Wouldn't the Ivy League schools be perfect for the current NIL set up? A bunch of billionaire alumni could buy up players and make what the P5 conferences are offering look like pocket change.
What we are trying to tell you is that the 4:00-4:10 kids do their research on their options and make their school choice. Most try to get an athletic scholarship at a non Ivy, others are drawn to the lower cost of State schools.
In the case of Graham Blanks and Maja Ramsden, Harvard lucked into fast kids with families eager to pay full tuition, so their kids could get an excellent Harvard education. Running smoothed the path to their admission and Harvard now has 2 ncaa champs and Olympians.
They don't get many of this type of runner, however, as most of the fastest kids either can't qualify academically even with a boost, or are unwilling to pay more to attend Harvard than their other options.
Fine. Everyone is a walk on at the Ivies. Let's look at this in terms of academic requirements. We know that the Ivies accept some kids whose GPAs and SAT scores are lower than they normally want for various reasons, being really good at a sport being one of them. A kid with a high school best mile of 4:40 is probably not going to get in if his grades and test scores are not as good as those of other applicants. But if his best high school mile is 4:10 he may well get in with those less than superior marks. It's that second type of walk on, the one a coach hopes will walk on to his team, the 4:10 kid, not the 4:40 kid, I'm asking about.
Coaches do have a say in admissions. But they have no control over the cost of the school. In your example, the coach may be able to get the 4:10 kid admitted, but he has no say in how much it will cost the 4:10 kid to attend the school. The 4:10 kid will pay the same amount as if he were a non-athlete who got admitted without a coach's help.
I'm very curious to see what she thinks she deserves vs what she's actually worth. Somehow I think she believes she's worth near 6 figures per year, while she's probably not even $10,000.
Her quote sounds a bit smug. It wasn't just her - she was part of a talented recruiting class that did well within the conference:
“As a former student-athlete who has single-handedly helped to uplift the Penn program, I am extremely disappointed,” Whittaker, a 2024 College graduate, said in a written statement to the DP. “Ivy League schools are under the impression that they can take, use, and reuse their athletes and give them nothing in return.”
You are talking about institutions that are the highest examples of neoliberal, capitalist bootlicking in our culture. Harvard's endowment alone is the equivalent of the combined national wealth of 120 nations.
They don't know how to do anything else but "take, use and reuse ... and give nothing in return."
I'm posting these comments without having read the thread.
My main point is #3: I don't see much changing to be honest from the current setup.
1) Ivy League sports operate at a loss. Why would you then "revenue share" money to the athletes?
2) NIL going forward for all sports is supposed to be legitimate. That doesn't change for Ivy League schools.
3) I don't see much changing to be honest. The top athletes in revenue sports will still be strongly induced to leave. How much revenue sharing did we think there was going to be for Ivy League basketball or football? The football programs are I-AA level. Do we expect Georgetown football players to get paid? Basketball maybe they expected something on the men's side. A few thousand dollars year might help some kid on a full income based scholarship. But really good players will still be strongly induced to leave. A yale bball guy went to Michigan. NIL deals were shams in the past. Going forward they are supposed to be legit. But to make up for it a Michigan basketball player will get revenue sharing.
This tidbit from the DP article to me is nuts and I wonder if it will get reversed under the Trump administration: "This comes days after the United States Department of Education declared that future NIL payments paid directly from universities should count as “athletic financial assistance” under Title IX — and thus should be distributed equally between men’s and women’s programs."
So if Ann Arbor Chevrolet wants to sponsor the Michigan football team as a whole it has to sponsor the Athletic Department as a whole and half the money has to go to women's sports?
Title IX is about treating people fairly not equally. If men's sports brings in more revenue they can easily make an argument they should get more of it. With the TV rev share they are going to get a lot more of it so why wouldn't this apply to sponsorships as well? Just because some bureaucrat made a decision doesn't mean it should apply.
I do think a bubble is coming with NIL across the board. Rich people don’t like giving money away for zero return. It is exciting right now but I think the collectives will start fading out
Wow. They were making these donations tax-deductible.
But as part of the settlement there no longer can be shame NIL's. I assume this will apply to Ivy League as well even though they are opting out
No. I am one of those people with a modest income who never spent any money but saved instead. I don't have a pension. I have parents who I started taking care of. My savings won't carry me through until my death. I have 15 year old cars. I have a small house worth $200K. I can't spare money for college but the Ivies told me that I can pay full fare because I have savings.
Robert said that is how it works when he was at Cornell. Honestly you're better off at Ivies not saving in terms of getting more financial aid.
Even if wealthy, why would a fast runner not start with Duke, Michigan, Notre Dame, Northwestern, Stanford who can give a scholarship?
Why, the brand name, of course.
Wealth or the perception of wealth will allow the most craven decisions a person is capable of.
Superfast and you can get a full-ride sure. But if you're going to get 1/4 a scholarship somewhere you might just pick what school you think is best for you.
How so? It is ranked ahead of 5 Ivies as well as Michigan and Notre Dame? Granted it only has a women's program but the team finished 3rd at regionals the past 2 years and qualified the year before. Apparently a lot of smart and fast women are choosing it.
All kids are walk-ons at the Ivies. You remain very confised about how track and field recruiting works. The Harvard coach isn't sending out hundreds of letters to runners like football coaches do to 4 star and 5 star players. Track and Field coaches look look through the thousands of emails, questionnaires, texts, calls, etc. that they receive. They respond to kids who are fast enough for their program if they have openings. Thousands of elite kids don't approach the Ivies becuase they know that they will receive a partial scholarship at other schools or they know that they will pay significantly less at their P4 state school or other good private school. This isn't complicated. Distance runners are on average great students. Many of them would qualify for the Ivies if coming in through the athletics route. But their parents tell them to pursue other schools. Even if wealthy, why would a fast runner not start with Duke, Michigan, Notre Dame, Northwestern, Stanford who can give a scholarship? And if upper middle class, an instate kid is going to be way more interested to attend Virginia or Wisconsin or Florida or Oregon with and academic and athletic discount bring proce to almosst nothing rather than getting a discount at an Ivy and being left with $60K per year of cost.
No they are not walk ons. This is completely false. They are recruited based on performance and athletic achievement (state titles typically), and importantly the ability to get accepted academically (which is typically straight A's, 1350 to 1400 or better, and near top % of class rank)
If a recruited athlete meets those standards, makes an official visit, can determine and accept the costs, and verbally commits then the coach will include that athlete among a small and exclusive list of preferred athletes to the admissions department which mostly accepts the athletes on the coach's list.
A walk on athlete is rare in all sports at Ivy's. They would have to 1. Get accepted purely on academic merit. 2. Fly under the radar athletically so as not to be noticed in both attributes.
You are choosing your own definition. Preferred walk-on is the commonly accepted term for a recruited athlete not on scholarship. But the word "preferred" is merely the adjective. Every P4 football player is recruited but there are more than 1000 who are walk-ons.
I am a big fan of the Whittaker sisters, but 1) she isn't even the best Whittaker, and 2) I suspect Penn T&F loses money annually, so not sure what she has 'brought up'.
What we are trying to tell you is that the 4:00-4:10 kids do their research on their options and make their school choice. Most try to get an athletic scholarship at a non Ivy, others are drawn to the lower cost of State schools.
In the case of Graham Blanks and Maja Ramsden, Harvard lucked into fast kids with families eager to pay full tuition, so their kids could get an excellent Harvard education. Running smoothed the path to their admission and Harvard now has 2 ncaa champs and Olympians.
They don't get many of this type of runner, however, as most of the fastest kids either can't qualify academically even with a boost, or are unwilling to pay more to attend Harvard than their other options.
But the Footlocker National Champion this year did chose an Ivy…
I do think some of this argument is silly because even at many other of these high academic, non-Ivys that have been mentioned male runners are certainly not getting full rides at the outset and they cost just as much. Plus now there are fewer slots for them.
No. I am one of those people with a modest income who never spent any money but saved instead. I don't have a pension. I have parents who I started taking care of. My savings won't carry me through until my death. I have 15 year old cars. I have a small house worth $200K. I can't spare money for college but the Ivies told me that I can pay full fare because I have savings.
Robert said that is how it works when he was at Cornell. Honestly you're better off at Ivies not saving in terms of getting more financial aid.
Most private schools don’t count your retirement savings (401k or 403b) against financial aid and cap the hit you take from primary home equity. You might be better off maxing retirement contributions and/or paying off your mortgage while living off cash savings or non retirement accounts to spend them down before applying for financial aid. If you plan on buying cars using cash sometime in the next 5 years, do it before applying for aid.
So if Ann Arbor Chevrolet wants to sponsor the Michigan football team as a whole it has to sponsor the Athletic Department as a whole and half the money has to go to women's sports?
Title IX is about treating people fairly not equally. If men's sports brings in more revenue they can easily make an argument they should get more of it. With the TV rev share they are going to get a lot more of it so why wouldn't this apply to sponsorships as well? Just because some bureaucrat made a decision doesn't mean it should apply.
I agree your stance, but the Department of Education statement relates to payments directly from the school. So the $20mm in revenue share, they say, should be split. I don’t think they can force a private company to pay both genders equally.
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.