NCAA proposing new college athletics subdivision rooted in direct athlete compensation | Page 4 | The Boneyard

NCAA proposing new college athletics subdivision rooted in direct athlete compensation

superjohn said:
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.
Expand ...
Seems like TV ratings would disagree with that.
 
Fishy said:
You are not wrong.

This is where Title IX becomes a barrier to entry for less-resourced schools.
Expand ...
It's going to jack up youth sports too.

"My daughter is gettin' one of them dadgum $30k paychecks!"

Just great Dad, then what? Pro soccer players make less than McDonald's cooks.
 
upstater said:
It's going to jack up youth sports too.

"My daughter is gettin' one of them dadgum $30k paychecks!"

Just great Dad, then what? Pro soccer players make less than McDonald's cooks.
Expand ...

Oh, god, I didn’t even think of that.

I see so many hockey and soccer parents so hoodwinked by club coaches into thinking that their kid is going to get a college ride…..this will make it so much worse.
 
My take? This is a ploy to get Congressional involvement. There will be a LOT of schools opting out of this.
 
The NBA and the NFL have to fund this as well. They are the direct beneficiaries of the investment public schools are making in athletics.
 
superjohn said:
How would you know that? We're still working off the old system with all of this stuff.
Expand ...
I don't know, the casual fans drive viewership and I'm not sure why that would change in this new system. The entire point of this is to have giant name brand teams playing each other so casual fans who don't even realize there is a new system will tune in.
 
superjohn said:
You could always gamble and play fantasy if that's your thing. I don't understand your post.
Expand ...
If you consolidate college football to 40 or so teams, you can easily replicate the currrent weekly fantasy model that most of us do with the nfl. Sure, you could do it now I suppose but a consolidated form makes it more appealing. With less teams and less games to watch, interest in those games will surely go up. Right now, I dont care about nor watch 95% of college football. All I am saying that with a consolidated version, even if its the same 40 teams, my interest may go up. It can't really go further down.
 
superjohn said:
You could always gamble and play fantasy if that's your thing. I don't understand your post.
Expand ...
I currently don't have a college fantasy team. I have 4 NFL ones with various groups of friends. A consolidated college format with 40 teams makes it far easier to replicate the current NFL fantasy model. Since I have been engaged in fantasy football, my interest in the NFL, even a meaningless game, has skyrocketed while my interest in all other sports has waned. This new model of just the Big 10 and SEC can have massive appeal nationally. I currently will never watch Ole Miss vs Texas AM but you know what, if i have a college fantasy team and the Ole Miss running back, I will now watch with great intent. I watch 7 hours of NFL football on Sundays. I watch less than an hour of college football on Sat. That can easily change with this.
 
FriarJ said:
My take? This is a ploy to get Congressional involvement. There will be a LOT of schools opting out of this.
Expand ...

I don’t think so.

They’re going to want congressional involvement to keep athletes from gaining employee status, but this is more the NCAA itself trying to create a role for itself going forward.
 
upstater said:
It's going to jack up youth sports too.

"My daughter is gettin' one of them dadgum $30k paychecks!"

Just great Dad, then what? Pro soccer players make less than McDonald's cooks.
Expand ...
Um, she leaves college with greatly reduced debt and gets to start on the career choice? Because you're a college athlete doesn't mean that you ultimately will go pro. The vast majority do not.
 
Fishy said:
I don’t think so.

They’re going to want congressional involvement to keep athletes from gaining employee status, but this is more the NCAA itself trying to create a role for itself going forward.
Expand ...
This is an oddly proactive plan by the NCAA.
 
Fishy said:
I don’t think so.

They’re going to want congressional involvement to keep athletes from gaining employee status, but this is more the NCAA itself trying to create a role for itself going forward.
Expand ...
I'm not sure. Baker explicitly asked for Congress to step in because they can't really regulate this under the current legal framework. I think he's proposing this as way to force their hand, because nobody wants this.
 
CL82 said:
Um, she leaves college with greatly reduced debt and gets to start on the career choice? Because you're a college athlete doesn't mean that you ultimately will go pro. The vast majority do not.
Expand ...
??
They have full tuition remission and scholarships now. This just raises the stakes and makes people go all out even more, while in college, you're getting paid, so the students will be forced into spending even more of their time on their sport. The levels of intensity are going to change, and not for the better.
 
upstater said:
??
They have full tuition remission and scholarships now. This just raises the stakes and makes people go all out even more, while in college, you're getting paid, so the students will be forced into spending even more of their time on their sport. The levels of intensity are going to change, and not for the better.
Expand ...
Again, I haven't looked into this at all yet. But I thought the 30,000 needed to be set aside for every athlete. Most students who aren't participating in revenue sports don't get a full scholarship. That assumption is correct the end result will be schools will sponsor fewer sports. Instead schools will sponsor the revenue men's sports and then just women's sports to offset them.
 
CL82 said:
Again, I haven't looked into this at all yet. But I thought the 30,000 needed to be set aside for every athlete. Most students who aren't participating in revenue sports don't get a full scholarship. That assumption is correct the end result will be schools will sponsor fewer sports. Instead schools will sponsor the revenue men's sports and then just women's sports to offset them.
Expand ...
Even at the NCAA minimum, this is going to be really expensive. We can only cut one more men's sport. If that one sport is football, there could be significant savings between the 85 football scholarships and matching women's. Though the last time we tried to commensurately cut a women's sport, we lost a Title IX lawsuit. You can bet the whole thing is going to be very ugly
 

Online statistics

Members online
252
Guests online
2,151
Total visitors
2,403
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Share This Page

Forum statistics

Threads
164,139
Messages
4,384,317
Members
10,185
Latest member
aacgoast


.
..
Top Bottom