|
Post by Mocha on Aug 7, 2014 20:18:04 GMT -5
USC (along with Indiana) has already announced it will guarantee scholarships for four years.
|
|
|
Post by James on Aug 8, 2014 9:29:43 GMT -5
A lot of people are talking about basketball here, but the fact is that 3 of the last 4 mens champs and 4 of the last 6 women's champs weren't part of the so called power five. This is all about football and I don't think any of the people involved have really stopped to think about how this will effect any other sport.
|
|
|
Post by pogoball on Aug 8, 2014 10:53:12 GMT -5
Honestly, this was coming. The ridiculous profits of football for the power 5 has been the biggest problem in NCAA sports. It'll be interesting to see whether this will effect football programs for the mid-majors which lose money and largely rely on paydays from the power-5 teams.
If the power-5 start to compensate athletes, then I'm not sure the mid-major D1 programs will be able to keep up with that additional expense without cutting scholarships.
|
|
|
Post by bc1900 on Aug 8, 2014 11:13:37 GMT -5
It's not interesting at all, while Hawaii is a great volleyball school, with a rich tradition, their current conference, and former, don't even come close to touching the revenue and success, across all sports as the other conferences. These new rules, IMO, won't really change the status quo for the teams you mentioned. Hawaii is rarely in the running for the best recruits anyway, and the volleyball program is self sufficient, and teams generally line up at the door to play in Hawaii (who wouldn't wanna go on an island vacation?) not sure how the new rules will change any of that. BYU has the whole mormon thing going on, the new rules won't change that indoctrination. And even though volleyball talent is as widespread as ever, San Diego still finds itself within a 3 hour drive of the highest concentration of top volleyball clubs in the country. If USC or UCLA is recruiting the same kid as San Diego or Pepperdine and they throw in the cost of attendance factor or guaranteed 4 year schollie, the kid if on the fence will lean toward SC or UCLA and don't tell me they don't recruit the same players USC and UCLA are also well ahead of Pepperdine and SDSU academically and in terms of post-graduation networking, that has to matter to some recruits.
|
|
|
Post by oshkoshdadmjs on Aug 8, 2014 11:14:11 GMT -5
We'll just make our own league with more blackjack and hookers... This is all driven by football, but it would be interesting to me to see if athletic departments use this to try and move their football programs away from the rest of their programs though this. Making rules for only football athletes. The precedent is set for having schools have certain programs at different division levels (e.g. Hopkins for lacrosse, UM-Duluth for hockey). Those schools are under grandfather clauses. You can't just decide to have this program be D-I, that program be D-III, and whatnot. I'm pretty sure schools are allowed to designate one sport that can play in a different division up from the rest of the school.
|
|
|
Post by dorothymantooth on Aug 8, 2014 12:55:25 GMT -5
Not true, will create an even way bigger divide between bigs and mid majors because in volleyball there isn't one already? ![;-|](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/squint.png) Thus the "even way bigger" divide.
|
|
|
Post by dorothymantooth on Aug 8, 2014 12:55:57 GMT -5
A lot of people are talking about basketball here, but the fact is that 3 of the last 4 mens champs and 4 of the last 6 women's champs weren't part of the so called power five. This is all about football and I don't think any of the people involved have really stopped to think about how this will effect any other sport. because they don't care how it does.
|
|
|
Post by dorothymantooth on Aug 8, 2014 13:06:53 GMT -5
Interesting that hawaii is not perceived to be in a power conference. San Diego, BYU, Hawaii are just a few that are not considered mid majors but will not benefit from the rule changes that will affect the "power 5." It's not interesting at all, while Hawaii is a great volleyball school, with a rich tradition, their current conference, and former, don't even come close to touching the revenue and success, across all sports as the other conferences. These new rules, IMO, won't really change the status quo for the teams you mentioned. Hawaii is rarely in the running for the best recruits anyway, and the volleyball program is self sufficient, and teams generally line up at the door to play in Hawaii (who wouldn't wanna go on an island vacation?) not sure how the new rules will change any of that. BYU has the whole mormon thing going on, the new rules won't change that indoctrination. And even though volleyball talent is as widespread as ever, San Diego still finds itself within a 3 hour drive of the highest concentration of top volleyball clubs in the country. It changes things because if a kid gets an offer from Hawaii and Kentucky, Kentucky will be able to add a stipend to their scholarships, have recruiting rules, get to add more staff, be in the gym more hours etc........ We will have to see what all gets agreed upon but this may totally change the status quo. Now Hawaii or BYU will be able to do that, but they don't have the resources the big 5 have.
|
|
|
Post by silversurfer on Aug 8, 2014 13:07:46 GMT -5
It's going to be interesting, because obviously schools will want to spend more money on football and basketball, which could take money away from the other sports. But there may also be new revenue streams through the top sports that open up to schools as well.
|
|
|
Post by dorothymantooth on Aug 8, 2014 13:15:50 GMT -5
It's going to be interesting, because obviously schools will want to spend more money on football and basketball, which could take money away from the other sports. But there may also be new revenue streams through the top sports that open up to schools as well. what about small athletic departments at schools with billion dollar endowments?
|
|
|
Post by silversurfer on Aug 8, 2014 13:20:26 GMT -5
It's going to be interesting, because obviously schools will want to spend more money on football and basketball, which could take money away from the other sports. But there may also be new revenue streams through the top sports that open up to schools as well. what about small athletic departments at schools with billion dollar endowments? Yeah those athletic departments don't see much of those billion dollar endowments. The endowments they get are from their department's alumni, which don't add up to nearly as much.
|
|
|
Post by bc1900 on Aug 8, 2014 13:40:45 GMT -5
It's going to be interesting, because obviously schools will want to spend more money on football and basketball, which could take money away from the other sports. But there may also be new revenue streams through the top sports that open up to schools as well. what about small athletic departments at schools with billion dollar endowments? They will stay small.
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Aug 8, 2014 15:50:07 GMT -5
It's going to be interesting, because obviously schools will want to spend more money on football and basketball, which could take money away from the other sports. But there may also be new revenue streams through the top sports that open up to schools as well. what about small athletic departments at schools with billion dollar endowments? hopefully they aren't stupid enough to waste their endowment and something as inconsequential as sports.
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Aug 8, 2014 16:01:26 GMT -5
the only comment I have on this legislation is that all you Penn State, Florida, Ohio State, Nebraska, Texas, UCLA, USC, Washington, Wisconsin, ......etc. fans & alumni can go royally screw yourselves because this is directly related to the greed of your institutions - enjoy your new super league you hypocrits - unless you fans of the BCS are out there advocating pay for performance (i.e. Destinee Hooker gets a $50,000 stipend and the back-up libero gets $1,000) or unless you are out there advocating to detach football from academia altogether then whatever you have to say is just so much BS. ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png)
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Aug 8, 2014 16:05:19 GMT -5
Those schools are under grandfather clauses. You can't just decide to have this program be D-I, that program be D-III, and whatnot. I'm pretty sure schools are allowed to designate one sport that can play in a different division up from the rest of the school. One sport male and one sport female, I think.
|
|