This will lead to some interesting developments, especially when paired with the new transfer portal system...
SCotUS rules against the NCAA
- Thread starter Username Not Available
- Start date
For education-related expenses, I agree with this.
I would have played a sport to have my tuition paid for.
Any of them.
The profits from the revenue sports go to funding the non-revenue sports and providing opportunities for those students (many of them women). When the system is blown up, will those opportunities disappear? Be careful what you wish for.
Bingo. People don’t really consider the true implications of this. Non-revenue sports (including basically all female sports) will be brutalized. I can’t imagine that’s what people actually want.
Women’s sports aren’t going anywhere. Remember that little brouhaha over the “training room” at the women’s NCAA tournament? That would be child’s play compared to the litigation that will ensue if schools try to cut women’s athletics in order to pay football players.
The NCAA seems to want to refocus this discussion to NIL changes that are likely to come before the July 1 deadline for many state laws to kick in. If they can “contain” the increased reimbursement to athletes to an NIL system, there should be little impact on AD budgets. Remember the court didn’t say colleges have to provide more compensation to athletes, it only said the NCAA can’t stop them from doing it. (For education related expenses). Them that can, will. Them that can’t won’t.
Do you think “for education related expenses” is pretty vague and can be easily manipulated?
I absolutely think they can and will be 'broadly' interpreted and I'm really curious to see how it plays out. I suspect it will be a part of the decline in overall competitiveness in the revenue sports outside of the top programs.
And at the same time, I'm all for the athletes getting more out of an industry that is driven by their talent and performance. So it looks good and bad for various reasons.
I think all advantages are easily manipulated and used by the dominant programs to remain dominant. I think you have to be remarkably naive to think large sums of money aren’t changing hands at top programs every day. Just look at the taped evidence that emerged from the FBI sting a few years ago. And yet the NCAA is largely incapable of enforcing any of its current rules, as evidenced by the fact that Kansas, Arizona and LSU continue to recruit at a high level and compete for championships.
As such, I don’t worry about how schools like NU will be impacted by these changes because a) we are consistently non-competitive now and b) I don’t anticipate any more cheating or manipulation than is already occurring .
You don’t anticipate any more cheating than what’s already occurring!? I would have to think you would have be remarkably naïve to be believe that. A much more “legal” path has just been opened up for them through an extremely vague new rule.
The competition gap that had closed significantly in the last 25 years between mid-majors and majors (through wider tv coverage, etc) will suddenly get ripped open again.
No I don’t— I just think a lot of what has been going on under the table will no longer be hidden. NU has been basically a terrible program for about 100 years, with one blip. I don’t see them at anymore of a disadvantage now that other schools will be paying their players legally rather than illegally. Hell, maybe NU can find some wealthy alums willing to pay OUR players!