|
Post by gofaster88 on Jul 25, 2024 17:06:06 GMT -5
There is no way this is going to happen unilaterally for a D1 programs. I can't imagine the Ivy's even with their endowments are all of a sudden start offering 105 scholarships for their football team. When in the past they offered zero athletic scholarships. I went to Harvard, and I can say with certainty that the alumni and administration don't really care about football. They do care about crew and ice hockey, and maybe field hockey as well. Technically, Harvard doesn't offer athletic scholarships, but I always found it interesting how they managed to get some of the best rowers on their crew teams every year. I would bet that a lot of those crew athletes somehow manage to obtain "need" based scholarships or something like it. So, am I wrong in thinking there is no way those schools will all of a sudden offer 105 scholarships to football? Will they just let the sport die if they were forced to do so? Might fall the same way for Men's Volleyball at schools like Harvard and Princeton if they are to give scholarships.
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Jul 25, 2024 17:19:55 GMT -5
I went to Harvard, and I can say with certainty that the alumni and administration don't really care about football. They do care about crew and ice hockey, and maybe field hockey as well. Technically, Harvard doesn't offer athletic scholarships, but I always found it interesting how they managed to get some of the best rowers on their crew teams every year. I would bet that a lot of those crew athletes somehow manage to obtain "need" based scholarships or something like it. So, am I wrong in thinking there is no way those schools will all of a sudden offer 105 scholarships to football? Will they just let the sport die if they were forced to do so? Might fall the same way for Men's Volleyball at schools like Harvard and Princeton if they are to give scholarships. There's nothing in the settlement that requires schools to offer scholarships.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jul 25, 2024 17:21:26 GMT -5
Do you have factual numbers to support your thoughts? I do not. I provided one factual example which is one more than you have provided. Since you replied to me that "You are underestimating the number of walk-ons" I just figured you had some numbers or examples to back it up. That was in response to you saying most probably have zero. Any basis for that? Additionally, there is factual support that most rosters don’t even have 15 players, regardless of scholarship, so I’m not sure how this is even probative of your underlying point with the roster max.
|
|
|
Post by dodger on Jul 25, 2024 17:45:31 GMT -5
I went to Harvard, and I can say with certainty that the alumni and administration don't really care about football. They do care about crew and ice hockey, and maybe field hockey as well. Technically, Harvard doesn't offer athletic scholarships, but I always found it interesting how they managed to get some of the best rowers on their crew teams every year. I would bet that a lot of those crew athletes somehow manage to obtain "need" based scholarships or something like it. So, am I wrong in thinking there is no way those schools will all of a sudden offer 105 scholarships to football? Will they just let the sport die if they were forced to do so? Might fall the same way for Men's Volleyball at schools like Harvard and Princeton if they are to give scholarships. Roster limits do not require the awarding of scholarships: they may grant aid to all 18 : secondly i would guess Harvard has more than 108 players on their football team: and their crew is probably bigger than what that roater limit would be! Here is a curious question: is the Ivy League part of the settlement amount? Will they be receiving their 22 million? Yes they will: the power 5 negotiated this deal and the FCS has been lumped in for a percentage of liability: but Harvard Law and ivy league power brokers will be ready for counter suits and appeals to circuit courts and eventually supreme court: and hopefully (NCAA hopefully) the legislature steps in and protects college sports so this wonderfully unique program may continue in some form with a better situation for the athletes; all the athletes
|
|
|
Post by wahinefan on Jul 25, 2024 19:33:05 GMT -5
How will this new rule effect the Transfer Portal? Will the Transfer Portal get a lot more crazier?
|
|
|
Post by vbnerd on Jul 25, 2024 21:20:02 GMT -5
I went to Harvard, and I can say with certainty that the alumni and administration don't really care about football. They do care about crew and ice hockey, and maybe field hockey as well. Technically, Harvard doesn't offer athletic scholarships, but I always found it interesting how they managed to get some of the best rowers on their crew teams every year. I would bet that a lot of those crew athletes somehow manage to obtain "need" based scholarships or something like it. So, am I wrong in thinking there is no way those schools will all of a sudden offer 105 scholarships to football? Will they just let the sport die if they were forced to do so? Might fall the same way for Men's Volleyball at schools like Harvard and Princeton if they are to give scholarships. Well, first, it's not just the scholarships. Then they can opt in to paying $22 million in revenue sharing, which for some schools is $30 million in additional expenses next year, and it sounds like most if not all of the P4 and at least a few other schools are planning on fully participating in revenue sharing, so it doesn't seem like 105 is a problem at most schools. Also, if I understand this correctly, a portion of the additional scholarships will count against the revenue sharing number, as an incentive to start there with the additional funds, so yeah, I think you will see full funding of high revenue teams where possible. I say teams not sports because at some schools Hockey or baseball or even Nebraska Volleyball are profitable, while the sport nationally really isn't. Every school is going to set their own priorities and we'll see how it all works out by next fall I would imagine.
|
|
|
Post by mplsgopher on Jul 25, 2024 21:39:05 GMT -5
Why does it have to be a finite either/or? Every roster gets a full scholarship, to pay for school. You know, student-athlete. And then, NIL is a separate bucket (of donations) to fund high performance. That's how I think about it.
Because budgets ARE finite. But donations aren't. You just ask the donor for more, to fund not just scholarships but also NIL.
|
|
|
Post by mplsgopher on Jul 25, 2024 21:45:33 GMT -5
Well, first, it's not just the scholarships. Then they can opt in to paying $22 million in revenue sharing This only even makes sense if, you know, there's actually revenue to share in the first place. Outside the Big Ten, SEC, ACC, and Big 12, I don't think any other DI conference has a revenue source -- that means a TV deal -- that will result in a significant payment to players. Depends who gets what, of course. Are Big East teams just going to pay men's basketball players?
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Jul 25, 2024 21:49:51 GMT -5
Well, first, it's not just the scholarships. Then they can opt in to paying $22 million in revenue sharing This only even makes sense if, you know, there's actually revenue to share in the first place. Outside the Big Ten, SEC, ACC, and Big 12, I don't think any other DI conference has a revenue source -- that means a TV deal -- that will result in a significant payment to players. Depends who gets what, of course. Are Big East teams just going to pay men's basketball players? If Title IX doesn’t apply to revenue sharing, I think all of the money will go to football and men’s basketball. The bottom line of the athletic department generally isn’t affected by the volleyball team winning. And even at Nebraska, are football boosters really going to accept football paying their $1M less than other Big Ten football programs because the volleyball players “deserve” it? The exception could be if conferences mandate that ALL of the teams distribute the money in a specific way.
|
|
|
Post by veritas on Jul 25, 2024 21:51:30 GMT -5
Raising the team roster limit and ultimately scholarship limit may have the side affect of allowing the richer schools to stash talent away that might actually play at other schools. It isnt as simple as that, but could be.
|
|
|
Post by mplsgopher on Jul 25, 2024 22:47:30 GMT -5
This only even makes sense if, you know, there's actually revenue to share in the first place. Outside the Big Ten, SEC, ACC, and Big 12, I don't think any other DI conference has a revenue source -- that means a TV deal -- that will result in a significant payment to players. Depends who gets what, of course. Are Big East teams just going to pay men's basketball players? If Title IX doesn’t apply to revenue sharing, I think all of the money will go to football and men’s basketball. The bottom line of the athletic department generally isn’t affected by the volleyball team winning. And even at Nebraska, are football boosters really going to accept football paying their $1M less than other Big Ten football programs because the volleyball players “deserve” it? The exception could be if conferences mandate that ALL of the teams distribute the money in a specific way. I guess where I was going with it was: I don't want it to be that schools can just jack up student fees that much higher to be able to spend another $22M of student fees on athletics, just so they can pretend that they're a big boy school.
If you're not in a conference that actually has a nine (or ten) figure TV deal, then you're not a big boy school.
If you can pay for the extra $22M with donations or other actual gameday revenues, then by all means. But you shouldn't be allowed to jack students for the money or go into debt for it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2024 22:59:41 GMT -5
This only even makes sense if, you know, there's actually revenue to share in the first place. Outside the Big Ten, SEC, ACC, and Big 12, I don't think any other DI conference has a revenue source -- that means a TV deal -- that will result in a significant payment to players. Depends who gets what, of course. Are Big East teams just going to pay men's basketball players? If Title IX doesn’t apply to revenue sharing, I think all of the money will go to football and men’s basketball. The bottom line of the athletic department generally isn’t affected by the volleyball team winning. And even at Nebraska, are football boosters really going to accept football paying their $1M less than other Big Ten football programs because the volleyball players “deserve” it? The exception could be if conferences mandate that ALL of the teams distribute the money in a specific way. Title 9 will apply
|
|
|
Post by babybacksets on Jul 26, 2024 4:58:01 GMT -5
Oh my softball school is f*cked lmao Speaking of softball, Canady to Texas Tech is a damn shame.
|
|
|
Post by vbnerd on Jul 26, 2024 7:07:32 GMT -5
Well, first, it's not just the scholarships. Then they can opt in to paying $22 million in revenue sharing This only even makes sense if, you know, there's actually revenue to share in the first place. Outside the Big Ten, SEC, ACC, and Big 12, I don't think any other DI conference has a revenue source -- that means a TV deal -- that will result in a significant payment to players. Depends who gets what, of course. Are Big East teams just going to pay men's basketball players? Revenue included in the formula includes media rights, as well as ticket sales and sponsorships but not donations...and I'm not sure about logo licensing or book store jersey sales. Donations are not included, and private capital deals, and between those two, that's where most of money that goes to athletes is actually coming from. But if you look at Siena College in the MAAC with 15,000 seats and Louisiana Lafayette in the Sun Belt with 13,500 seats, there is incentive to find money for basketball to maximize ticket and sponsor revenue. And not that that wasn't true before but the field may be a little more slanted now than it previously was. There's about 25 schools with basketball capacity of under 2000, all in small conferences with small distributions. Other than donors, maybe they go to student fees? IDK how they make it or if they really should be staying in D1.
|
|
|
Post by badgerguru on Jul 26, 2024 7:58:35 GMT -5
When is this set to be apart of the rules? This upcoming season already or 2025+?
|
|