Rough Day for College Athletics

Other than that I would miss watching college football, I don't think cutting collegiate sports and their associated expense would be such a bad thing.

Colleges and universities should be for higher education, not developmental programs for pro sports. There are many other extracurricular activities to participate in without the pressure of varsity athletics.

Being a successful student/athlete is a very tough thing to be. One usually suffers at the expense of the other.

Less than 1% of all college athletes turn pro. The club and state-sponsored systems that most other nations employ to develop their world class athletes have worked just fine.

Other than maybe the NFL suffering from no college drafting (I for one don't care much for the NFL other than post season anyway), I can't think of another sport that wouldn't do just fine without collegiate athletics.

This is a brave new world that requires thinking outside the box in many areas not just sports.

This coming from a former large DI program XC and track athlete.

zxcvzcxv wrote:

I'd bet that the vast majority of track and field medalists used to be NCAA athletes or state-sponsored.

I believe Usain Bolt trained at a Jamaican Technological University facility, but I don’t think he took classes or was enrolled.

Maybe regional Olympic training facilities for US athletes would make more sense than university?

hmmph wrote:

I participated in both D1 varsity and club sports while in school. I honestly think students get more out of the club sport experience - there is greater leadership opportunities and the need for diverse skill building such as logistics, coaching, fundraising, and web design.

Loss of coaching jobs would certainly be unfortunate, but in terms of preparing for future careers, club sports are much more useful and you still have strong community building. I think switching to a more club sport-centric system with some funding from the schools would have a lot of advantages for students over varsity sports.

Could still have a paid coach or advisor to over see the thing and provide training. Heck most college coaches in non revnue sports teach a class or they did when I was in school.

Team budgets would be much smaller. Coaches salaries less but not poverty level. The football coach would not be making 7-8 figures.

HRE wrote:

Well, yes. USATF, whatever letters it was using, has never needed to do much about developing the sport at grass roots. High schools and colleges have done that. But if college track and field disappears or nearly does the part of our system that turns promising high school athletes into national and international ones is gone and there is no replacement system.

Then why can the rest of the world produce world champions without college support?

Shut up you idiot. We knew back in May there would be no sports when California State Systems 23 Campus HQ in Long Beach CA announced no sports until 2021/2022. That's the largest 4 year college system in the world. When CSU decides it means the whole world copies them every effin time. You knew that. So shut the eff up.

Questionable2 wrote:

[quote]

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the NCAA say they were waiving the minimum sport sponsorship requirement along with Title IX for the 20-21 academic year?

I don't think title IX is their rule to waive.

The pandemic is real and is still strong. NCAA should cancel fall sports, and all classes should be held online only.

howdydowdy wrote:

HRE wrote:

Well, yes. USATF, whatever letters it was using, has never needed to do much about developing the sport at grass roots. High schools and colleges have done that. But if college track and field disappears or nearly does the part of our system that turns promising high school athletes into national and international ones is gone and there is no replacement system.

Then why can the rest of the world produce world champions without college support?

We could replicate what those countries do but we don't have those kinds of systems in place now. We've always had the collegiate system to do that. It is a de facto professional system that allows scholarship athletes to develop without having to deal with supporting themselves. Take it away and those athletes need to find a job or a way to pay for school and continue to train an d compete. And in the US, where are you going to compete as a 20 year old shot putter or pole vaulter at a high level?

Trump has failed again. Sigh.

Money is overrated. Just train like the Norwegians (and have antidoping home mobiles!!! so you are not f***cked by cheaters),

I hate to bust your liberal bubble (again), but to think that Norwegians don't and haven't doped is at best naive. At worst partisan. Ahhh. Very evident with your past history of posting here.

gettelfinger wrote:

I hate to bust your liberal bubble (again), but to think that Norwegians don't and haven't doped is at best naive. At worst partisan. Ahhh. Very evident with your past history of posting here.

Examples?

Well. As you are a troll I know you will not give any,

This will certainly make things tougher for those schools trying to qualify as an at-large team for the NCAA cross country championships. Guessing that conference championships will carry more weight when the committee picks the at-large teams?

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/29435295/source-big-ten-moving-conference-only-model-all-sports-fall

2021 rules. Everyone goes this year.

parkrun is going to save running in USA