|
|
Post by warriorfan808 on Aug 10, 2024 19:37:59 GMT -5
decouple the scholarship limit with the roster limit and it will make more sense. They are trying to solve a puzzle that has to do with laws the recent lawsuits have identified preventing the NCAA from making a ton of money and not paying the revenue generating athletes. Removing scholarship limits somehow fixes something and has nothing to do with any of the non revenue generating athletes and sports, besides how it affects them. The settlement agreement added roster limits to somehow throttle the super schools' football teams as a sort of compromise to uncorking scholie limits. I think a lot of ADs will love this because the roster limits will be a nice ceiling on expenses for all the sports that were costing them $ and not paying anything back. I personally think this is a fragile position for the NCAA and an effort to retain/regulate football and men's basketball. in the not so long term, it is a bad deal for every other sport and will not be good for 95% of all other NCAA teams in all other sports. There will probably be a few women's teams that make out well due to PC appearances to balance $ (like how women's VB and BB coaches get paid better that the market might warrant because of optics with football and men's BB coach salaries) but I foresee a lot of budget cuts to men's volleyball and possibly some women's programs as well. I am worried about scholarships but I don't think it would be the end of NCAA MVB, I am most worried about the funding of programs. I think only a few men's volleyball players would quit if they didn't get scholarships and the junior's level will not be impacted that much (women's is a different story) as long as the MVB programs are intact and there are some benefits (preferred admissions/access to 'alternate' scholarships, funds for; travel, coaches, equipment, etc., tutoring, priority class registration, etc.) I don't see how this ends up a step forward for MVB and other Olympic sports, it seems to be an inevitable step back because the market is speaking and society isn't putting the value there. So many of the athletes playing men's volleyball in the NCAA are paying most of their college expenses now, I would guess 20% at the most is the discount men's volleyball athletes are getting of the gross cost for the entire group of DI/II compared to what the entire group would pay if they attended university as a non athlete. My sky is falling take is that the overall NCAA model seems to be unraveling and I am not sure how they maintain regulations that keep a competitive field beyond more than a few universities. Maybe a lot of schools go DIII or the equivalent? As far as AD loving it due to roster limits for non revenue sports….I don’t think they will like that they have to give 18 scholarships now instead of 4.5. With a roster of 24 they only had to give 4.5 if they were fully funded. The big question is will they have to give 18 or can they roster 18 and give 7? The other big issue is I disagree that guys will just keep playing even if the money is gone. Maybe the guys who are in upper HS or college already…but guys who are younger may choose another sport that can offer them money. This could cripple our Olympic teams in about 10 years. Hoping for the best but definitely concerned. I know kids who are definitely getting more than 20% but I am sure there are plenty of walk ons too that may balance out your 20% number. Yes. Per Hawaii AD, while vb roster limits will be 18. Not all 18 need to be on scholarship. You can have all on scholarship, none on scholarship or anywhere in between. |
|
|
|
Post by volleycoach2310 on Aug 10, 2024 21:06:56 GMT -5
As far as AD loving it due to roster limits for non revenue sports….I don’t think they will like that they have to give 18 scholarships now instead of 4.5. With a roster of 24 they only had to give 4.5 if they were fully funded. The big question is will they have to give 18 or can they roster 18 and give 7? The other big issue is I disagree that guys will just keep playing even if the money is gone. Maybe the guys who are in upper HS or college already…but guys who are younger may choose another sport that can offer them money. This could cripple our Olympic teams in about 10 years. Hoping for the best but definitely concerned. I know kids who are definitely getting more than 20% but I am sure there are plenty of walk ons too that may balance out your 20% number. Yes. Per Hawaii AD, while vb roster limits will be 18. Not all 18 need to be on scholarship. You can have all on scholarship, none on scholarship or anywhere in between. Do you know if they can split them though? Now they take that 4.5 and partially scholarships lots of kids…if they have to give fulls it will be interesting how that goes. If they have say money to scholarship 6 kids but can’t split them it could be interesting for sure! |
|
|
|
Post by jmpy5 on Aug 10, 2024 23:01:18 GMT -5
They are all equivalency scholarships, so they can be allocated the same way the 4.5 currently are. If you have the bucks, and TIV compliance you could do 18 full.
|
|
|
|
Post by wilbur on Aug 11, 2024 16:47:28 GMT -5
Yes. Per Hawaii AD, while vb roster limits will be 18. Not all 18 need to be on scholarship. You can have all on scholarship, none on scholarship or anywhere in between. Do you know if they can split them though? Now they take that 4.5 and partially scholarships lots of kids…if they have to give fulls it will be interesting how that goes. If they have say money to scholarship 6 kids but can’t split them it could be interesting for sure! The way I read it they have adjusted limits and added in revenue sharing, so the roster is limited to X players but funding much less limited than before. They could pay X athletes the equivalent of more than X scholarships if the revenue sharing portion is structured right. This is my interpretation and maybe wrong. This will come into play for football and basketball but I doubt any mens volleyball team is going to go at it like this... but if they did there will be some real bargins out there for European players compared to basketball and football. For 100k a year you could get the best player in the NCAA. Maybe Simone will stick around if the LB gala fundraisers are generous enough. |
|
|
|
Post by ManapuaSurprise on Aug 13, 2024 4:48:16 GMT -5
then will the Big West Conference develop a schollie limit for their schools? also have to wonder if BYU, UCLA, USC, Ohio State, Penn State, Stanford try to unify in presumably a Big 10 sponsored sport with affiliate members I would speculate they might also invite Harvard and Princeton if they did so no way they would do that conference due to travel. it will be an exciting conference with a whopping average attendance of 1,300 per game lol |
|
|
|
Post by MonroeClark90 on Aug 13, 2024 9:54:39 GMT -5
Wouldn't Hawaii and even Ball State for that matter be thrown into that mix as they are schools with D1 Football? Granted their programs are nowhere near the USCs, OSUs, etc, but all that $$ isn't coming from gate sales, much of it comes from lucrative TV deals. Hawaii is always the late game on Saturdays for the gamblers who are chasing and ESPN has Tuesday night "MACtion" every week. I'd even wonder if they could thrive as they'll have more ability to spend $$ with no expectations to pay $10M for a 5-star QB.
|
|
|
|
Post by vbnerd on Aug 13, 2024 11:02:30 GMT -5
If the settlement goes through as planned...
The schools who opt into this model...
-The vb rosters are limited to 18 players.
-there is NO scholarship cap or floor, and all scholarships are equivalency (can be cut and stacked).
-And schools can spend up to about $22 million on revenue sharing, but that is not likely to impact men's volleyball.
For schools to pay the football team and the title IX pool of women their relative shares of $22 million, some cuts may need to be made and that may impact men's non-revenue sports.
|
|
|
|
Post by volleycoach2310 on Aug 13, 2024 15:19:12 GMT -5
If the settlement goes through as planned... The schools who opt into this model... -The vb rosters are limited to 18 players. -there is NO scholarship cap or floor, and all scholarships are equivalency (can be cut and stacked). -And schools can spend up to about $22 million on revenue sharing, but that is not likely to impact men's volleyball. For schools to pay the football team and the title IX pool of women their relative shares of $22 million, some cuts may need to be made and that may impact men's non-revenue sports. So if they had 22 million say to use…does 11 of that have to go to female sports due to Title IX? I could see some men’s vball programs possibly getting cut with this due to them wanting that money to only go to Football on the men’s side, and boy would that suck! |
|
|
|
Post by vbnerd on Aug 14, 2024 10:46:47 GMT -5
If the settlement goes through as planned... The schools who opt into this model... -The vb rosters are limited to 18 players. -there is NO scholarship cap or floor, and all scholarships are equivalency (can be cut and stacked). -And schools can spend up to about $22 million on revenue sharing, but that is not likely to impact men's volleyball. For schools to pay the football team and the title IX pool of women their relative shares of $22 million, some cuts may need to be made and that may impact men's non-revenue sports. So if they had 22 million say to use…does 11 of that have to go to female sports due to Title IX? I could see some men’s vball programs possibly getting cut with this due to them wanting that money to only go to Football on the men’s side, and boy would that suck! If they don't split it fairly among the genders, that would be a violation of title IX and they can be taken to court. If they do split it fairly among the genders, and the football and men's basketball players who generate the revenue are not receiving enough of it, the school can be taken to court. "Some schools have already said they're going to assume the Title IX mandates they give are 50 (percent) to female, 50 (percent) to male based on their student body makeup," said Mit Winter, an NIL expert and sports lawyer at Kennyhertz Perry. "Other schools are not going to make that assumption and will probably decide football is generating most of this broadcast revenue, and they have a higher NIL value based on that, so we are going to give more to football players and basketball players and some other amount to men's sports and women's sports. It's really going to be up to each school based on legal advice from their general counsel and outside counsel on how they are going to approach Title IX." www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/ncaa-president-seeks-federal-help-for-national-standard-on-title-ix-as-questions-mount-with-house-settlement/Then the next question is it the value, or the number of players in the sharing arangment. If Livvy Dunn or Madi Skinner makes $10 million, is that it for the women or if you are sharing with 120 football and basketball players, do you need to share with 120 female athletes? And is that number more important than the amount of money - so $10k per female and $50k (average) per male athlete? They are still trying to figure all of this out. That said, the NCAA has rules on sports sponsorship. I think D1 is 6 men's sports. So even if they just pay basketball or basketball and football, they still need to have a handful of other sports and certain number of those need to be team sports so while you could see a non-football school scholarship 18 men and pay the starting 7, you also might see a football school go non-scholarship, no revenue sharing and try to get by on academic scholarships and what it means to have a degree from a UCLA or Ohio State. |
|
|
|
Post by OuchMyBack on Sept 5, 2024 5:41:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by OuchMyBack on Oct 21, 2024 6:21:00 GMT -5
(Taken from what I’d consider a reliable FB post)
NCAA vs House Settlement UPDATE
I spoke with Garrett Broshuis, an attorney in St. Louis for Korein Tillery LLC, which represents athlete plaintiffs from Colorado opposing the settlement. I was put into contact with him from another parent on this page. He was interested in hearing how student athletes would be affected by the proposed new lower roster limits in the NCAA settlement. He feels that the negative impact of lower roster limits on student athletes is not being considered in this settlement. One thing he did clarify is that the new lower roster limits will be implemented across ALL D1 schools. It is not dependent on whether they are P4 or opt in to revenue sharing.
—————
This is bad for opportunities for men’s volleyball athletes in the upcoming years.
|
|
|
|
Post by digbigvolley22 on Oct 21, 2024 7:12:53 GMT -5
(Taken from what I’d consider a reliable FB post) NCAA vs House Settlement UPDATE I spoke with Garrett Broshuis, an attorney in St. Louis for Korein Tillery LLC, which represents athlete plaintiffs from Colorado opposing the settlement. I was put into contact with him from another parent on this page. He was interested in hearing how student athletes would be affected by the proposed new lower roster limits in the NCAA settlement. He feels that the negative impact of lower roster limits on student athletes is not being considered in this settlement. One thing he did clarify is that the new lower roster limits will be implemented across ALL D1 schools. It is not dependent on whether they are P4 or opt in to revenue sharing.————— This is bad for opportunities for men’s volleyball athletes in the upcoming years. Eh maybe but I think this may encourage more schools to add men’s volleyball. I know in the east coast more teams have been added but we need more west coast teams specifically Cali to start adding programs whether they be D1 or D2. |
|
|
|
Post by Not Me on Oct 21, 2024 7:52:12 GMT -5
(Taken from what I’d consider a reliable FB post) NCAA vs House Settlement UPDATE I spoke with Garrett Broshuis, an attorney in St. Louis for Korein Tillery LLC, which represents athlete plaintiffs from Colorado opposing the settlement. I was put into contact with him from another parent on this page. He was interested in hearing how student athletes would be affected by the proposed new lower roster limits in the NCAA settlement. He feels that the negative impact of lower roster limits on student athletes is not being considered in this settlement. One thing he did clarify is that the new lower roster limits will be implemented across ALL D1 schools. It is not dependent on whether they are P4 or opt in to revenue sharing.————— This is bad for opportunities for men’s volleyball athletes in the upcoming years. It will be. But very good for the attorneys. The attorneys for the original House case have a clause in the settlement, where they get a percentage of the money paid to student athletes for the next 20 years. It will make them about $500 mil over the course of the deal. |
|
|
|
Post by GrowingTheGame14 on Oct 21, 2024 8:13:23 GMT -5
(Taken from what I’d consider a reliable FB post) NCAA vs House Settlement UPDATE I spoke with Garrett Broshuis, an attorney in St. Louis for Korein Tillery LLC, which represents athlete plaintiffs from Colorado opposing the settlement. I was put into contact with him from another parent on this page. He was interested in hearing how student athletes would be affected by the proposed new lower roster limits in the NCAA settlement. He feels that the negative impact of lower roster limits on student athletes is not being considered in this settlement. One thing he did clarify is that the new lower roster limits will be implemented across ALL D1 schools. It is not dependent on whether they are P4 or opt in to revenue sharing.————— This is bad for opportunities for men’s volleyball athletes in the upcoming years. Eh maybe but I think this may encourage more schools to add men’s volleyball. I know in the east coast more teams have been added but we need more west coast teams specifically Cali to start adding programs whether they be D1 or D2. All about money.. A lot of programs are going to have to evaluate what programs they can financially keep afloat at that level. Schools do not think about the greater good or creating opportunity.. They think about the financial aspect of it and Men's Volleyball is no where near a for profit opportunity or even break even for that matter. Even though there is a huge push at the youth level the college level is definitely well behind and will remain behind now. |
|
|
|
Post by wilbur on Oct 21, 2024 19:17:03 GMT -5
(Taken from what I’d consider a reliable FB post) NCAA vs House Settlement UPDATE I spoke with Garrett Broshuis, an attorney in St. Louis for Korein Tillery LLC, which represents athlete plaintiffs from Colorado opposing the settlement. I was put into contact with him from another parent on this page. He was interested in hearing how student athletes would be affected by the proposed new lower roster limits in the NCAA settlement. He feels that the negative impact of lower roster limits on student athletes is not being considered in this settlement. One thing he did clarify is that the new lower roster limits will be implemented across ALL D1 schools. It is not dependent on whether they are P4 or opt in to revenue sharing.————— This is bad for opportunities for men’s volleyball athletes in the upcoming years. that is definitely bad for all sports other than the sports with athletes that will get more benefit than the roster limits will hurt. Football and basketball. This seems like a bone thrown to the the universities and NCAA to help them manage costs. The should revisit the 18 # for men's volleyball to make it 20 and redshirts don't count. |
|
