NIL influencers already changing their tune…

WANTED: Passionate Sycamore Fanatics. That You?

Register NOW to join our community of die-hard Sycamore fans.


Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.
If you change something from varsity level to club level does Title IX still apply?

Likely VERY doubtful... However, once universities (especially the P2 and the wealthiest of the G8) begin their "firesale" of varsity programs and replace with club teams, the Title IX mavens and their backers will push for that change
 
If you change something from varsity level to club level does Title IX still apply?

Nope. Club sports have nothing to do with intercollegiate athletics.

Most are student-run organizations that either pay out of pocket or run fundraisers to play, etc. When I was still at State and in SGA, we worked to try to get some of them tiny funding grants. Hell, club baseball existed back then. The best way to think of them is interschool intramurals.
 
Likely VERY doubtful... However, once universities (especially the P2 and the wealthiest of the G8) begin their "firesale" of varsity programs and replace with club teams, the Title IX mavens and their backers will push for that change

We're going to see Title IX mavens go nuts and I'll add that I believe you'll see the NAACP lose their shit, too.
 

Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.
Good question. One has to think is this all by design?

Nah, I don't think schools want to cut athletic programs. There is just very little long term thinking going into this by most and the athletes that will profit of the new system don't care about anything but themselves.
 
We're going to see Title IX mavens go nuts and I'll add that I believe you'll see the NAACP lose their shit, too.
Likely because athl scholies - even at mid-major basketball, 'smaller FBS' football schools are the "only" way some kids are going to get that opportunity. Moreover, when you look at the number of non-revenue sports who exist BECAUSE of the "old system" -- how many college opportunities will exist for some segments of the population?

When entire athletic programs begin to shutter and that will happen at some schools OR some of today's Div I revert back to Div II and/or Div III and that HAS HAPPENED, I really wonder what all of the NIL proponents will say at that time?
 
Likely because athl scholies - even at mid-major basketball, 'smaller FBS' football schools are the "only" way some kids are going to get that opportunity. Moreover, when you look at the number of non-revenue sports who exist BECAUSE of the "old system" -- how many college opportunities will exist for some segments of the population?

When entire athletic programs begin to shutter and that will happen at some schools OR some of today's Div I revert back to Div II and/or Div III and that HAS HAPPENED, I really wonder what all of the NIL proponents will say at that time?

Bingo. They can either trade their athletic skills for the college education or they can leverage debt like your average college student does.

They'll still blame the NCAA and schools saying they're punishing those that lost their opportunities.
 
Bingo. They can either trade their athletic skills for the college education or they can leverage debt like your average college student does.

They'll still blame the NCAA and schools saying they're punishing those that lost their opportunities.

I agree -- but what I find a bit frustrating? quizzical?? is that some of the LOUDEST voices demanding NIL, Full Cost of Attendance, Pay Me for What I Bring To You, etc is the same community that is likely to lose the most across the community.

Again, the schools and the NCAA are chiefly to blame. If Pacesetter wants to sell a ISU MBB jersey with any (non-retired ##, say # 32), that is between ISU and Pacesetter... as long as Curry (1978-79, 1980-81) or Carter (2007-11) don't appear on it - what 'right' do Curry and Carter have to any piece of the $$ that Pacesetter and ISU have earned?

EA Sports should have been given a cease and desist letter from UCLA and the NCAA over their use of Ed O'Bannon and EVERY OTHER PLAYER's name, etc.
 
It’s going twell be interesting if only revenue sports become employees. No way the sports that cost the university money should get the same or any of what major fball and basketball get.
 

Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.
I agree -- but what I find a bit frustrating? quizzical?? is that some of the LOUDEST voices demanding NIL, Full Cost of Attendance, Pay Me for What I Bring To You, etc is the same community that is likely to lose the most across the community.

Again, the schools and the NCAA are chiefly to blame. If Pacesetter wants to sell a ISU MBB jersey with any (non-retired ##, say # 32), that is between ISU and Pacesetter... as long as Curry (1978-79, 1980-81) or Carter (2007-11) don't appear on it - what 'right' do Curry and Carter have to any piece of the $$ that Pacesetter and ISU have earned?

EA Sports should have been given a cease and desist letter from UCLA and the NCAA over their use of Ed O'Bannon and EVERY OTHER PLAYER's name, etc.

They simply don't care as long as they get theirs. They're essentially pulling up the ladder behind themselves.
 
It’s going twell be interesting if only revenue sports become employees. No way the sports that cost the university money should get the same or any of what major fball and basketball get.

Based on the legal framing behind it, I don't know how they can't be classified that way. Reading through the USC case made it pretty bulletproof. The mandated schedules and time commitment was really damning.

What is going to be interesting is the discussion around that work value versus their cost center expense. If schools get to that, does fielding a women's softball team (just picking one for the sake of discussion) provide any value to your school? If the main talking point is athletics are a defacto marketing arm, I think you'd be hard pressed to come up with analytics/metrics to show they draw prospective students outside of those on the team.

With NIL now here, I think we're going to see students stand up to the school and demand student fees stop. If I'm paying $2k/year to subsidize college athletics and I see athletes driving around in brand new cars, decked out in name brand clothes, dropping wads at the college haunts, I'm not interested in paying that back as part of my student loans until my mid 30s.
 
Based on the legal framing behind it, I don't know how they can't be classified that way. Reading through the USC case made it pretty bulletproof. The mandated schedules and time commitment was really damning.

What is going to be interesting is the discussion around that work value versus their cost center expense. If schools get to that, does fielding a women's softball team (just picking one for the sake of discussion) provide any value to your school? If the main talking point is athletics are a defacto marketing arm, I think you'd be hard pressed to come up with analytics/metrics to show they draw prospective students outside of those on the team.

With NIL now here, I think we're going to see students stand up to the school and demand student fees stop. If I'm paying $2k/year to subsidize college athletics and I see athletes driving around in brand new cars, decked out in name brand clothes, dropping wads at the college haunts, I'm not interested in paying that back as part of my student loans until my mid 30s.
The title IX will be fascinating to see play out. I can’t see how a softball player can make as much as a fball player. If yes, then which sports are getting dropped?

And do fball players all make the same or is it a salary cap of sorts per team?

I agree on the subsidizing aspect.
 
The title IX will be fascinating to see play out. I can’t see how a softball player can make as much as a fball player. If yes, then which sports are getting dropped?

And do fball players all make the same or is it a salary cap of sorts per team?

I agree on the subsidizing aspect.

Sports at the upper crust of power conference level will survive. It's pretty much the the lower rung of power schools and below that will likely cut sports in the future.

Hell, look at the news out of Washington. There was posts on Twitter they are taking out multiple loans and desperately trying to refinance all of their bonds ahead of the Big Ten move... and that is a P2 school already with funding problems.
 
Hell, look at the news out of Washington. There was posts on Twitter they are taking out multiple loans and desperately trying to refinance all of their bonds ahead of the Big Ten move... and that is a P2 school already with funding problems.
Washington State and Eastern Washington are apparently having funding issues as well. Not saying your wider point isn't correct, but it sounds like the WA university system might have issues beyond athletics.
 

Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.
Sports at the upper crust of power conference level will survive. It's pretty much the the lower rung of power schools and below that will likely cut sports in the future.

Hell, look at the news out of Washington. There was posts on Twitter they are taking out multiple loans and desperately trying to refinance all of their bonds ahead of the Big Ten move... and that is a P2 school already with funding problems.
Yeah no doubt they uppers will survive. They won’t be willing to pay non revenue sports salaries equal to revenue sports, if at all.

Big Ten is reportedly setting aside 20M per season to share with their athletes. It’s just TBD which athletes they are paying.

There will be cost cutting moves to staffs, as football staffs are insane at the high major levels.
 
Back
Top