The issue of paid employees becomes somewhat complicated because a number of institutions in the power 5 conferences are state schools. State colleges have to follow state rules about employees, what the benefits are and how those positions are funded. I think if athletes in revenue generating sports become employees, the schools will have little choice but to spin those sports off as professional teams and pay the athletes as state employees. These athletes would not receive scholarships in the normal sense, they would get tuition remission to go to school free. Non-revenue generating sports and their athletes will remain under NCAA control which would allow those athletes to have NIL deals in place and normal scholarships.
Parents of both athletes and non athletes have never wanted their money funding anything but their kids' education now and it never has been. Funding for athletic departments comes from revenue generated by teams, mainly football and basketball, from alumni and booster contributions, or from student activity fees. You could sort of argue that the activity fees are financing something other than students' education but money generated by those fees finances a lot more than athletic programs many of which are educational, speaker series, campus radio and newspaper and who knows what else, which includes some funding for athletic teams. But that is just the nature of universities these days.
Incorrect - A sports fee is included yearly on what you pay the school. This past year was a llittle over $600
Are you talking about high schools or colleges? We always paid sports fees at our kids' high school but only student activity fees in college. Money for the sports programs came out of the money generated by activity fees. This was also the case for me at all four colleges I attended.
Now all these NIL students who leave after a year for pro or another college- why don't they put an addendum onto these deals to stay you are required to stay for two years and maintain grades or else you must return all money.
It's just a transfer of value from young black men to posh white prep school women, and some men too
I live in Europe and played sport for my uni without all the bells and whistles that you've added to disguise from the fact you run a modern slave trade
The 'club' model (as I think you call it) was just fine. Not everything in the world has to maximise related economic activity
I actually did some research on the race and parental income of participants in the different sports - the NCAA publish it. It backs up what I'm saying
If this post gets enough downvotes I might dig it out
Now all these NIL students who leave after a year for pro or another college- why don't they put an addendum onto these deals to stay you are required to stay for two years and maintain grades or else you must return all money.
You didn't answer my question. Is that fee from a high school or a college?
do you think minor league sports are anywhere near as popular as college sports? of course europeans are all anti ncaa, they don't know the passion of college football, march madness, or even how much more attention college running gets than any club not at the top of the pro running world. if schools leave the ncaa and the athletes are just pros advertising a college, i don't think any of those sports will have the same draw
That gets them to 16, the minimum required to compete as a Division I FBS school, and is in the "safe harbor" for proportionality for Title IX.
So, yes, that is a model we could be looking at in the future.
They could move down to FCS and sponsor 5 men's and 9 men's teams. Or they could get rid of football and sponsor 7 men's and 7 women's sports.
How many FBS schools outside of P4 make net profit from football? Some of them get to play in smaller Bowl games, but those don't pay much, and the money has to be shared with other teams in the conference.
And 16/14 are not numbers set in stone. Those could be lowered in future.
yup--look at New Mexico-their football team until recently lost a lot of money-4 teams were cut in 2018 including alpine skiing and men's soccer...
There are multiple lawsuits "resolved" by this and multiple other lawsuits and potential lawsuits. The results of these suits are as clear as mud. The NCAA has definitely been identified as an organization which (along with its major college members) has committed an unlawful restraint of trade with respect to the terms of "employment" of student-athletes. The courts so far have not identified "employment" practices by the NCAA (and major colleges) that are not illegal (short of actually making the student athletes actual employees of the universities). It also isn't clear whether the rulings that apply to big time sports also will apply to the lesser DI and DII/DIII schools. For these schools it would seem to be wise to not give athletic scholarships at all, or any other form of special financial compensation to enrolled students who happen to be athletes. The "minor" sports at all schools, and especially "Power 5" type schools, are going to be heavily impacted.
The United State House of Reps settlement has been granted preliminary approval by U.S. District Court Judge Claudia Wilken. Per Boise State Law Professor Sam Ehrlich, the claims period will begin on October 18, with the exclusion and objection deadline set for January 31, 2025. The final approval hearing is currently set for April 7, 2025. (link)
There are multiple lawsuits "resolved" by this and multiple other lawsuits and potential lawsuits. The results of these suits are as clear as mud. The NCAA has definitely been identified as an organization which (along with its major college members) has committed an unlawful restraint of trade with respect to the terms of "employment" of student-athletes. The courts so far have not identified "employment" practices by the NCAA (and major colleges) that are not illegal (short of actually making the student athletes actual employees of the universities). It also isn't clear whether the rulings that apply to big time sports also will apply to the lesser DI and DII/DIII schools. For these schools it would seem to be wise to not give athletic scholarships at all, or any other form of special financial compensation to enrolled students who happen to be athletes. The "minor" sports at all schools, and especially "Power 5" type schools, are going to be heavily impacted.
The United State House of Reps settlement has been granted preliminary approval by U.S. District Court Judge Claudia Wilken. Per Boise State Law Professor Sam Ehrlich, the claims period will begin on October 18, with the exclusion and objection deadline set for January 31, 2025. The final approval hearing is currently set for April 7, 2025. ()
I'm hoping your House of Reps reference is a joke... House refers to the last name of one of the named plaintiffs and class representatives in House v. NCAA, Grant House, who is a former all-American swimmer at Arizona State.
I'm hoping your House of Reps reference is a joke... House refers to the last name of one of the named plaintiffs and class representatives in House v. NCAA, Grant House, who is a former all-American swimmer at Arizona State.
Plaintiffs are him - a swimmer who never won any titles - a backup women’s basketball player who bounced around teams, and a 4th string QB. Simply hilarious. There’s a reason it’s not actual football stars
I'm hoping your House of Reps reference is a joke... House refers to the last name of one of the named plaintiffs and class representatives in House v. NCAA, Grant House, who is a former all-American swimmer at Arizona State.
Plaintiffs are him - a swimmer who never won any titles - a backup women’s basketball player who bounced around teams, and a 4th string QB. Simply hilarious. There’s a reason it’s not actual football stars
I'm hoping your House of Reps reference is a joke... House refers to the last name of one of the named plaintiffs and class representatives in House v. NCAA, Grant House, who is a former all-American swimmer at Arizona State.
Plaintiffs are him - a swimmer who never won any titles - a backup women’s basketball player who bounced around teams, and a 4th string QB. Simply hilarious. There’s a reason it’s not actual football stars
so much of what is going on now is just test cases for supreme court political rulings. student loan relief gets shot down by a state who doesn't service loans, when the nonprofit, legally separate servicer doesn't join the lawsuit and hasn't paid that state a cent in decades. they take on a gay wedding website case where it's unclear the couple or the supposed request ever actually existed.
the facts are besides the point which is pathetic for a court.
Kids should join local pro teams for pay and skip the antiquated NCAA system.
This is the core of the whole issue.
There are not local pro teams, as Minor league pro sports is not profitable.
Wrap those same Minor leaguers in the history and hoopla of college sports and you have a multi billion dollar industry.
Take away the college brands, mascots, band, students, alumni, campus weekend and you are left with zilch.
^^^This right here is why I find this whole lawsuit ridiculous. I feel like the old man yelling at the sky haha.
If someone’s not good enough in their sport to go pro (professional athlete = someone paid for their athleticism) right out of high school, they have the alternative option of playing in college in the system that exists. Which is basically, “you’re decent at what you do. You’re not a professional. You can continue to play for no money, and you get an education…. By the way, WE can make money off your performance. If you don’t like it, don’t do it. The deal is the deal.”
There’s all kinds of arena football teams, CFL, European league, minor league baseball etc … that pay a few bucks if you can’t make the big time. But the kids want the hoopla so choose the college route. But they don’t want to accept that their value as an athlete is not equal to the hoopla, it’s not even on par with a Single A baseball player usually.
So here we are bending over backwards ruining college sports to pay people who weren’t good enough to be pros (likely because of their age, one day they may get there.) because they don’t like the deal they agreed to and we have to make them feel special. And a court says they’re entitled to it, I have no idea how.
So here we are bending over backwards ruining college sports to pay people who weren’t good enough to be pros (likely because of their age, one day they may get there.) because they don’t like the deal they agreed to and we have to make them feel special. And a court says they’re entitled to it, I have no idea how.
Because, no matter how good a deal you might think a Scholarship is, you can not run an industry where some people make millions while others are artificially capped at non salary benefits.
I agree that minor league sports are not profitable, for the most part. But the fact remains college athletics is (even schools that are in the red still generate a ton of revenue, and just spend too much on coaching salaries/new facilities because they haven't had to spend on athletes).
You can not legally pay coaches and administrators millions of dollars, sell tens of thousands of tickets, and cash in on TV and streaming revenues while limiting the earning potential of a large portion of the labor pool to "scholarships" (which while potentially valuable, really amount to a fringe benefit).
The NCAA and schools have to find a way to deregulate and pay, at least some athletes, a wage and not price fix and limit pay artificially. Or they could stop selling TV broadcasting rights, stop charging admission, and cap the salaries of coaches in revenue sports to be commiserate with faculty pay at the University, and make the whole system very "unprofessional" and unprofitable.
Obviously they chose the latter, and this settlement is a reflection of how College sports is now a minor league system. Many athletes at the DI level will get nothing or some scholarship support; but some athletes will make a modest to good wage, and stars in popular sports will make a ton of money from endorsements and their school contracts.
So here we are bending over backwards ruining college sports to pay people who weren’t good enough to be pros (likely because of their age, one day they may get there.) because they don’t like the deal they agreed to and we have to make them feel special. And a court says they’re entitled to it, I have no idea how.
Because, no matter how good a deal you might think a Scholarship is, you can not run an industry where some people make millions while others are artificially capped at non salary benefits.
I
Are you sure about that?
Almost every industry has some people making millions while others (yes, they are called employees) are making peanuts.
So now we are going to have change.
It is what it is but you know as well as I, this will ultimately end up with fewer opportunities for student athletes. There will be many schools which will eliminate some/all sports--- reducing them to club level. Again, it is what it is.
Some will make tons of money though so there's that.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.