Big East opt in and every Big East school pledges to commit as much to basketball as the P4 programs, we will be fine.
 
.-.
freescooter said:
Yeah! I mean can you imagine anyone going to Harvard or MIT or Chicago. Heck, MIT and Chicago, they are D3. They’ll never be considered elite. .
Expand ...
They are all private schools. Name the elite flagship state universities that do not prioritize sports.
 
huskymedic said:
Expand ...

Reading the article. I think Baker is pushing to get something done vs the college bureaucrats. Particularly the p 4 , from dragging their feet. He want something done soon
 
Reality is at many schools that think they are important in college football but are more midrange the professorship and the rest are going to get really cranky. Think mid level big 10 schools
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,221
Messages
4,557,800
Members
10,442
Latest member
StatsMan


Top Bottom