Extinction of the NCAA?

practice PR everytime wrote:

What's Next wrote:

This hasn't been getting enough attention in my opinion, but if Football or Basketball are not played this year, the NCAA is going to struggle in a BIG way to exist beyond this fiscal year. We have already seen multiple schools cut programs with just missing out on revenues from this March Madness. What do you people think is going to happen when any of the following happen?

1. No football/ Football with no fans in the stands (no revenue)

2. No basketball/Basketball without fans

3. No student fees charged to regular student body

It is just really hard for me to see a scenario where the NCAA is able to survive a year and a half without sports. Am I missing something here?

long overdue...the NCAA is relic. It's becoming more and more awkward every year to pretend like a basketball player getting paid for their work is a crime while school build hundred million $$$ stadiums and pay coaches millions to coach 'amateur' sports.

the sooner the better

NCAA should only control non-revenue sports if anything....pretending like Cross country and College football are in anyway in the same realm is a farce.

Jimmm wrote:

practice PR everytime wrote:

long overdue...the NCAA is relic. It's becoming more and more awkward every year to pretend like a basketball player getting paid for their work is a crime while school build hundred million $$$ stadiums and pay coaches millions to coach 'amateur' sports.

the sooner the better

NCAA should only control non-revenue sports if anything....pretending like Cross country and College football are in anyway in the same realm is a farce.

I agree with this. The NCAA should be detached from universities. Making students pay astronomical prices for tuition in order to fund the football team is a terrible model for everyone (other than maybe the football team). Sports at the university level should be treated as minor leagues or development leagues, athletes should be paid, and attending school should not be a requirement. Olympic sports that are not money makers like track and field, volleyball, tennis, etc, should be subsidized by the federal government so that we maintain our Olympic dominance. Above all, universities should be about education, not sports.

Luv2Run wrote:

Jimmm wrote:

I agree with this. The NCAA should be detached from universities. Making students pay astronomical prices for tuition in order to fund the football team is a terrible model for everyone (other than maybe the football team). Sports at the university level should be treated as minor leagues or development leagues, athletes should be paid, and attending school should not be a requirement. Olympic sports that are not money makers like track and field, volleyball, tennis, etc, should be subsidized by the federal government so that we maintain our Olympic dominance. Above all, universities should be about education, not sports.

How can the NCAA be detached from universities when universities started it and it is an organization comprised of those colleges. How is it people are ignorant enough not to realize the colleges pass all the rules the NCAA enforces?

Tuition money does not go to the athletic department. Heck at D3 schools the athletes there PAY to participate in sports since they pay tuition. For a D3 school sports can be an important revenue stream for the college. Lots of guys want to keep playing ball in college and enough have parents willing to pay.

Some power 5 and group of 5 colleges do charge student fees that go to the athletic department (I am not a fan of these), but in the scheme of tuition that fee is not keeping anyone from going to college.

Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Vandy, and the Ivies all have athletic teams that are quite competitive and it has not harmed the academic standing. (Toss in UVA and Michigan on the public side). The two do not have to be mutually exclusive.

Also, the idea of the federal government funding these sports is even worse than the current system we have. Seriously, look at all the things the government has F'ed over the years and you want them in charge of developing athletes?

Every other country funds its teams with government money and yet the US is right at the top of the medal count every Summer Games and many Winter Games in recent history.

Do you really want the Trump Administration trying to oversee the training program for our distance runners?

couldn't continue waiting at least 5 minutes wrote:

hold your phone sonny wrote:

I'm surprised to see so many people delighting in the idea of the NCAA ending. You do realize that would be a death blow to distance running in this country. Without the college system the way it is cross country and track will be done.

For all the flaws the NCAA might have it still develops and produces our future stars. I'm sure someone is going to point at the idea that we will do a club system like Europe or something along those lines. If that was such a good idea here we would have switched years ago but it isn't. We complain now about Footlocker vs NXN for who the true national champion is, can you imagine how diluted the competitions will become without a NCAA championship? Every AAU and JO group and new groups that would pop up would call themselves a national championship to try to make money. How many people are going to skip getting an education in college to go run for some club where they might win the 4th most prestigious national meet with the off chance of getting picked up for a sponsorship?

On the face of it I think you are probably correct. Short term, if the NCAA were to disappear then distance running and nearly all minor sports would suffer.

Of course the NCAA is ruining distance running and minor sports anyway mostly because they don't understand the sport and don't care about it.

What should happen with the NCAA, which of course won't happen, is all of the money they make should be shared equally with each institution. TV revenue for NCAA football and basketball events should be distributed to all institutions. That would be the way insure all sports would thrive... but there is no way they are interested in doing that.

It will certainly be interesting to see what will happen to the NCAA, universities, and college athletics if there is no football this year. We will see some major changes but none of it will be good for distance running.

And, my take is that a club system for running will further erode the top end of distance running in the US. It's already hard enough... removing the existing system will result in fewer athletes participating and clearly that will impact long term development in the sport.

douglas burke wrote:

practice PR everytime wrote:

long overdue...the NCAA is relic. It's becoming more and more awkward every year to pretend like a basketball player getting paid for their work is a crime while school build hundred million $$$ stadiums and pay coaches millions to coach 'amateur' sports.

the sooner the better

NCAA should only control non-revenue sports if anything....pretending like Cross country and College football are in anyway in the same realm is a farce.

The Coaches Develop the Players, so they can improve to the point of MAYBE They can play well enough to get paid after College, MOST of the players who did make it to the NFL would not have made it to the NFL without being on a College Team to Develop, Strength Coaches the Experience of playing against other Good Players every week, In High School a kid who Plays at Clemson, Ohio State Alabama, LSU etc. Was most likely a Man among Boys, So College is a MAJOR Upgrade. They could pay players if they want, but it would be like A Student Majoring in lets say a Accounting and wanting to be an Accountant After he gets his degree, The Teachers Teach what goes into and work on that in that program. Yes they could pay the kid for learning to be an Accountant, but he is not ready until after he gets A Degree or at least until they are well into the program.

DanM wrote:

Classic bullshit line from an AD who does not want to hear dissenting opinions:

"Did you consult with the coaches or players on the decision to cut the sports? If not, why not?"

HS: "No, you can’t do that procedurally. I know it sounds like the right thing to do, but, then, what happens is all the response we got just moves up a month, and you start getting people who lobby at that point. If you look across the country — we’re not the first — we’re not the tenth school to announce cuts in sports. No school will run a procedure where they will go and vet it to coaches and players. We vetted it privately to the athletics advisory board, to the president’s senior leadership team, to my senior leadership team, but we knew the decision wasn’t going to be welcomed. Anyone in athletic administration would say, if you did it early, in terms of letting coaches know, it just exacerbates the whole process. It seems kinder to do it the other way. It just isn’t doable."

agree-a lot of them are spinning the same B.S. I'm sure that Sheehy the AD of Dartmouth is taking a big paycut LOL....

https://www.thedartmouth.com/article/2020/07/q-a-with-ad-harry-sheehy-on-the-elimination-of-five-sports-and-cancellation-of-fall-athletics