NCAA NIL/Subdivision Proposal

[Trotsky]

The 60 universities that already have professional athletes instead of students in football and basketball go fully transparent in those sports.  Maybe they won't even fake matriculation anymore.  The rest of college sports will totter along, somewhat corrupt, but for embarrassingly low stakes.

[BearLover]

The settlement is happening: https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/40206364/ncaa-power-conferences-agree-allow-schools-pay-

How will it affect the sports like hockey and lacrosse where Cornell can actually compete with the Michigans and Notre Dames of the world? This settlement obviously does not benefit Cornell (or any school not in a Power 4 football conference).  

The question is whether the $20m per school that can now be paid directly to athletes goes almost entirely to football and basketball or is instead spread more evenly among other sports. Minnesota hockey, or Michigan lacrosse, now could, if it wanted, pay a salary to its players.

In college hockey, only nine teams are in Power 4 conferences: the seven members of the Big 10, BC, and ASU. Which is to say, the other 55 D-1 hockey teams are part of athletics departments which operate at break-even or a deficit, i.e. they don't have money for to pay player salaries. Denver, NoDak, Duluth, Quinnipiac—it's hard to see these perennial powers competing with the football schools who can afford to pay players a salary. Or Cornell, for that matter—but this is all contingent on the football schools actually allocating this money towards hockey/lacrosse.

Another wrinkle is that Canadian players, at least under current law, cannot earn NIL money.

In the end, I don't know what will happen to Cornell's chances of finally winning a championship in hockey or lacrosse. They aren't improving as a result of this settlement. But they probably aren't going down a ton either, given that it's unclear how much of the $20m at these football schools will go towards hockey/lacrosse, or whether the collateral damage to other national hopefuls like Quinnipiac is greater. And, at least in the near term, schools will have to pay off the settlement and won't have quite as much money to throw around.

[ugarte]

The settlement is happening: https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/40206364/ncaa-power-conferences-agree-allow-schools-pay-

How will it affect the sports like hockey and lacrosse where Cornell can actually compete with the Michigans and Notre Dames of the world? This settlement obviously does not benefit Cornell (or any school not in a Power 4 football conference).  

The question is whether the $20m per school that can now be paid directly to athletes goes almost entirely to football and basketball or is instead spread more evenly among other sports. Minnesota hockey, or Michigan lacrosse, now could, if it wanted, pay a salary to its players.

In college hockey, only nine teams are in Power 4 conferences: the seven members of the Big 10, BC, and ASU. Which is to say, the other 55 D-1 hockey teams are part of athletics departments which operate at break-even or a deficit, i.e. they don't have money for to pay player salaries. Denver, NoDak, Duluth, Quinnipiac—it's hard to see these perennial powers competing with the football schools who can afford to pay players a salary. Or Cornell, for that matter—but this is all contingent on the football schools actually allocating this money towards hockey/lacrosse.

Another wrinkle is that Canadian players, at least under current law, cannot earn NIL money.

In the end, I don't know what will happen to Cornell's chances of finally winning a championship in hockey or lacrosse. They aren't improving as a result of this settlement. But they probably aren't going down a ton either, given that it's unclear how much of the $20m at these football schools will go towards hockey/lacrosse, or whether the collateral damage to other national hopefuls like Quinnipiac is greater. And, at least in the near term, schools will have to pay off the settlement and won't have quite as much money to throw around.

i do not see a lot of money going to hockey and none going to lacrosse. those games may sell tickets but they do not get tv money and that's all that matters. B1G hockey and lacrosse are already mostly being shown on the in-house network. I don't even think ASU is going to put money towards hockey. BC might? But only because their basketball and football kind of stink now.

[BearLover]

The settlement is happening: https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/40206364/ncaa-power-conferences-agree-allow-schools-pay-

How will it affect the sports like hockey and lacrosse where Cornell can actually compete with the Michigans and Notre Dames of the world? This settlement obviously does not benefit Cornell (or any school not in a Power 4 football conference).  

The question is whether the $20m per school that can now be paid directly to athletes goes almost entirely to football and basketball or is instead spread more evenly among other sports. Minnesota hockey, or Michigan lacrosse, now could, if it wanted, pay a salary to its players.

In college hockey, only nine teams are in Power 4 conferences: the seven members of the Big 10, BC, and ASU. Which is to say, the other 55 D-1 hockey teams are part of athletics departments which operate at break-even or a deficit, i.e. they don't have money for to pay player salaries. Denver, NoDak, Duluth, Quinnipiac—it's hard to see these perennial powers competing with the football schools who can afford to pay players a salary. Or Cornell, for that matter—but this is all contingent on the football schools actually allocating this money towards hockey/lacrosse.

Another wrinkle is that Canadian players, at least under current law, cannot earn NIL money.

In the end, I don't know what will happen to Cornell's chances of finally winning a championship in hockey or lacrosse. They aren't improving as a result of this settlement. But they probably aren't going down a ton either, given that it's unclear how much of the $20m at these football schools will go towards hockey/lacrosse, or whether the collateral damage to other national hopefuls like Quinnipiac is greater. And, at least in the near term, schools will have to pay off the settlement and won't have quite as much money to throw around.

i do not see a lot of money going to hockey and none going to lacrosse. those games may sell tickets but they do not get tv money and that's all that matters. B1G hockey and lacrosse are already mostly being shown on the in-house network. I don't even think ASU is going to put money towards hockey. BC might? But only because their basketball and football kind of stink now.

You'd think it would be reciprocal in the sense of "program A brings in X% of athletics profits, so therefore X% of the 20m goes to program A." In that case, almost nothing will go to hockey, since pretty much every hockey program in the country operates at a loss. (The exceptions being maybe Minnesota and NoDak?) But then again, on the other hand, are schools really going to spend almost the entire 20m on football and basketball? I honestly don't know. It doesn't send a great message to the other sports' athletes.

Anybody have a sense re: Title IX implications?

[ugarte]

hahahahaaha sorry i tried to conjure up an image of a school administrator spending a single second thinking about the message it sends to the other sports' athletes hoooo good one lol

[BearLover]

hahahahaaha sorry i tried to conjure up an image of a school administrator spending a single second thinking about the message it sends to the other sports' athletes hoooo good one lol

School administrators have to deal with coaches, boosters, parents, and athletes form all their athletics programs. Literally happens all the time, so it shouldn't be too hard for you to picture.

[chimpfood]

Will this mean that the Ivy League's rule of no athletic scholarships will be worked around? Could Cornell "pay" players but giving them full rides or would money have to actually be exchanged to get around the Ivy League rule?

[rss77]

If you read Dr Nicki Moore's the Ivy Faculty Reps and ADs discussed the changing world of college athletics at their May meeting.  What really galls me is that in order to pay the 2.8 billion dollar settlement the Power schools insisted that 60% must come from schools outside that grouping. So typical when it comes to revenue the Power schools want every penny they can get their dirty paws on but when it comes to expenses they look to others to bail them out. Ivy Exec Director Harris is right to call foul this time.

[billhoward]

One reading may be:
* The Ivy Eight will continue to not offer athletic scholarships
* The Ivy Eight perhaps cannot get in the way of students earning / receiving money on their own

We genuflect when Ian Shane makes another incredible save, but how much would Bauer, CCM, Sherwood want to give him? And would Cornell then want to claw back any need-based aid? Yeah, they probably would.

[BearLover]

The Ivies are never going to pay their athletes. All we can hope for is that other schools won't either in the sports we care about.

[rss77]

The problem is with the triumvirate of HYP and their almost religious adherence to a failed model of amateurism going back to the 1917, 1945, and 1954 agreements. Am hopeful that the lawsuit of the Brown athletes and the Dartmouth unionization movement will flip the Mosel on its head.

[billhoward]

If I read some of the stories correctly, part of the payment money due from the colleges to the player fund is allocated based on how far basketball teams advance in the NCAA tournament. So the Ivies are further on the hook for Yale winning its first game this year and Princeton winning 2 to make make the Sweet Sixteen last year.

[BearLover]

The problem is with the triumvirate of HYP and their almost religious adherence to a failed model of amateurism going back to the 1917, 1945, and 1954 agreements. Am hopeful that the lawsuit of the Brown athletes and the Dartmouth unionization movement will flip the Mosel on its head.

I think these lawsuits are not good news for the Ivies' competitive aspirations. Yes, the Ivies do adhere to a failed model of amateurism. But even if they didn't believe in amateurism, the Ivies (and all other schools without a Power 4 football tv contract) lose money on athletics and cannot afford to "share revenue" with their players. These lawsuits widen the gap between the haves and have-nots. The end result is not that Brown and Dartmouth pay their players more or award more scholarships, but rather that the schools with richer athletic departments do, leaving Brown and Dartmouth in the dust.

[Trotsky]

The problem is with the triumvirate of HYP and their almost religious adherence to a failed model of amateurism going back to the 1917, 1945, and 1954 agreements.

It has had nothing to do with amateurism for 50 years, and it has never had anything to do with academics.  It is a designer label.  It reinforces the idea that we're better than everybody else, and there are parents who lap that up.

The ban on athletic scholarships and the shortened season are Class Signaling.  It says "I am rich and powerful enough to do something this counterproductive."  It is tall hats.

[Swampy]

And so it begins.... ::cry::