NCAA President Proposes That Schools Be Allowed to Directly Pay Players

[xubrew]

This will probably be my only post of the year. Generally, if I feel there are too few degrees of separation from something, then I also feel it's better to stay away.

But, this has been proposed by Charlie Baker. I think it will pass and go into effect as early as July 2024. This all but ends amateurism. An amateur will now likely be considered a player who has not been paid to play on a non-scholastic team.

I kinda knew it had to happen sooner or later. Well, I guess it's now later and it's happening.


https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/39047353/ncaa-proposes-rule-let-schools-athletes-enter-nil-deals

[GoMuskies]

This really fucking sucks.

[paulxu]

Were schools losing player to cities with bigger car dealerships? Or Pizza joints? Or whatever?

For all the schools running in the red on their athletic budgets, this should really help them out.

[Xville]

Wonder what that subdivision would really mean. How many teams? Would they have their own college football playoff and own March madness? Why does that need to be a part of this? Why the separation?

If this effs with the tourney and/or the college playoff that effing sucks. If it doesn’t, I don’t care.

[sirthought]

So messed up.

This is why colleges in other countries don't have major college sports, and instead have lower tier professional leagues. Colleges are state sponsored institutions meant for the business of training and education. They aren't meant for running professional sports leagues.

[GoMuskies]

I'm for going back to the fully amateur model and letting someone set up those lower tier professional leagues for those who don't want to go to college and get "exploited".

[sirthought]

I don't know that exploited is the word for it with athletes honestly. They see what opportunities lay before them and it's now or never to take advantage.

The people being exploited are those having to pay for the programs they don't even have anything to do with, can't directly watch without having to pay more, and can have the programs they are involved with ignored because the football team needs a new this or that to recruit better.

[xubrew]

Wonder what that subdivision would really mean. How many teams? Would they have their own college football playoff and own March madness? Why does that need to be a part of this? Why the separation?

If this effs with the tourney and/or the college playoff that effing sucks. If it doesn’t, I don’t care.

It's possible, but I'm guessing it will not. I don't think the championships will be effected that much, if at all. That is simply my opinion, so you can take that for what it's worth.

The reason I feel that way is that the membership has to vote on this, and I just don't think they can get a majority vote if the end result is no NCAA Basketball Tournament.

What I do think will happen is a big expansion of Power Five concept where those five leagues had the power to make certain rules for themselves and not need the approval of the rest of the membership. I think it will basically be that on steroids. To be a part of the "subdivision" a school will have to play football at the FBS level, they will have to have a minimum number of athletes (probably 500 or so), and they'll have to pay at least half of them a minimum of $30,000 a year or more.

The "subdivision" will be able to make its own rules. Some that I would anticipate would be...

-No year of residence for players transferring in from outside the subdivision

-A fifth year of eligibility instead of just four

-raising (or eliminating altogether) the number of scholarships that are allowed

-the ability to schedule another school for the spring football game, and the ability to schedule two (or more) exhibition college basketball games in the summer

-they may make changes to academic eligibility, or they may just get rid of it entirely (probably not, but I bet they lighten it up some)


Who knows? They'll be able to pretty much do what they want, and it probably will create a huge competitive advantage. In fact, I don't see how it wouldn't create an even bigger competitive advantage than the one that already exists. Which sucks! It was kind of fun watching 15 seeds to go the Sweet Sixteen and Elite Eight these past few years.

I do think this will pass. I think a lot of people just want the court cases and the threat of anti-trust violations to go away, and I also think that as long as schools feel that their conferences can get at least one team into the basketball tournament, then that's good enough for them.

Again, that's just my opinion. I really don't know how it will actually play out. So, take it for what it's worth.

[GoMuskies]

The Big East better get some lobbying done to fix that fucked up provision about needing to play FBS football. Otherwise, it's over for the Big East.

[waggy]

The Big East better get some lobbying done to fix that fucked up provision about needing to play FBS football. Otherwise, it's over for the Big East.

In my mind though the football schools are at a disadvantage when it comes to payroll and medical expenses. Playing football is expensive. Didn't I recently see that the going rate for a QB is $2M per?

[waggy]

Do CFP dollars get distributed like NCAA tourney dollars? Pretty sure I know the answer, and that something needs to change there.

[MHettel]

This is like seeing a hurricane on the radar, headed straight towards you and are you can do is HOPE it somehow doesn’t destroy you.

We better hope that the BBall schools and Non-Power 5 football schools get aligned quickly to really limit how much the Big 4 football conferences can raise the ante to even play.

I’m sure some states will just shut down their fball programs if they are either forced to pay the players or become completely irrelevant if they choose not to pay their players.

They don’t have to “change” the NCAA tournament to effectively change the tournament. If they implement a set of rules, determined at the conference level, that allows the deep pocket schools to essentially buy the best players, then the tournament will eventually devolve into a “big 5 championship”.

Not good for the Xaviers out there

[paulxu]

Also, it's Power 4 now...not 5.

[xubrew]

The Big East better get some lobbying done to fix that fucked up provision about needing to play FBS football. Otherwise, it's over for the Big East.

I'm afraid there are a few other layers to it.

This could easily be voted down. There are 363 D1 members, and I'm guessing there would be somewhere between 65 schools at the low end and about 80 at the top end that would be part of this new subdivision (Big Ten, SEC, ACC, B12, and between 5 to 15 others that decide to make the financial commitment and make the jump. So that's 260 that can vote against it and quash it.

But...then what??

The elephant in the room hasn't said this out loud, but it doesn't have to. Those 65-80 schools don't really need the NCAA. That's the real power that they have. They'll stick around so long as it is clear to everyone that they are the alphas. They'll keep paying schools to come and play them in home buy games, and they'll keep letting each conference get at least one team into the championships, but they now also get to make their own rules that give them all the advantages. MHettel said something that was spot on. They don’t have to “change” the NCAA tournament to effectively change the tournament. And here's the thing. They now know that. And they don't get their way they may just leave altogether and do their own thing in all sports that's completely separate from the NCAA.

The 260ish schools, including the Big East, really kind of do NEED the NCAA Tournament. The Power Schools do not. They perhaps LIKE it, but they don't need it the same way that the rest of us do. And, they know that. And that's the real power they have. They feel that if it really comes down to it, they don't need the NCAA at all.

[drudy23]

All it does it provide a bigger gap between the haves and the have nots, probably just how they want it.

This is bad news for small private basketball schools not named Duke.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Title IX would come into play where it doesn't currently with NIL. (I know there us a law suit, I think Oregon, challenging NIL related to Title IX).

Matt Jones from KSR thinks the NCAA is proposing this as a way for politicians to step in and make rules regarding NIL in college athletics. He doesn't think the NCAA actually wants this (which I agree with, it would be a complete 180 from decades worth of comments on the matter).

[xubrew]

Title IX would come into play where it doesn't currently with NIL. (I know there us a law suit, I think Oregon, challenging NIL related to Title IX).

Matt Jones from KSR thinks the NCAA is proposing this as a way for politicians to step in and make rules regarding NIL in college athletics. He doesn't think the NCAA actually wants this (which I agree with, it would be a complete 180 from decades worth of comments on the matter).

It would come into play, but it wouldn't matter to the schools that choose to do it. If a school like Ohio State or Florida that has over 600 student athletes have to pay more than half of them $30k a year, that comes out to somewhere between $9 million and $10 million minimum. Those schools could pay that and never miss it, and they'd make sure half those receiving it would be female students so they'd be in compliance with Title IX. Texas A&M just paid Jimbo Fisher $76 million to not coach their football team.

[D-West & PO-Z]

It would come into play, but it wouldn't matter to the schools that choose to do it. If a school like Ohio State or Florida that has over 600 student athletes have to pay more than half of them $30k a year, that comes out to somewhere between $9 million and $10 million minimum. Those schools could pay that and never miss it, and they'd make sure half those receiving it would be female students so they'd be in compliance with Title IX. Texas A&M just paid Jimbo Fisher $76 million to not coach their football team.

Where do you get the idea they'd only have to pay half? And where do you get the low sum of 30K a year when there are guys making six and less so making 7 figures a year for NIL deals?

[GoMuskies]

Where do you get the idea they'd only have to pay half? And where do you get the low sum of 30K a year when there are guys making six and less so making 7 figures a year for NIL deals?

Those are the annual requirements from the NCAA proposal. A minimum of $30k x. 50% of the number of student athletes.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Those are the annual requirements from the NCAA proposal. A minimum of $30k x. 50% of the number of student athletes.

HA, that would be a good source!

Didn't even read it, I am a moron.

[xubrew]

Where do you get the idea they'd only have to pay half? And where do you get the low sum of 30K a year when there are guys making six and less so making 7 figures a year for NIL deals?


HA, that would be a good source!

Didn't even read it, I am a moron.

It's actually a good question.

I landed on that by reading the proposal. But as to the question of how did THEY land on that, here are my thoughts, which are admittedly cynical, but I think they are also accurate....

They want to set up the parameters in a way so that almost no other schools other than themselves are able to join the subdivision. Most schools don't have 500 athletes. Most schools don't play FBS football, and of the ones that do play FBS football and have 500+ athletes, almost no one outside of the P4 will be able to afford to pay half of them $30k every year. It's an elite and exclusive club that they are creating for themselves.

There has always been this attitude of smugness and narcissism that has existed in college athletics, and in college football and basketball in particular, that i think is so toxic to the overall health, and popularity, and quality of the sport. "We have nothing to gain from you. We don't need you. Go sit over there now." While that has always existed, it seems to be particularly more prevalent in the last ten years or so. People say they love college athletics because in college, it's all about the game. That is the biggest load of crap. College sports are LESS about the game than any other sport on the planet. Century old conferences have realigned, century old rivalries have ended, and NONE of it happened because of anything that was "about the game." In no other part of the world can you just systematically avoid a team, or decide you don't want to be a part of a rivalry anymore, or have groups of teams that are collectively just shut out the way you do in college athletics.

That's (at least in part) what this is. Just in the Big East, you've got Wisconsin/Marquette, and Creighton/Nebraska, and Maryland/Georgetown (who don't play anymore anyway), or even X/UC. I think those schools will get some satisfaction out of being able to say "Yeah, you've played us evenly, or even dominated the series and completely outperformed us for the last decade or so, but it's not about the game anymore and we don't want it to be. We are now in the Elite Subdivision and you are not. We don't need you anymore. We have nothing to gain from you. Go sit over there now with the Atlantic Ten and the Horizon League."

That's the attitude that so many throughout D1 college athletics seem to have. And, unfortunately, it's NOT about the game. I sometimes wonder if it ever really was. Why play schools and try to beat them when you can just systematically shut them out instead?? That’s the attitude that exists. It couldn’t be any less “about the game.”

[xubrew]

You know what?? Fuck it!

It's such a shame that something that is so great between the lines of the field and court has to be lead by people that are not qualified to lead a search party that's looking for the big statue on Liberty Island, and that are at the same time so selfish that they'd just as soon burn their own loved ones at the stake if it was the only way they could think of to light their cigars.

College sports must have been great if these people haven't been able to completely ruin it yet. But, they really are getting close!

[XUGRAD80]

This is just the NCAA leadership acknowledging what was already going to happen eventually. He’s basically just telling those schools that want to pay their players to go ahead and form their own organization. Those that don’t will stay in the current NCAA. Possibly return to the old rules. The new organization will conduct its own championships and run itself under its own rules. It probably would mean the end of the current 68 team tournament with all of its smaller conference schools being involved, and would replace it with 2 separate tournaments…one for the “pro” schools and one for the “amateur” schools.

Where does this leave X? Well, I can’t imagine any scenario where X is paying student athletes directly. Maybe they can afford it for some, but not across the board.

[xudash]

I'm taking a quick cut at this, so my apologies if I have missed some major, gaping thing.

Data source: https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges/xavier-university/student-life/sports/#The%20Xavier%20University%20Athletics%20Program

KEY INSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENT FROM THIS PROPOSAL:

To enter the subdivision, a school must invest $30,000 per year per athlete into what is known as an "enhanced educational trust fund" for at least half of the school's athletes.

- - - - - - -

Total Number of Xavier Athletes, per above link: 367

There are 367 athletes who take part in at least one sport at the school, 181 men and 186 women. They receive, on average, about $16,654 in sports-related student aid to attend Xavier. On average, the school gave males around $15,096 of sports aid and women received about $18,171.

367 / 2 = 184 (rounded)

184 x $30,000 = $5,520,000

What Do We Look Like Financially Now in the AD?:

Xavier sports teams made $25,201,006 in revenue, but they did have to spend $25,201,006 for expenses. Although the school didn’t make any money, it didn’t lose any either!

Here we are back to that age old topic of AD accounting practices and procedures. Free Cash Flow obviously is the much more important metric here, but only the inner sanctum know what that looks like. I'm bringing this up here because I'm wondering out loud how much wiggle room we have as we presently exist. Beyond affordability, having to have or not requiring football certainly is something to watch with this - - I haven't stayed up on that issue.

- - - - - - -

MY VERY QUICK AND NOT ALL TOO WELL THOUGHT OUT BOTTOMLINE:

1. BE MEDIA AGREEMENT. Here we are with me harping about how important the next media agreement is for the Big East yet again, and understanding that the next media agreement may tee up "coverage" for a 6 to 10 year window. Who knows after that. Nonetheless, if it comes in at close to $9 million per school, then we can probably play in this sandbox, again, assuming that non-football schools are allowed into it. The shame of it will be that the additional $5 million'ish in funding will get soaked up by this, rather than being put into capital and other AD program improvements. And yes, I understand that $30k per student is the baseline number. The Ohio State's, Alabama's and USC's of the world may amp up that number, or they may have no reason to do so. Market forces - the value of the actual athletes they attract to their programs - and their own greed will dictate the pay scales at these schools.

2. WHICH PROGRAMS CAN TRULY AFFORD THIS? I'm back to thinking about how many athletic programs actually truly operate on what we can refer to as a healthy basis, given the accounting issues we know to exist. We have repeatedly heard that perhaps 20 or so athletic departments truly operate in the black. We've read that some programs in the major conferences actually operate in the red. No doubt this proposal is meant to establish an exclusive club. The issue is whether or not it could become too exclusive (see #3 below). Bigger public schools supported by substantial student fees coupled with reasonable media agreement payouts are set up well overall to join in. Five years from now, UC could be much more relevant than Wake Forest or BC, as an example, albeit with the obvious point that solid coaching must be in the mix to achieve win/loss success.

3. IF IT'S ALWAYS BEEN ABOUT THE ECONOMY, STUPID, THEN THIS IS ABOUT BEING ABOUT TV VIEWERSHIP, STUPID. If this proposal goes in the direction of inclusion for the B1G, the SEC and whatever is left as being relevant primarily from the ACC and Big XII - and who knows what Notre Dame is thinking right now - then its a small club in number that is supported by large fan bases. But what does that math look like? Here's the point: the closer this moves to true semi-pro status, the more likely that casual viewership exits stage left over time, or at least certainly reduces as the collegial feel of it all evaporates, at least IMHO.

If this goes the way of two full blown distinct organizations - THE CLUB and then what is left of the NCAA - how much media money will exist for each, based on what may transpire with the viewership numbers? At least I'd rather be in the fight with basketball only than having to duke it out as an NCAA scholarship football member.

- - - - - - -

I'll finish with what I absolutely know in my heart of hearts: that the NCAA Tournament as it exists is a unique, inclusive event that has been and will continue to be wildly successful if it remains in its current format. If the "CLUB" runs away and does its own thing, it will take a haircut, period, end of story. Yes, they'll have a lower denominator with which to divy it all up, but the "all" in the numerator will not look like what it looks like now.

If we can continue to participate in an NCAAT that doesn't change, and if we don't have to or are not allowed to join this thing, then we'll be fine. Imagine being able to continue to participate in the NCAAT as it exists without having to join this thing, and while still being in a viable Big East with a nice media agreement. We could certainly keep up under that scenario.

I've almost caught my tail, so I'll stop now.

[xudash]

BTW, interesting post from the HolyLandofHoops:


1. Whether a school opts in or out does NOT affect their FBS status (at least for now) or Division 1 status.

2. Whether a school plays FBS football, FCS football, or no football has no bearing on their ability to opt in or opt out.

3. Charlie Baker now thinks it will be closer to 100 schools opting in.

Here is who I think will opt in:

P4 (including ND)
Big East (including UConn football)
Gonzaga
Oregon State
Washington State
MW (except for Air Force)
AAC (except for Army and Navy)
Liberty
UTEP
James Madison
Appalachian State
St. Louis
Dayton
VCU
UMass

Total: 113 schools

I still think this gets interesting based on what transpires with the NCAAT.

[XUGRAD80]

I don’t see how schools that are not playing BIG TIME FOOTBALL will be able to afford this. I’m not even sure that all of the schools in the current power 5 will decide to go this route. I suspect that some of them will weigh the longterm impact on their budgets and profitability and decide not to go down this path. On the other hand, the schools that are annual members of the top 40 and are filling the major bowls year after year will need to stay in the fast lane.

[xeus]

The Big East better get some lobbying done to fix that fucked up provision about needing to play FBS football. Otherwise, it's over for the Big East.

Agreed. Frankly, I don’t see how that provision withstands a legitimate gender equity analysis. And that’s what the NCAA is advancing as an element of this bullshit.

[paulxu]

Hope you can read this article about Cliff Ellis. It would seem the NIL and rat race that CBB has become, has claimed a good coach:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2023/12/08/cliff-ellis-retires/

[XUGRAD80]

Hope you can read this article about Cliff Ellis. It would seem the NIL and rat race that CBB has become, has claimed a good coach:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2023/12/08/cliff-ellis-retires/

Great article. The coaching ranks, at every level and in every sport, are filled with people like him that fly under the radar and aren’t as well known as others. Those that play for them and know them are the real winners.

[GoMuskies]

Didn't Cliff Elllis cheat his ass off at Auburn?

I can't read the article, but I know Coastal is pretty bad this year. Why couldn't Cliff stick it out through March?

[paulxu]

Those are probably good questions, for which I have no ready answers.
In the article, many coaches speak quite highly of him.

“Cliff isn’t a good person; he’s a great person,” said Krzyzewski, who competed against Ellis for 10 seasons while he was at Clemson."

[GoMuskies]

Cliff was 177-128 at Clemson. 56-90 in ACC play. I bet Coach K did love the guy!

He sure got it going at Auburn briefly. They were really good and really fun to watch for a year or two.

[paulxu]

So you're saying Clemson was an ACC buy game?

[XUGRAD80]

Didn't Cliff Elllis cheat his ass off at Auburn?

I can't read the article, but I know Coastal is pretty bad this year. Why couldn't Cliff stick it out through March?

College sports today, with the recruiting cycles and the transfer portal, and all the rest are a 365 day “season”. It never ends, it just moves from one part of the year to another. Sometimes you realize it’s just time and no sense in putting it off any longer. He retired the day after his 78th birthday.

[xubrew]

Didn't Cliff Elllis cheat his ass off at Auburn?

I can't read the article, but I know Coastal is pretty bad this year. Why couldn't Cliff stick it out through March?


Cliff was 177-128 at Clemson. 56-90 in ACC play. I bet Coach K did love the guy!

He sure got it going at Auburn briefly. They were really good and really fun to watch for a year or two.


Yeah, what did happen??

I don't remember the specifics, but I know there was about a two year period where Auburn was insanely good and a bit of a national phenomenon. Not quite what UNLV was or what the Fab Five were, but probably the coolest team in college hoops at the time. It was the Doctors of Dunk or Phi Slamma Jamma 20 years later.

Then, right before the NCAA Tournament one year, several players were declared ineligible by the NCAA. Like...literally right at the end of the regular season. And, then it was over. It was like it never happened. People pretty much went back to not even remembering that Auburn had a team until Bruce Pearl got there.

I don't know what happened or what Cliff Ellis's role was in it. I just knew that all of a sudden all these great athletes were gone.