end of D1 world as we know it?

This is stupid

Greed has thrown open pandora's box and everyone will have to accept the consequences of these decisions.

The only thing left that can change the outcome is to increase initial eligibility academic standards and force student-athletes to be admitted on academic performance alone.

Just because you are 6 foot 10, or weight 350 lbs is no reason to be admitted to a great academic institution and then have hundreds of thousands of dollars invested into keeping you eligible.

4 year schools are not a right......put the junior colleges back in busines

Or take universities out of de facto professional sports completely, but I don't think that's what the big time college athletics programs want.

Of course, they might see things differently when the head-trauma-class-action-lawsuit freight train smashes into their D1 football treasure chest.

IVY and D3 look better and better every day!

we have killed our own golden goose.

Non-Scholarship sports are the way to go. Won't necessarily result in a big loss of programs it will just shift the emphasis a bit and in time improve the overall student-athlete experience.

I am not against the recruiting of international student-athletes but it should eliminate the xc/track rosters with 50% or more internationals and allow a great deal more US kids an opportunity to compete.

I'm not very confident that it will all wash out this way but it will be interesting to see the changes in the next 5 to 10 years.

just do away with it wrote:

Non-Scholarship sports are the way to go. Won't necessarily result in a big loss of programs it will just shift the emphasis a bit and in time improve the overall student-athlete experience.

I am not against the recruiting of international student-athletes but it should eliminate the xc/track rosters with 50% or more internationals and allow a great deal more US kids an opportunity to compete.

I'm not very confident that it will all wash out this way but it will be interesting to see the changes in the next 5 to 10 years.

Don't ignore that "ability to sign endorsement deals" part - that could make coming to the US to run for a college very appealing to, say, an up-and-coming Kenyan athlete good enough to be on Nike's radar but not good enough to go straight to the pros.

Once the money tree is discovered, the forest is destined to die.

People in non-revenue sports already have the ability to forgo a scholarship and sign an endorsement deal by simply competing outside of the collegiate system. I'm not sure what advantage NCAA competition offers over non-collegiate competition to a runner, tennis player, golfer, etc. under this proposal.

[quote]dkny64 wrote:

Very interesting article today in the Chronicle of Higher Ed on the most recent meeting of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics. Key quote relevant to LRCers [emphasis added]:

"Under Mr. [Dan] Beebe’s plan, athletes in nonrevenue sports would no longer receive scholarships but would have the opportunity to sign endorsement deals. Teams would play a region-based schedule, allowing some colleges to save hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in travel expenses. And colleges would not have to hire full-time coaches in every sport, freeing up even more money.

Great idea. They should go for it.

just do away with it wrote:

Non-Scholarship sports are the way to go. Won't necessarily result in a big loss of programs it will just shift the emphasis a bit and in time improve the overall student-athlete experience.

I am not against the recruiting of international student-athletes but it should eliminate the xc/track rosters with 50% or more internationals and allow a great deal more US kids an opportunity to compete.

I'm not very confident that it will all wash out this way but it will be interesting to see the changes in the next 5 to 10 years.

Yeah, when your sport is comprised of a lot of internationals that then go back home after their time is up, don't be surprised when there's no one left to care when the sport is cut.

MOST schools lose money in every sport, so NO college sport is a revenue sport.

There would be a few elite football and basketball teams.

Who, in their right mind, is going to keep college football when they lose $1,000,000 a season.

At least in track and XC many schools can stay close to home and compete.

If you're a school in Upstate NY and NE Pa. you have meets all over the place every weekend in XC, Indoors, and Outdoors.

why would I do that? wrote:

People in non-revenue sports already have the ability to forgo a scholarship and sign an endorsement deal by simply competing outside of the collegiate system. I'm not sure what advantage NCAA competition offers over non-collegiate competition to a runner, tennis player, golfer, etc. under this proposal.

True, but now they'd have the option of accepting endorsement money and still competing collegiately. For someone like Missy Franklin, that would mean a lot of money. For someone like Mary Cain, it might have meant doing some NCAA racing after signing with Nike [unclear.] In the case of Alexa Efraimson, it would mean that signing with Nike wouldn't preclude competing collegiately if her PRs don't progress over the next 12 months. For foreign athletes it would open up new potential revenue streams [and nothing would stop schools from giving top foreign runners significant need-based aid if they were so inclined.]

"If" T&F goes non-scholarship. You are going to see a strong shift in what schools dominate the sport.

Arkansas will be fine, because they have ways to make tuition cheap. Surrounding states get in state tuition, low act score standard for academic scholarship etc... Illinois also gives in-state tuition to surrounding states. Indiana does not and it's almost impossible to get in-state tuition once your there for school.

Kansas schools can get the entire KS juco system in school at an in-state rate.

Texas, Florida, California, Ohio and other "Track" states will be fine. Iowa, Minnesota, Washington, Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky etc... will suffer. Oregon has a few good distance runners but not much else. Smaller schools where a full Pell grant basically covers the cost of tuition will be flooded with talent.

You'll see a sharp decline in foreign athletes. Especially Kenyans who are for the most part very poor. In-State talent is going to get recruited hard, and the "Missionary" coaches who can develope kids like that will make a really good living, while the "Mercenary" coaches who sign 5 foreigners every year who can already score at NCAA's will be a thing of the past.

Jules Vern wrote:

In-State talent is going to get recruited hard, and the "Missionary" coaches who can develope kids like that will make a really good living, while the "Mercenary" coaches who sign 5 foreigners every year who can already score at NCAA's will be a thing of the past.

Missonary vs Mercenary- I like those terms. I know if I were an AD I'd like my XC coach to be more than a van driver.

Unfortunately that isn't what's currently winning championships. If you can get 5 Kenyans from point A to point B you'll win a lot of meets. Even if none of them get any faster in four years. You can also bring a shot putter from 16 to 18 meters and lose to the 21 yr old freshman from Croatia who threw 19 meters a year ago and now is throwing 18.25.

GottaSayIt wrote:

Jules Vern wrote:

In-State talent is going to get recruited hard, and the "Missionary" coaches who can develope kids like that will make a really good living, while the "Mercenary" coaches who sign 5 foreigners every year who can already score at NCAA's will be a thing of the past.

Missonary vs Mercenary- I like those terms. I know if I were an AD I'd like my XC coach to be more than a van driver.

That's great, it starts with an earthquake Birds and snakes, an aeroplane......

Once the box is truly open, it won't be long until the Pro sports teams decide to create minor leagues and take every cent away from the schools.

The schools are bad at getting money from their states, the pro teams are good at it. It will be like taking candy from a baby.

akornfv897g wrote:

Once the box is truly open, it won't be long until the Pro sports teams decide to create minor leagues and take every cent away from the schools.

The schools are bad at getting money from their states, the pro teams are good at it. It will be like taking candy from a baby.

Minor leagues are expensive. Baseball and Hockey built their systems before college baseball and hockey were viable alternatives. The NBA's D league doesn't seem to be expanding and the NFL has never even attempted to build any kind of minor league / farm system.

Doesn't matter since the Power 5 is here. I.E. the 5 big football conferences are starting their own TV company.