The NCAA is an evil and corrupt organization

[upstater]

if the situation is as dire as you make it, why have college sports existed til now? and what will the ncaa folding have anything to do with changing that equation. for instqnce, why does anyone besides the bcs schools play NOW, given your doom and gloom? and surely it isnt the NCAA that haw been keeping low 1a schools, d2, and d3 schools playing athletics.

The answer is easy: losing $5 million a year is acceptable. Losing $20 million a year is harder to swallow. Look at Rhode Island. They spend $5 million a year total. Look at U. Buffalo. Their budget was at $7 million when they joined D1 football less than a decade ago. By 2009, he budget had grown to $26 million. I just looked up its cohort, SUNY Binghamton, and their budget is $12 million.

 

[upstater]

There are so many errors and false premises in this paper that I'd be embarassed to put my name on it. It has a not-so-hidden agenda and clearly is not trying to put forth an objective analysis.

The professor who affixed her name to it was well paid.

 

[Danzz]

This article in the Atlantic does a good job laying out the history of the hypocrisy that is the NCAA. I highly recommend giving it a read.

The Atlantic

It is not about education, it is not about protecting students, it is about profiting. I hope it all collapses.

What would we have without the NCAA?I don't like the organization but we need a cop in college sports and they are the police.

 

[bmayuc]

The answer is easy: losing $5 million a year is acceptable. Losing $20 million a year is harder to swallow. Look at Rhode Island. They spend $5 million a year total. Look at U. Buffalo. Their budget was at $7 million when they joined D1 football less than a decade ago. By 2009, he budget had grown to $26 million. I just looked up its cohort, SUNY Binghamton, and their budget is $12 million.

Yes, if anyone starts losing a ton of money, they will probably stop whatever they are doing whether we are talking sports or banking. What I am asking you to answer is this: What does the NCAA folding have anything to do with a loss of revenue or an increase in losses? The NCAA isn't paying these schools because the NCAA isn't making money. The NCAA is simply an ineffective enforcement body and a minimally effective administration operation. Hell, with the rise of conferences as the main power player in TV negotiations, you could argue that the NCAA is mostly obsolete in the negotiation arena as well. If the NCAA dies, how does that have any impact of the revenue/cost/profit/loss of college sports?

The paper is full of holes, the biggest one is this: While top-tier players may be worth 250K or whatever this article supposes(artificially), if the NCAA collapsed it would be replaced by another governing body. If that governing body can't keep the scholarship model intact, it would fall to a true market system. If that is the case, then the market would bear what the market would bear. Each Athletic Department would pay what it would pay or not pay, and that would divide the athletic marketplace accordingly. D1 wouldn't be divided by number of scholarships available but by cost each conference would allocate for each player. Maybe the SEC is 50,000 and the Big East is 10,000, for example. But its not like sports would die, they would just be run much more like businesses than before.

 

[upstater]

Yes, if anyone starts losing a ton of money, they will probably stop whatever they are doing whether we are talking sports or banking. What I am asking you to answer is this: What does the NCAA folding have anything to do with a loss of revenue or an increase in losses? The NCAA isn't paying these schools because the NCAA isn't making money. The NCAA is simply an ineffective enforcement body and a minimally effective administration operation. Hell, with the rise of conferences as the main power player in TV negotiations, you could argue that the NCAA is mostly obsolete in the negotiation arena as well. If the NCAA dies, how does that have any impact of the revenue/cost/profit/loss of college sports?

The paper is full of holes, the biggest one is this: While top-tier players may be worth 250K or whatever this article supposes(artificially), if the NCAA collapsed it would be replaced by another governing body. If that governing body can't keep the scholarship model intact, it would fall to a true market system. If that is the case, then the market would bear what the market would bear. Each Athletic Department would pay what it would pay or not pay, and that would divide the athletic marketplace accordingly. D1 wouldn't be divided by number of scholarships available but by cost each conference would allocate for each player. Maybe the SEC is 50,000 and the Big East is 10,000, for example. But its not like sports would die, they would just be run much more like businesses than before.

Based on the first post of the thread, I thought we were discussing what would happen if the NCAA went kaput because schools wanted to adopt recommendations similar to those in the Atlantic article linked. In other words, I was discussing what would happen if schools or conferences set their own policies. I think the whole enterprise would eventually collapse, with perhaps only a couple big conferences surviving.