NCAA proposing new college athletics subdivision rooted in direct athlete compensation

[huskymedic]

… and away we go:



-> According to Baker’s proposal, schools that choose to be part of the new subdivision — they can opt in or out — are required to meet a strict minimum standard rooted in athlete investment.<-

-> Entry into the subdivision requires a school to invest, at minimum, $30,000 per year per athlete into what is termed an “enhanced educational trust fund” for at least half of a school’s countable athletes. Schools would determine when athletes receive the amount, which, for four-year athletes, will total at least $120,000. Schools must continue to abide by the framework of Title IX, assuring that 50 percent of the investment be directed toward women athletes. <-

 

[shizzle787]

… and away we go:



-> According to Baker’s proposal, schools that choose to be part of the new subdivision — they can opt in or out — are required to meet a strict minimum standard rooted in athlete investment.<-

-> Entry into the subdivision requires a school to invest, at minimum, $30,000 per year per athlete into what is termed an “enhanced educational trust fund” for at least half of a school’s countable athletes. Schools would determine when athletes receive the amount, which, for four-year athletes, will total at least $120,000. Schools must continue to abide by the framework of Title IX, assuring that 50 percent of the investment be directed toward women athletes. <-

Told everyone we would have the option to opt in. Nobody is getting kicked out. They will choose to drop down.

 

[shizzle787]

We will opt in, and so will the rest of the Big East. We may go down to the minimum number of sports, but we we will opt in.

 

[JMick]

We will opt in, and so will the rest of the Big East. We may go down to the minimum number of sports, but we we will opt in.

As written, this basically kills football for a lot of schools. If you keep football, it's too much money going to women's sports and non-revenue sports that are already heavily subsidized.

I guarantee proposals gets rewritten so you have to sponsor football in this division if you want to play.

 

[shizzle787]

As written, this basically kills football for a lot of schools. If you keep football, it's too much money going to women's sports and non-revenue sports that are already heavily subsidized.

I guarantee proposals gets rewritten so you have to sponsor football in this division if you want to play.

I think that’s the point. The article mentions these schools will stay in Division 1 for all other sports.

They want to reduce a) the number of FBS football schools and to a lesser extent b) the number of Division 1 institutions.

Both of which are good things IMO as long as UConn and the Big East opt-in. Hint: I think they both will. For example, Georgetown, pays Cooley 6 million a year. The total additional cost for them will be less than that.

This proposal will eliminate the low-hanging fruit.

 

[JMick]

I think that’s the point. The article mentions these schools will stay in Division 1 for all other sports.

They want to reduce a) the number of FBS football schools and to a lesser extent b) the number of Division 1 institutions.

Both of which are good things IMO as long as UConn and the Big East opt-in. Hint: I think they both will. For example, Georgetown, pays Cooley 6 million a year. The total additional cost for them will be less than that.

This proposal will eliminate the low-hanging fruit.

If they don't require schools to keep football, and schools start dropping football & women's sports, it's going to be a political nightmare.

Requiring that some athletes get paid when they don't bring any money to the school is so stupid. This whole thing has jumped the shark.

 

[Drew]

We will opt in, and so will the rest of the Big East. We may go down to the minimum number of sports, but we we will opt in.

I don’t doubt that UConn will opt in but I’m not 100% convinced the entire Big East will. Financially this is a pretty steep burden:

“Entry into the subdivision requires a school to invest, at minimum, $30,000 per year per athlete into what is termed an “enhanced educational trust fund” for at least half of a school’s countable athletes. Schools would determine when athletes receive the amount, which, for four-year athletes, will total at least $120,000. Schools must continue to abide by the framework of Title IX, assuring that 50 percent of the investment be directed toward women athletes.

There are 133 FBS programs and 69 in the Power Five. Schools sponsor different numbers of sports, some as few as 18 and others as many as 35. Athlete populations range greatly by institution, but a sensible average is around 350-400 athletes on some portion of a scholarship.

A school depositing the minimum of $30,000 each year per athlete for half of their athletes would spend about $6 million a year. Schools would not be required to deposit the same amount for each athlete. The model leaves that to the discretion of the institution.”

The highlighted above is more than we earn in annual media revenue in a given year and that’s if we invest the minimum amount required for only half of our athletes. Plus with the ability to invest more than that if you so choose, I’m guessing most of the B1G and SEC will be investing much more than $30k per athlete annually (double or triple that?) as they can allocate anywhere from 10-20% of their media rights deals to easily cover these payments.

We play half of our games in an arena that smells like old chicken and piss and have a $50M deficit in the department currently- I don’t know that it’s a slam dunk that we are going to be financially competitive with other “peer” institutions (i.e. Kansas, Arizona, etc) in that sub-division.

 

[superjohn]

I don’t doubt that UConn will opt in but I’m not 100% convinced the entire Big East will. Financially this is a pretty steep burden:

“Entry into the subdivision requires a school to invest, at minimum, $30,000 per year per athlete into what is termed an “enhanced educational trust fund” for at least half of a school’s countable athletes. Schools would determine when athletes receive the amount, which, for four-year athletes, will total at least $120,000. Schools must continue to abide by the framework of Title IX, assuring that 50 percent of the investment be directed toward women athletes.

There are 133 FBS programs and 69 in the Power Five. Schools sponsor different numbers of sports, some as few as 18 and others as many as 35. Athlete populations range greatly by institution, but a sensible average is around 350-400 athletes on some portion of a scholarship.

A school depositing the minimum of $30,000 each year per athlete for half of their athletes would spend about $6 million a year. Schools would not be required to deposit the same amount for each athlete. The model leaves that to the discretion of the institution.”

The highlighted above is more than we earn in annual media revenue in a given year and that’s if we invest the minimum amount required for only half of our athletes. Plus with the ability to invest more than that if you so choose, I’m guessing most of the B1G and SEC will be investing much more than $30k per athlete annually (double or triple that?) as they can allocate anywhere from 10-20% of their media rights deals to easily cover these payments.

We play half of our games in an arena that smells like old chicken and piss and have a $50M deficit in the department currently- I don’t know that it’s a slam dunk that we are going to be financially competitive with other “peer” institutions (i.e. Kansas, Arizona, etc) in that sub-division.

Sweet UConn diss!

 

[Jbirdp5]

They mention a minimum of 30k per student, did they ever mention a maximum?

 

[Drew]

They mention a minimum of 30k per student, did they ever mention a maximum?

There is no maximum. You can pay what you see fit, but the total women’s $ comp has to be at least 50% of the men’s

 

[Samoo]

There is no maximum. You can pay what you see fit, but the total women’s $ comp has to be at least 50% of the men’s

Actually 100% of the men's, 50% for each.

 

[Jbirdp5]

There is no maximum. You can pay what you see fit, but the total women’s $ comp has to be at least 50% of the men’s

That’s very interesting because I’m sure some of the big football schools would give a Qb recruit a large sum to entice him to come to the school, but then having to make it up on the women’s side could make that problematic….that’s why I’m sure schools will err more on the low end and keep the NIL very high which doesn’t need matching

 

[Platt81]

How does a school like Delaware feel who was the first to pay the larger fee to upgrade to FBS to basically be told you don’t matter less than two weeks after? Wonder if there’s a return policy on their commitment.

 

[Drew]

That’s very interesting because I’m sure some of the big football schools would give a Qb recruit a large sum to entice him to come to the school, but then having to make it up on the women’s side could make that problematic….that’s why I’m sure schools will err more on the low end and keep the NIL very high which doesn’t need matching

Agreed and how I would view this happening is if youre the B1G as an example, who will make $100M in TV money annually starting in 2025, you can take $20M of that (20% of your media rights revenue) and allocate it to this in order to pay out to your players ($10M on the men’s side and $10M on the women’s side). The B1G will allocate a lot of that to women’s volleyball as it’s a powerhouse on that side and the SEC will allocate a lot to women’s hoops.

I don’t think UConn will ever lose access to the NCAA Tournament- my concern with all of this is that if these leagues are paying 3, 4, 5x what we can eventually, and also in a position to create all of the rules and determine (how much) access is available for other leagues, that we won’t be able to field a national title competitive team over the long-term. That is the major risk with not being involved in those leagues, not whether or not we will have access to a slot in the tournament

 

[Drew]

Actually 100% of the men's, 50% for each.

This is what I meant to say lol. Thank you

 

[Drew]

 

[shizzle787]

The Big East will mandate it if I’m betting. I assume only schools who opt in with play 1-A football.

 

[Greedo]

Outside of this board I see a ton of speculation that only SEC and B1G schools will opt in. I guess we'll see how this plays out. On the CFB subreddit basically every ACC/B12 fan is saying their school won't be able to join.

 

[shizzle787]

How does a school like Delaware feel who was the first to pay the larger fee to upgrade to FBS to basically be told you don’t matter less than two weeks after? Wonder if there’s a return policy on their commitment.

I expect most of the MAC, Sun Belt, and CUSA to opt out.

 

[shizzle787]

Outside of this board I see a ton of speculation that only SEC and B1G schools will opt in. I guess we'll see how this plays out. On the CFB subreddit basically every ACC/B12 fan is saying their school won't be able to join.

It’s 6 million minimum a year. A lot of schools will opt in. A school like ULM with a 15 million dollar budget probably won’t though.

 

[brihman]

This proposal hasn’t been bludgeoned immediately so in my mind it’s one of the best things they’ve done in a long time.

 

[Greedo]

It’s 6 million minimum a year. A lot of schools will opt in. A school like ULM with a 15 million dollar budget probably won’t though.

Yeah, but is it worth it to spend all that money when you won't be able to come close to competing with SEC and B1G schools in every sport because they'll be spending way more?

 

[superjohn]

Since the Big 10 can't win championships, get rid of all the competition...

 

[Drew]

It’s 6 million minimum a year. A lot of schools will opt in. A school like ULM with a 15 million dollar budget probably won’t though.

I know you are just completely breezing through this like there is no doubt that the Big East schools are all going to be able to do this but just as an example, the $6M minimum number you’re referencing is ~16% of Marquette’s entire athletics budget for all sports based upon this data.

They’re not receiving any public funds from the state to support this so they need to find the money from somewhere to do it (do they increase student fees?). And that is presuming they are only going to pay the minimum, which again, probably isn’t likely to be enough if you want the best players for men’s basketball (and football which they don’t sponsor).

If the Big Ten and SEC are offering $60-$80k per player in MBB, it’s not an easy feat for a Big East team to match that $. You’re taking about raising 150% of the current media rights amount in money solely to pay athletes. That isn’t a given.

 

[CL82]

Told everyone we would have the option to opt in. Nobody is getting kicked out. They will choose to drop down.

Sort of. If you are already getting $30 million plus per year for broadcast rights, agreeing to this is the price of continuing that arrangement. If you are not, it's going to be extraordinarily difficult for most schools to be able to afford to "option in".

This is a NCAA concession to the P* schools wanting to break off. In essence, they've allowed the halves to exclude the have-nots From participation at the highest level by abandoning their core concept of not directly compensating athletes.