NCAA is close to settlement, possible new model

[volleyballer8992]

May 24, 2024 15:30:54 GMT -5 vbnerd said:

May 24, 2024 15:29:48 GMT -5 psuvbfan10 said:

Apologies if already asked - what does this do for non power 5 conferences? Seems like it just widens the gap

We can only guess at this point.

You’d have to assume universities that can put up and pay will be a league of their own? And the rest business as usual ?

[money]

If scholarships are added - the transfer portal will be even worse. There will be no more playing time, just more unhappy kids at the end of the bench collecting a paycheck.

[mplsgopher]

NCAA prez claims 10 year injunction included with settlement:

[vbnerd]

May 24, 2024 17:14:57 GMT -5 volleyballer8992 said:

May 24, 2024 15:30:54 GMT -5 vbnerd said:

We can only guess at this point.

You’d have to assume universities that can put up and pay will be a league of their own? And the rest business as usual ?

Yes, that's probably the safe bet, but if that were to be true and they can no longer even hope to pull and App State over Michigan or St. Peters over Kentucky, might that free up some schools to go all-in on a non-revenue sport. Coastal Carolina won a CWS a few years ago - make baseball your #1 thing while the SEC/ACC make it there 5th thing. Sell tickets, sell cool hats, make it an event. Could UAB or Samford hijack Alabama's softball program? Could Texas Southern get noted Alumni Megan Thee Stallion and some of her friends to do halftime and post-game shows for a few women's soccer games to juice attendance/revenue/interest? No idea, but at some point I would hope they don't all just go toe to toe with much bigger budget programs.

Also, there are two theories on how to allocate the money.
- Title IX is the law and if we don't honor it, we'll be back in court.
- This all started because we didn't give money to the players who earned it (FB/MBB) and we aren't making that mistake again.

If the second option becomes the dominant path here, favoring revenue sports, maybe volleyball and other sports don't change much?

Despite the settlement expenses there is the potential for new money - apparently several schools are talking to private capital to bring in the money they need to step up. There is now a distribution for women's basketball tournament (so will guarantees go up?). What are the new roster caps for each sport going to be? So how do those changes play out? And how does that affect who cuts what, and who spends what?

Do they expand the men's basketball tournament to get more cash from CBS? How and how much? And do bigger Power 4 (3 if the ACC goes down) conferences really get the bulk of the additional teams? They still need to go .500 to get in right? And if the 22 smaller leagues are ticked about having to pay more for the settlement, do they find a way to skew tournament selections to get a couple more bids to reclaim some of that distributed money going forward. Probably not but I hope they would.

Oh, and the North Carolina Legislature is trying to require UNC and NC state to play each of Charlotte, App Stat and ECU home and away in football and basketball over each 6 year cycle. Now that we've gotten politicians get into in college sports, can you get them out? And how does their nonsense impact things?


You are probably right, but there is a lot that we don't know the answer to for a while yet.

[bluepenquin]

May 24, 2024 19:43:02 GMT -5 money said:

If scholarships are added - the transfer portal will be even worse. There will be no more playing time, just more unhappy kids at the end of the bench collecting a paycheck.

Depends on the details - the new pay the athlete proposal is probably going to include scholarship guarantees for the athlete and the University.  There may be buyout options, but these guarantees or contracts may make for less transfers or possibly not more frequent transfers.

But then - unhappy kids that aren't playing will be more likely to be released from their contract then starters, as it should be.  

[mplsgopher]

May 25, 2024 5:55:52 GMT -5 bluepenquin said:

May 24, 2024 19:43:02 GMT -5 money said:

If scholarships are added - the transfer portal will be even worse. There will be no more playing time, just more unhappy kids at the end of the bench collecting a paycheck.

Depends on the details - the new pay the athlete proposal is probably going to include scholarship guarantees for the athlete and the University.  There may be buyout options, but these guarantees or contracts may make for less transfers or possibly not more frequent transfers.

But then - unhappy kids that aren't playing will be more likely to be released from their contract then starters, as it should be.

I'm not sure the bolded will hold (not saying it won't). A good portion of consternation (at least among coaches, but I think fans can recognize it as well) over all the player movement has been loss of depth.

(This applies probably a lot more to basketball and football than volleyball, but I'm sure it's also important to have a really good group of "B" team girls who pus the "A" team girls in the practice gym.)

[savannahbadger]

One question I'm thinking about with this new model, is what happens when season tickets holders stop dropping their renewals en masse? The payments haven't even started yet, and I'm ready to drop football with all the recent increases in "donations" and seat prices, and just dropped one seat for VB a couple weeks ago. I don't follow pro sports, and if college sports becomes too much like a free-for-all pro league, then I'm out. I can't imagine a scenario where season tickets for most revenue sports at big time universities won't double or quadruple in just a few years.

[vbruh]

IMO, women's volleyball will pick up 4-8 additional scholarships when rosters are capped at 16-18. It's going to be tricky for schools to navigate the roster vs scholarship numbers on the men's side, because they already have reduced scholarship allocations in almost every sport other than football. If everyone on a roster gets a ride, I don't see the math working, unless some men's sports are dropped.

Here is the current breakdown by sport and gender:
scholarshipstats.com/ncaalimits

[mikegarrison]

May 25, 2024 10:47:58 GMT -5 savannahbadger said:

One question I'm thinking about with this new model, is what happens when season tickets holders stop dropping their renewals en masse? The payments haven't even started yet, and I'm ready to drop football with all the recent increases in "donations" and seat prices, and just dropped one seat for VB a couple weeks ago. I don't follow pro sports, and if college sports becomes too much like a free-for-all pro league, then I'm out. I can't imagine a scenario where season tickets for most revenue sports at big time universities won't double or quadruple in just a few years.

Well, that's a market economy for you. You are free to decide something is too expensive for you, and they are free to raise prices. Just because you decide something is too expensive doesn't mean everyone else will also.

[mervinswerved]

So many people have predicted fans and donors would walk away from college sports and yet more than two years into kids getting paid they're as popular as ever.

[vbnerd]

Kristi Dosh is an attorney and sports business journalist with a well referenced article on several aspects of this t.co/ch0oXgZ4vq
Highlights include
-flat payments could jeopardize a school’s non-profit status.
-schools are going to have to assess each athletes market value and coaches probably won’t be involved.
-both sides of title IX, and if this might apply to international players.


She also posted a link to an interview with the commissioner of the big sky who says none of his schools are going to pay players, and more.

[dodger]

All very exciting and interedting:
But for Big 5 who signed on to settlement and presuming judge agree’s and they dont lose again (there are at leadt 2 more in litigation) the big 5have ssid:
1) no more scholarships-contracts
2) roster limits no more scholarship limits!

And if they go to employees (seems inevitable) no longer will titleIX be useful for employees!

Title VII does equal pay for equal work: what womens basketball coaches sued for pay leverage in past.

Universities eliminate, shrink, combine departments and get rid of all those employees all the time. Once an sthletic departments athletes are made employees; Title IX will not protect the female university volleyball employee!!!

[n00b]

May 25, 2024 23:05:26 GMT -5 dodger said:

All very exciting and interedting:
But for Big 5 who signed on to settlement and presuming judge agree’s and they dont lose again (there are at leadt 2 more in litigation) the big 5have ssid:
1) no more scholarships-contracts
2) roster limits no more scholarship limits!

And if they go to employees (seems inevitable) no longer will titleIX be useful for employees!

Title VII does equal pay for equal work: what womens basketball coaches sued for pay leverage in past.

Universities eliminate, shrink, combine departments and get rid of all those employees all the time. Once an sthletic departments athletes are made employees; Title IX will not protect the female university volleyball employee!!!

Maybe, but even if they are paying athletes, I don’t see how they won’t also be on scholarship. You think they’ll pay the football players then separately make them pay tuition? While attending class is a requirement for their employment?

[mplsgopher]

May 25, 2024 22:06:26 GMT -5 vbnerd said:

Kristi Dosh is an attorney and sports business journalist with a well referenced article on several aspects of this t.co/ch0oXgZ4vq
Highlights include
-flat payments could jeopardize a school’s non-profit status.
-schools are going to have to assess each athletes market value and coaches probably won’t be involved. 

Specific quotes:

Each school will have to determine how much to offer and how they will determine the amount each athlete receives, presumably based on their individual market value. Paying every athlete the same amount would only open the institution to antitrust violations for allegations like price fixing.

“As tax-exempt entities, universities must be cautious with flat payments to athletes, as this can attract IRS scrutiny,” said Katie Davis, a CPA and partner at James Moore & Co. “Payments should reflect fair market value to avoid issues with private benefit rules and maintain tax-exempt status. Ensuring compliance through individualized valuations and proper documentation is important to meeting IRS requirements and avoiding potential penalties.”

Paying fair market value, however, isn’t as easy as issuing flat payments.

“A key complexity is the fair value measurement of an athlete’s NIL, which must be initially determined and regularly assessed,” said Jim Booz, a former UVA staffer who now now serves as the director of college athletics advisory services at James Moore. “This requires defined process and personnel to manage the ongoing evaluation.”

This may necessitate athletic departments adding new responsibilities for existing staff or hiring new staff members to manage the changes.

“Athletic departments need to plan for identifying staff to manage these changes,” said Jim Booz, a former UVA staffer who now now serves as the director of college athletics advisory services at James Moore & Co. “These staff members will engage with players associations, unions, and agents, and handle payment distribution. Given the complexities, head coaches likely won’t want to be involved in these discussions.”

Mind you, part of this reads as an advertisement for their (and their firms') professional services. "Hire us now, if you want to get ahead of this!" I can only image the legal/tax professionals salivating over the potential new clients.

This just makes me want new legislation to nip this kind of thing in the bud, even more.

Collective bargaining with the athletes, who are on-board and agree to all stipulations, makes this all go away.

[mplsgopher]

May 26, 2024 5:48:19 GMT -5 n00b said:

May 25, 2024 23:05:26 GMT -5 dodger said:

All very exciting and interedting:
But for Big 5 who signed on to settlement and presuming judge agree’s and they dont lose again (there are at leadt 2 more in litigation) the big 5have ssid:
1) no more scholarships-contracts
2) roster limits no more scholarship limits!

And if they go to employees (seems inevitable) no longer will titleIX be useful for employees!

Title VII does equal pay for equal work: what womens basketball coaches sued for pay leverage in past.

Universities eliminate, shrink, combine departments and get rid of all those employees all the time. Once an sthletic departments athletes are made employees; Title IX will not protect the female university volleyball employee!!!

Maybe, but even if they are paying athletes, I don’t see how they won’t also be on scholarship. You think they’ll pay the football players then separately make them pay tuition? While attending class is a requirement for their employment?

Agree .....

.... so long as they still require players to actually be students at the school.

(For example, on-staff electricians who perform electrical maintenance and upgrades on the school buildings likely aren't students and I doubt anyone would expect them to be. Just saying)