Beginning of the End???

[SIENA1971]

In major change, college athletes set to be paid directly by schools
. The NCAA and major conferences agreed to a settlement that would establish a revenue-sharing model for athletes beginning in the fall of 2025, though many steps remain to finalize the arrangement.

Most likely next logical step is splitting up Div I programs and possibly tourneys- March Madness & NIT

Thoughts??

[musicman]

May 23, 2024 19:29:29 GMT -5 SIENA1971 said:

In major change, college athletes set to be paid directly by schools
. The NCAA and major conferences agreed to a settlement that would establish a revenue-sharing model for athletes beginning in the fall of 2025, though many steps remain to finalize the arrangement.

Most likely next logical step is splitting up Div I programs and possibly tourneys- March Madness & NIT

Thoughts??

Sad, sad state of affairs! Especially for the mid-majors. Call me old or old fashioned but I can't see anything positive about this debacle about to happen. Get a free education, get treated like a king, get to play the sport you love but have to be paid. Isn't that the reason we have professional teams in athletics? Don't go to college! Go straight to the pros like many are doing.

[hankla]

Mark Singelais has a story in TU sports today. The headline tells how bad the story will be for non-power conferences:
MAAC To Lose $28M In Funding. The loss is over ten years starting in the Fall of 2025.
Although 90 percent or more of the back damages to be paid will benefit athletes from the power conferences
the distribution of funds from the Big Dance to be withheld from Division I schools by the NCAA will be 40%
from the Power 5 conferences and 60% from the 27 non-power conferences. The MAAC is hit harder than other conferences
due to St. Peter's Peacocks reaching the Elite 8. Idon't know if the non-power conferences banded together could challenge
these terms in Court.

[musicman]

I'm not sure about the logic in what I've been thinking recently when it comes to paying college athletes. My question upon thinking about said logic is this. The college athlete is now going to be paid for his or her participation in a sport for a school. That means they will have to pay taxes on income. I would think they would be considered an employee. If they are being paid for their participation in sports why shouldn't they have to pay some sort of tuition like every other student that is accepted into an academic program? I'm sure readers can shot a lot of holes into my thought process on this subject but it does piss me off. Students with other scholarships such as art, science or music don't get paid. As you can tell, it rubs me the wrong way. Does it being a NIL make it legally correct or morally acceptable?

[warden99]

A law suit is a very long shot. A good administrator will look at their total budget. Over the years our administration has grown. We have time to make cuts. Just looking at new positions in the last ten years we will find possibilities. When the time comes we will be ready

[SIENA1971]

With athletic “salaries” possibly being covered by the mid-majors themselves the total experience for the all athletes will be diminished … no golf or baseball trips South, participation in out of state tourneys , overseas trips, elimination of some athletic teams, staffing being reduced, etc to cover the additional expenses not currently budgeted … raising tuition and fees not viable with competition to fill incoming classes …

[$cott]

May 27, 2024 9:33:21 GMT -5 musicman said:

I'm not sure about the logic in what I've been thinking recently when it comes to paying college athletes. My question upon thinking about said logic is this. The college athlete is now going to be paid for his or her participation in a sport for a school. That means they will have to pay taxes on income. I would think they would be considered an employee. If they are being payed for their participation in sports why shouldn't they have to pay some sort of tuition like every other student that is accepted into an academic program? I sure readers can shot a lot of holes into my thought process on this subject but it does piss me off. Students with other scholarships such as art, science or music don't get paid. As you can tell, it rubs me the wrong way. Does it being a NIL make it legally correct or morally acceptable?

I'm a huge music fan but it is hard to deny that the school sees no direct benefits from the music and arts programs. The men's basketball program is very different. It clearly generates income regardless of what book-keeping magic they use to pretend it doesn't. The big issue now is whether Title 9 is going to require schools to pay every athlete in every sport the same amount. The Power 5 conferences can, and should absorb that blow. The mid and low majors will drown if that is a requirement.

[oldfox]

I have never read an article stating the House Settlement requires colleges to pay athletes. The articles alway says it “allows” payments.

From the Baltimore Sun: “…. Who gets paid going forward? Presumably, the payments would start with the athletes in sports that produce most of the revenue: football and men’s basketball players. Women’s basketball is likely next in line, but athletes in all sports should expect to see some benefit — but probably not at all schools. The proposal would allow schools to pay athletes, but not require it. Schools that don’t rake in millions in TV revenue could pass and rely on NIL deals brokered in part by booster-backed collectives. Though how and if those organizations fit in a new system is murky at best. There are also questions about whether the federal gender equity law Title IX would require equal funding for male and female athletes…..

There is so much to be worked out regarding this it’s very difficult to say how schools out of the P5 are impacted.  The judge in the case has the last word and it could take months for her to review the settlement to her liking.  The House Settlement doesn’t mark the end of the line of lawsuits the NCAA is currently facing.  There are still other cases out there to be resolved that have the potential to throw a wrench into the works.

Personally, i think the biggest issue is employment status of athletes.  The NCAA continues to look for legislative relief from Congress to help them avoid future legal actions. Every interview I’ve read with an athletic director says there needs to be a way to “pay” athletes outside of the traditional employer/employee relationship. I think the NCAA and its members will look to Congress to create a new employment category for certain college student-athletes.

I legally engaged a contractor to renovate our bathroom but he was never my employee.  I didn’t have to directly pay an employers share of his payroll taxes or other mandated benefits.  I’m sure a new class of “employee” status can be created to accommodate this unique situation if Congress chooses to engage on the issue.

[lakeshore7778]

May 27, 2024 13:47:14 GMT -5 oldfox said:

I have never read an article stating the House Settlement requires colleges to pay athletes. The articles alway says it “allows” payments.

From the Baltimore Sun: “…. Who gets paid going forward? Presumably, the payments would start with the athletes in sports that produce most of the revenue: football and men’s basketball players. Women’s basketball is likely next in line, but athletes in all sports should expect to see some benefit — but probably not at all schools. The proposal would allow schools to pay athletes, but not require it. Schools that don’t rake in millions in TV revenue could pass and rely on NIL deals brokered in part by booster-backed collectives. Though how and if those organizations fit in a new system is murky at best. There are also questions about whether the federal gender equity law Title IX would require equal funding for male and female athletes…..

There is so much to be worked out regarding this it’s very difficult to say how schools out of the P5 are impacted.  The judge in the case has the last word and it could take months for her to review the settlement to her liking.  The House Settlement doesn’t mark the end of the line of lawsuits the NCAA is currently facing.  There are still other cases out there to be resolved that have the potential to throw a wrench into the works.

Personally, i think the biggest issue is employment status of athletes.  The NCAA continues to look for legislative relief from Congress to help them avoid future legal actions. Every interview I’ve read with an athletic director says there needs to be a way to “pay” athletes outside of the traditional employer/employee relationship. I think the NCAA and its members will look to Congress to create a new employment category for certain college student-athletes.

I legally engaged a contractor to renovate our bathroom but he was never my employee.  I didn’t have to directly pay an employers share of his payroll taxes or other mandated benefits.  I’m sure a new class of “employee” status can be created to accommodate this unique situation if Congress chooses to engage on the issue.

It probably won’t be implemented this way, but at the conference or team level it should be able to be implemented any way they feel it can be afforded based on how competitive they feel they need to be. This should be able to include offering independent contractor employments in temporary (i.e. 1,2,3,or 4 yr) positions.

And stop calling these people student-athletes.

As for non- and low-revenue generating sports I don’t believe you’ll see as much elimination as people may think. Those sports e.g. lacrosse, golf, water polo, don’t provide that many athletic scholarships (NCAA only allows men’s lacrosse a 12.6 scholarships and I don’t think Siena gives half that) so most of those rosters are filled with students whose parents are willing to pay close to full ride so their kids can say they played Division 1.

[SIENA1971]

May 27, 2024 15:29:48 GMT -5 lakeshore7778 said:

May 27, 2024 13:47:14 GMT -5 oldfox said:

I have never read an article stating the House Settlement requires colleges to pay athletes. The articles alway says it “allows” payments.

From the Baltimore Sun: “…. Who gets paid going forward? Presumably, the payments would start with the athletes in sports that produce most of the revenue: football and men’s basketball players. Women’s basketball is likely next in line, but athletes in all sports should expect to see some benefit — but probably not at all schools. The proposal would allow schools to pay athletes, but not require it. Schools that don’t rake in millions in TV revenue could pass and rely on NIL deals brokered in part by booster-backed collectives. Though how and if those organizations fit in a new system is murky at best. There are also questions about whether the federal gender equity law Title IX would require equal funding for male and female athletes…..

There is so much to be worked out regarding this it’s very difficult to say how schools out of the P5 are impacted.  The judge in the case has the last word and it could take months for her to review the settlement to her liking.  The House Settlement doesn’t mark the end of the line of lawsuits the NCAA is currently facing.  There are still other cases out there to be resolved that have the potential to throw a wrench into the works.

Personally, i think the biggest issue is employment status of athletes.  The NCAA continues to look for legislative relief from Congress to help them avoid future legal actions. Every interview I’ve read with an athletic director says there needs to be a way to “pay” athletes outside of the traditional employer/employee relationship. I think the NCAA and its members will look to Congress to create a new employment category for certain college student-athletes.

I legally engaged a contractor to renovate our bathroom but he was never my employee.  I didn’t have to directly pay an employers share of his payroll taxes or other mandated benefits.  I’m sure a new class of “employee” status can be created to accommodate this unique situation if Congress chooses to engage on the issue.

It probably won’t be implemented this way, but at the conference or team level it should be able to be implemented any way they feel it can be afforded based on how competitive they feel they need to be. This should be able to include offering independent contractor employments in temporary (i.e. 1,2,3,or 4 yr) positions.

And stop calling these people student-athletes.

As for non- and low-revenue generating sports I don’t believe you’ll see as much elimination as people may think. Those sports e.g. lacrosse, golf, water polo, don’t provide that many athletic scholarships (NCAA only allows men’s lacrosse a 12.6 scholarships and I don’t think Siena gives half that) so most of those rosters are filled with students whose parents are willing to pay close to full ride so their kids can say they played Division 1.

Not everyone shares your optimism “The most disheartening thing for me is that we now have to make difficult decisions as to what budget items will be cut that obviously will negatively impact the student-athlete experience over the next 10 years.” - MAAC commissioner

[$cott]

May 27, 2024 15:29:48 GMT -5 lakeshore7778 said:

May 27, 2024 13:47:14 GMT -5 oldfox said:

I have never read an article stating the House Settlement requires colleges to pay athletes. The articles alway says it “allows” payments.

From the Baltimore Sun: “…. Who gets paid going forward? Presumably, the payments would start with the athletes in sports that produce most of the revenue: football and men’s basketball players. Women’s basketball is likely next in line, but athletes in all sports should expect to see some benefit — but probably not at all schools. The proposal would allow schools to pay athletes, but not require it. Schools that don’t rake in millions in TV revenue could pass and rely on NIL deals brokered in part by booster-backed collectives. Though how and if those organizations fit in a new system is murky at best. There are also questions about whether the federal gender equity law Title IX would require equal funding for male and female athletes…..

There is so much to be worked out regarding this it’s very difficult to say how schools out of the P5 are impacted.  The judge in the case has the last word and it could take months for her to review the settlement to her liking.  The House Settlement doesn’t mark the end of the line of lawsuits the NCAA is currently facing.  There are still other cases out there to be resolved that have the potential to throw a wrench into the works.

Personally, i think the biggest issue is employment status of athletes.  The NCAA continues to look for legislative relief from Congress to help them avoid future legal actions. Every interview I’ve read with an athletic director says there needs to be a way to “pay” athletes outside of the traditional employer/employee relationship. I think the NCAA and its members will look to Congress to create a new employment category for certain college student-athletes.

I legally engaged a contractor to renovate our bathroom but he was never my employee.  I didn’t have to directly pay an employers share of his payroll taxes or other mandated benefits.  I’m sure a new class of “employee” status can be created to accommodate this unique situation if Congress chooses to engage on the issue.

It probably won’t be implemented this way, but at the conference or team level it should be able to be implemented any way they feel it can be afforded based on how competitive they feel they need to be. This should be able to include offering independent contractor employments in temporary (i.e. 1,2,3,or 4 yr) positions.

And stop calling these people student-athletes.

As for non- and low-revenue generating sports I don’t believe you’ll see as much elimination as people may think. Those sports e.g. lacrosse, golf, water polo, don’t provide that many athletic scholarships (NCAA only allows men’s lacrosse a 12.6 scholarships and I don’t think Siena gives half that) so most of those rosters are filled with students whose parents are willing to pay close to full ride so their kids can say they played Division 1.

A lot of what you say is true but having come from a D3 school that has won national championships I can promise you that they are providing extra "aid" and are extremely lenient on admissions for players on the basketball team. If Siena can't at least compete with that then they are cooked.

[glen]

All this at a time when the MAAC (or at least some of the schools) are already in a tight financial position. The MAAC survey (you may have received it via email a few months back) hinted around to financials issues in the league. This can't be good. Recruiting should be fun. Any kid who gets a sniff from a P5 school won't even consider anyone else until that option is off the table. From a FB perspective it is likely to make the gap between BCS and FCS enormous. At this point it wouldn't surprise me to see them split hoop into 1A and 1AA. That said though, there are only so many slots on P5 rosters. It's not like any kid who is any good will get scooped up. It should be interesting.

[musicman]

May 28, 2024 5:17:38 GMT -5 glen said:

All this at a time when the MAAC (or at least some of the schools) are already in a tight financial position. The MAAC survey (you may have received it via email a few months back) hinted around to financials issues in the league. This can't be good. Recruiting should be fun. Any kid who gets a sniff from a P5 school won't even consider anyone else until that option is off the table. From a FB perspective it is likely to make the gap between BCS and FCS enormous. At this point it wouldn't surprise me to see them split hoop into 1A and 1AA. That said though, there are only so many slots on P5 rosters. It's not like any kid who is any good will get scooped up. It should be interesting.

The Wild Wild West!!

[warden99]

When I talked about cutting admin costs I did not intend for it to include student/athletes. Nor individual coach’s
HOWEVER. Why do we need a league commissioner ? And staff
We could function with a Secretarial office. Perhaps a ceremonial /Volunteer

Lots of things need to be decided. There are shoes that have not been dropped

Team make up and coaching leadership all teams will be free to develope schedules,travel and fundraising

Post season,holiday tournaments. Perhaps a holiday event. A good time to show off our facilities

I agree the big boys have wounded us. But let’s not play dead. Some of them might remember where they came from.

[MTS]

May 23, 2024 19:29:29 GMT -5 SIENA1971 said:

In major change, college athletes set to be paid directly by schools
. The NCAA and major conferences agreed to a settlement that would establish a revenue-sharing model for athletes beginning in the fall of 2025, though many steps remain to finalize the arrangement.

Most likely next logical step is splitting up Div I programs and possibly tourneys- March Madness & NIT

Thoughts??

Won’t happen. They’re greedy but not stupid.