NCAA proposing new college athletics subdivision rooted in direct athlete compensation

[CL82]

I might be reading things incorrectly but the $30k athlete minimums are solely for NIL or compensation

I haven't looked at it hard, but I thought this was money coming from the schools versus NIL which is money coming from outside the schools.

 

[upstater]

I haven't looked at it hard, but I thought this was money coming from the schools versus NIL which is money coming from outside the schools.

The article said both.

I don't understand why they can't fund it all with the revenue they make.

For the NCAA to dictate this in such a fashion creates a huge problem for UConn.

UConn is at a $40m deficit already. This adds to it. A lot. While tuition is rising.

If athletes are making $30m per year minimum on average (the distribution can be different, apparently), then that can only mean a huge subsidy from the pocket of average students to athletes.

They've done gone messed the whole thing up.

Go pro, use the revenues you make, don't give any to the university. Make it clean. This arbitrary minimum is destructive and for the birds.

Especially now when they are slashing and burning all over academia. Imagine West Virginia students hearing this news. They shut down Computer Science, English and Mathematics over there. Now they're going to pony up more $$ for sports? Absurd. Cutting the football coach's salary isn't going to make up for this.

 

[HuskyHawk]

It's pathetic how all this has played out with the Big 10 and SEC doing everything to destroy college sports. Now a bunch of athletes playing sports nobody cares about, while generating zero dollars and actually losing money for their schools are going to get paid a ton of money in addition to their free college.

The only rational solution is to do something like this, but just for football. We used to be division 1-AA. In reality, we still are. So are half the FBS schools. Create a new tier above FBS. At the minimum it would be just football and basketball. Applying this to other sports will just lead to schools not sponsoring as many sports, which is a lose - lose for college athletes.

This could force Congress to step in, because it's really pretty dumb.

 

[shizzle787]

The only rational solution is to do something like this, but just for football. We used to be division 1-AA. In reality, we still are. So are half the FBS schools. Create a new tier above FBS. At the minimum it would be just football and basketball. Applying this to other sports will just lead to schools not sponsoring as many sports, which is a lose - lose for college athletes.

This could force Congress to step in, because it's really pretty dumb.

They are creating a new tier for football. That is what this is. You have to opt-in to play 1-A football.

 

[JohnnyJr]

This doesn’t really make much sense, so the NCAA is still gonna control all postseasons except for football but if you’re in this new subdivision you can set your own scholarship limits and transfer rules. Is that only for football or all programs? You’d have some teams in the tournament with more scholarship players and different transfer rules.

 

[freescooter]

I think this is a disaster and I doubt it survives very long. It might be the end of the NCAA. To some extent I agree with superjohn (I know. I’m surprised too). It won’t work.

I also have my doubts about who will or will not opt in. I suspect there will be some surprises on both ends. Within the BIG 10 you have Rutgers and Maryland. 1 drowning in debt. The other prohibited from using state money for athletics. Might they relook stop things? Vanderbilt? BC? Northwestern? How about if you are one of those schools that hasn’t won a league title in a generation? Do you really want a semi-pro team? And if you have a semi-pro team do you really want to have them having to worry about passing World History?

As far as the NEWBIE goes you need to wonder about Georgetown perhaps over academics, but what about schools that have had pretty marginal success over the past 10-15 years? Seton Hall, Butler, DePaul? St John’s?

My sense of this is that 2 leagues will spin off. Maybe a single “super conference” with 20-30 semi-pro affiliate teams. Everyone else goes back to life much closer to what it was 5 years ago.

 

[auror]

I wonder if they can change it to total number of athletes paid by school be the same by gender, not necessarily $ amount.

 

[superjohn]

The only rational solution is to do something like this, but just for football. We used to be division 1-AA. In reality, we still are. So are half the FBS schools. Create a new tier above FBS. At the minimum it would be just football and basketball. Applying this to other sports will just lead to schools not sponsoring as many sports, which is a lose - lose for college athletes.

This could force Congress to step in, because it's really pretty dumb.

Agreed, it's all so ugly and anti-competitive. Big 10 and the SEC have decided they want to destroy college football and be the minor leagues for the NFL and it looks like nobody is going to stop them. They shouldn't be allowed to destroy the rest of college athletics.

 

[CL82]

The article said both.

I don't understand why they can't fund it all with the revenue they make.

For the NCAA to dictate this in such a fashion creates a huge problem for UConn.

UConn is at a $40m deficit already. This adds to it. A lot. While tuition is rising.

If athletes are making $30m per year minimum on average (the distribution can be different, apparently), then that can only mean a huge subsidy from the pocket of average students to athletes.

They've done gone messed the whole thing up.

Go pro, use the revenues you make, don't give any to the university. Make it clean. This arbitrary minimum is destructive and for the birds.

Especially now when they are slashing and burning all over academia. Imagine West Virginia students hearing this news. They shut down Computer Science, English and Mathematics over there. Now they're going to pony up more $$ for sports? Absurd. Cutting the football coach's salary isn't going to make up for this.

The problem is that this is all reactionary by the NCAA to try to hold itself together. It is a Band-Aid at best. Further, they should be honest with their motivations. By suggesting that this minimum amount is for all student athletes they put a "noble" gloss over What this really is, namely, the bigger schools pushing the smaller schools out of the market.

The good news is that smaller schools having the ability to "opt out" will take some of the pressure off them to maintain viable athletics. For many small private schools, athletics may go back to what it originally was, an extracurricular activity that has student support at games.

 

[Scrutineer]

If I'm reading it correctly, this proposal makes Charlie Baker look like a shill for the P4 so they'll let him keep his organization relevant. See SEC Commissioner's threat about the NCAA and their potential for leaving it. Questions follow.

1. Why $30,000 minimum? In whose interests is that? How much are minor league baseball players paid? And they don't get a full scholarship to gain the knowledge and/or skills necessary to be successful in a job.

2. Is the proposal simply designed to kill off schools outside the P4? If they do so they'll miss out on the many kids who are late bloomers who will not get an athletic scholarship because there'll be fewer schools playing particular sports. (Steven Ashworth and Baylor Scheirman are just two examples)

3. Won't the rush to kill off lots of schools for football radically reduce opportunities for women?

4. If you kill football can you join for basketball and/or other sports at that level but sponsor some at a lower level?

My prediction is this won't fly as proposed but, if it does, you can kiss off many fans' interest in college sports.

 

[HuskyHawk]

The problem is that this is all reactionary by the NCAA to try to hold itself together. It is a Band-Aid at best. Further, they should be honest with their motivations. By suggesting that this minimum amount is for all student athletes they put a "noble" gloss over What this really is, namely, the bigger schools pushing the smaller schools out of the market.

The good news is that smaller schools having the ability to "opt out" will take some of the pressure off them to maintain viable athletics. For many small private schools, athletics may go back to what it originally was, an extracurricular activity that has student support at games.

I think it's partly to force Congress to act. NCAA is limited in what it can do. If it works with the biggest schools to wreck everything (or appears to) then Congress steps in to stop it, and puts limits on the big schools that the NCAA can't.

 

[superjohn]

If I'm reading it correctly, this proposal makes Charlie Baker look like a shill for the P4 so they'll let him keep his organization relevant. See SEC Commissioner's threat about the NCAA and their potential for leaving it. Questions follow.

1. Why $30,000 minimum? In whose interests is that? Is it just to kill off schools outside the P4? If they do so they'll miss out on the many kids who are late bloomers who will not get an athletic scholarship because there'll be fewer schools playing particular sports. (Steven Ashworth and Baylor Scheirman are just two examples)

2. Won't the rush to kill off lots of schools for football radically reduce opportunities for women?

3. Must members of this division sponsor all sports at this level of payouts or can they choose to go D3 or D2 in some sports?

4. If you kill football can you join for basketball and/or other sports at that level but sponsor some at a lower level?

My prediction is this won't fly as proposed but, if it does, you can kiss off many fans' interest in college sports.

Your last sentence is what they fail to realize. Once everyone else is left out and you're just competing against yourselves most people will tune out. You watch the other games when your team is a part of the whole thing, without that the interest is gone.

 

[CL82]

I think it's partly to force Congress to act. NCAA is limited in what it can do. If it works with the biggest schools to wreck everything (or appears to) then Congress steps in to stop it, and puts limits on the big schools that the NCAA can't.

And what basis would Congress step into stop it? Antitrust? Wouldn't the fact that a independent not for profit organization approved the scheme be a point in favor of Congress not taking any action.

 

[CL82]

Once everyone else is left out and you're just competing against yourselves most people will tune out.

I've heard this theory a lot. I'd like to believe it, but I don't. I do think you'll lose some fans, but an awful lot of people will tune into whatever game is on.

 

[businesslawyer]

I haven't looked at it hard, but I thought this was money coming from the schools versus NIL which is money coming from outside the schools.

Per the release, this would be, in part, in return for the school's use of the players' NIL. It does not stop the players from licensing their NIL rights to third parties for other purposes.

 

[Fishy]

It’s like some of us knew what we were talking about.

Anyway.

This is just a proposal by the NCAA to stave off something worse and keep themselves on the payroll. Expect the something worse to prevail.

 

[Drew]

I've heard this theory a lot. I'd like to believe it, but I don't. I do think you'll lose some fans, but an awful lot of people will tune into whatever game is on.

Just wait until 25 million watch Michigan and Alabama- I’m sure they’re real concerned UMass fans aren’t watching lmao

 

[CL82]

Just wait until 25 million watch Michigan and Alabama- I’m sure they’re real concerned UMass fans aren’t watching lmao

Wouldn't that be UMass "fan"?

 

[JustbrewitMan]

With this no-cap allocation proposal, there are going to be some very very well paid female athletes at SEC & Big Ten schools…

 

[djct1999]

I've heard this theory a lot. I'd like to believe it, but I don't. I do think you'll lose some fans, but an awful lot of people will tune into whatever game is on.

Just look at the nfl. With legalized sports gambling and the proliferation of fantasy sports, I can argue this will make more people interested. If I am involved with fantasy on Thursdays and Saturdays i will watch more. All of a sudden, ole miss vs Texas am may matter to me just like the jags bengals game last night!

 

[Scrutineer]

Agreed, it's all so ugly and anti-competitive. Big 10 and the SEC have decided they want to destroy college football and be the minor leagues for the NFL and it looks like nobody is going to stop them. They shouldn't be allowed to destroy the rest of college athletics.

It's the evil SEC probably pushing this. Look at their Commissioner's comments:

Greg Sankey discusses possibility of SEC separating from NCAA

With the SEC growing in influence, many have questioned if the NCAA has outlived its usefulness in football.

lsutigerswire.usatoday.com

His last quote sounds like a real threat: "We’re going to give leadership a time to show leadership, and we have to figure it out after we see some direction.” (Speaking about Baker and the NCAA)

The B1G, Big12 and ACC should stay put and let the SEC go. ESPN will shill for them because they're their partners, but if all they do is play a round robin schedule who do they play in a league championship? Will football fans outside their footprint care enough to watch a league they're not vested in?

On the other hand, it would set up something similar to the merger of the AFL and NFL and SUPER money from the championship so as long as the suckers (us) keep upping our donations and paying ever higher ticket prices, the leagues and schools will keep doing what they're doing.

 

[Fishy]

With this no-cap allocation proposal, there are going to be some very very well paid female athletes at SEC & Big Ten schools…

You are not wrong.

This is where Title IX becomes a barrier to entry for less-resourced schools.

 

[Drew]

 

[shizzle787]

Well, St. John’s is opting in.

 

[superjohn]

Just look at the nfl. With legalized sports gambling and the proliferation of fantasy sports, I can argue this will make more people interested. If I am involved with fantasy on Thursdays and Saturdays i will watch more. All of a sudden, ole miss vs Texas am may matter to me just like the jags bengals game last night!

You could always gamble and play fantasy if that's your thing. I don't understand your post.