Kent Syverud tells ESPN: ‘The current system of college sports can’t continue’

[HRE Otto IV]

Where to begin?

We have so much work to do. We should have a beer some day because we are not going to solve these problems for the world exchanging messages on this message board.

You are right the Sporting Club is really professional sports. I don't think college Soccer is a profitable sport. That could change. Maybe going pro would bring more interest and more talent. I would certainly welcome it.

Last year only 15 schools had over 1500 attendance per game, only 9 schools had over 2k per game, and only one school over 3k. The year prior the numbers were 13 schools, 6 schools, 0.0 schools, so even worse.

So IMO college soccer would fit into that amateur category. The problem is schools are going to need to cut some sports. Most of that money that used to come into the school athletic department is now going to the Sporting Club. Before, Football and Basketball would subsidize other sports. If they went with the system I described, those sports would now need to be subsidized from the school itself, meaning from the academic side. Otherwise sports would get cut.

 

[MamesJungro]

Good luck with getting a multi-year contract structure. As long as education is a component of college athletics (I have a hard time seeing a point where kids won't have to go to class), any attempt to not have kids be able to transfer like a regular college student does will get blocked by anti-trust lawsuits.

I'm not a lawyer, so I am sure that I'm missing nuance, but signing contracts to directly compensate players would directly end the NCAA amateurism claim. NCAA and others are introducing NIL and not contesting the transfer rule to prolong the "student-athlete" designation as long as they can, but it seems like the writing is on the wall.

 

[NJCuse97]

You are right the Sporting Club is really professional sports. I don't think college Soccer is a profitable sport. That could change. Maybe going pro would bring more interest and more talent. I would certainly welcome it.

Last year only 15 schools had over 1500 attendance per game, only 9 schools had over 2k per game, and only one school over 3k. The year prior the numbers were 13 schools, 6 schools, 0.0 schools, so even worse.

So IMO college soccer would fit into that amateur category. The problem is schools are going to need to cut some sports. Most of that money that used to come into the school athletic department is now going to the Sporting Club. Before, Football and Basketball would subsidize other sports. If they went with the system I described, those sports would now need to be subsidized from the school itself, meaning from the academic side. Otherwise sports would get cut.

Sounds pretty similar to men’s lax really, but you categorize them as SC. Is SU not at the top of the metrics you provide? We have a NC and as a program we’ve improved year over year for probably the past 10-15 years. As a whole, I prefer college soccer in the same way I prefer college basketball. It isn’t perfect, it’s a bit messy, but you can see greatness develop, and they play defense (how many NBA players scored more than 50 points just last week!?)

I grew up in the late 80’s and 90’s liking the NJ Nets because they weren’t great, but because of that, they tried! Also Derrick Coleman

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Sounds pretty similar to men’s lax really, but you categorize them as SC. Is SU not at the top of the metrics you provide? We have a NC and as a program we’ve improved year over year for probably the past 10-15 years. As a whole, I prefer college soccer in the same way I prefer college basketball. It isn’t perfect, it’s a bit messy, but you can see greatness develop, and they play defense (how many NBA players scored more than 50 points just last week!?)

I grew up in the late 80’s and 90’s liking the NJ Nets because they weren’t great, but because of that, they tried! Also Derrick Coleman

Lax is borderline. I included them because it is a professional sport and there is no other U23 system. Also you can get away with a 10 team league. But I suppose you could in soccer as well.

Mainly if you are going with U23 pro sports (up to 5 year contracts), there aren't a lot of sports that you would include. Ideally you would have at least one sport in the Fall, Winter, and Spring. Fall is FB and W Soccer for sure, maybe M Soccer and W Volleyball too. Winter is BBall and Hockey. Spring is Baseball and Softball, maybe M Lax and I guess W Lax to even the sports out in each season.

 

[CNYGuy]

I'm not a lawyer, so I am sure that I'm missing nuance, but signing contracts to directly compensate players would directly end the NCAA amateurism claim. NCAA and others are introducing NIL and not contesting the transfer rule to prolong the "student-athlete" designation as long as they can, but it seems like the writing is on the wall.

Would schools sign up for that? Running a professional sports organization doesn't seem under the umbrella of higher education. If you remove the academics/student-athlete component, essentially it's the G-League and I'm not sure schools would want to wade into those waters.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Would schools sign up for that? Running a professional sports organization doesn't seem under the umbrella of higher education. If you remove the academics/student-athlete component, essentially it's the G-League and I'm not sure schools would want to wade into those waters.

You can argue that it is athletic "higher education" in a way. They are training young athletes to become professionals in their given sport. While also giving them access to an academic education if they choose.

 

[donniesyracuse]

It’s tax season. I assume we will be hearing stories soon about all of those dumb athletes who don't know they have to pay taxes on their NIL income.

 

[Hoo's That]

I don't want to drop Soccer. Also, not an SU thing. Soccer as a Men's sport doesn't seem worth it long term for colleges to sponsor IMO. MLS going forward is likely to eat up the majority of the talent pool before the kids even graduate High School. IMO as it currently is, college soccer is hard to watch. There is a lack of quality. I think that will actually get worse as time goes on.

So if college sports were to move to a model of Sporting Clubs (for profit to the school with a professional sport pathway for the athletes, no academics) and Amateur Athletics (non profit, non professional more so your Olympic sports, academics involved), where does Men's Soccer fit in?

I would say it fits in the Amateur category. Schools aren't going to profit on Men's Soccer and the talent will be like FCS FB. IMO few college kids in the future will end up playing professionally. In which case, is it really worth sponsoring? Especially with Title IX considerations?

I think you can say similar about Olympic Soccer. Does the sport really belong there?

So what if the MLS "eats up the majority of the talent pool". Then students will be playing soccer instead of having it as a minor league of the MLS. You know, like collegiate soccer was before the MLS.

All world sports governing bodies set the eligibility rules for their sport in the Olympics. FIFA, as the world governing body of soccer, controls the eligibility rules for Olympic soccer. It is not all amateurs. It is considered a U23 event and professionals can play in it.

Why are you obsessed with having collegiate sports' being a minor league?

 

[MamesJungro]

Would schools sign up for that? Running a professional sports organization doesn't seem under the umbrella of higher education. If you remove the academics/student-athlete component, essentially it's the G-League and I'm not sure schools would want to wade into those waters.

I'm not sure the schools will have a choice is what I'm getting at. It would not surprise me if a ruling came down the pike stating that the players in revenue-generating sports have a right to a portion of that money.

I don't know what happens after that, but private schools like Syracuse, without access to taxpayers' money, are going to have to make some hard choices. My guess is in that scenario, Kent is looking at a cash infusion from venture capital as a way to bridge that gap. Take that for what you will.

 

[Hoo's That]

I'm not sure the schools will have a choice is what I'm getting at. It would not surprise me if a ruling came down the pike sooner rather than later stating that the players in revenue-generating sports have a right to a portion of that money.

I don't know what happens after that, but private schools like Syracuse without access to taxpayers' money are going to have to make some hard choices

Many states have laws which forbid the use of tax money for athletics at state schools. That would put a lot of them in the same position as the privates.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

So what if the MLS "eats up the majority of the talent pool". Then students will be playing soccer instead of having it as a minor league of the MLS. You know, like collegiate soccer was before the MLS.

All world sports governing bodies set the eligibility rules for their sport in the Olympics. FIFA, as the world governing body of soccer, controls the eligibility rules for Olympic soccer. It is not all amateurs. It is considered a U23 event and professionals can play in it.

Why are you obsessed with having collegiate sports' being a minor league?

I am not obsessed with it. We are heading that way if not there already. Wouldn't it better to have rules than chaos and the farce of "student" athletes in the major sports? What we have now is the worst possible setup. I am all for going back to the way things used to be, but that cannot happen. So if we are moving forward, what is the solution?

My point on Soccer is if you have a split between U23 pro sports and student athlete sports, IMO Soccer would fit into the later. I do not think a college sponsored 18-22 year old pro soccer league would be successful. I have no issue with keeping Soccer as is.

As to dropping Soccer at SU, that has to do with costs and Title IX. IMO something will need to be cut with most funds leaving the athletic departments and going to the U23 pro teams. Nothing against the sport but given the limited choices it seems like the unlucky choice.

 

[Hoo's That]

I am not obsessed with it. We are heading that way if not there already. Wouldn't it better to have rules than chaos and the farce of "student" athletes in the major sports? What we have now is the worst possible setup. I am all for going back to the way things used to be, but that cannot happen. So if we are moving forward, what is the solution?

My point on Soccer is if you have a split between U23 pro sports and student athlete sports, IMO Soccer would fit into the later. I do not think a college sponsored 18-22 year old pro soccer league would be successful. I have no issue with keeping Soccer as is.

As to dropping Soccer at SU, that has to do with costs and Title IX. IMO something will need to be cut with most funds leaving the athletic departments and going to the U23 pro teams. Nothing against the sport but given the limited choices it seems like the unlucky choice.

The absolute final end state is that revenue sports athletes are not required to attend classes, probably in a structure outside the NCAA. That's football, both basketball teams, and possibly baseball/softball. The major portion of the schools will not participate in that arrangement by continuing to require class attendance and remaining in the NCAA. The non-revs will continue as they are now, possibly returning to their status pre-1984 of being for students.

 

[OrangePA]

He's right.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

The absolute final end state is that revenue sports athletes are not required to attend classes, probably in a structure outside the NCAA. That's football, both basketball teams, and possibly baseball/softball. The major portion of the schools will not participate in that arrangement by continuing to require class attendance and remaining in the NCAA. The non-revs will continue as they are now, possibly returning to their status pre-1984 of being for students.

That is what I was suggesting

 

[donniesyracuse]

Many states have laws which forbid the use of tax money for athletics at state schools. That would put a lot of them in the same position as the privates.

They wouldn't have to use tax money, just the revenue generated by giant television deals.

 

[MamesJungro]

Many states have laws which forbid the use of tax money for athletics at state schools. That would put a lot of them in the same position as the privates.

Is that true, though? It's surprisingly difficult to google that question, but it looks like New York is the only state with a D1 football program at a state university where a coach isn't the highest-paid state employee. That would certainly suggest to me that most can use state money on athletics.

 

[orangenauburn]

Is that true, though? It's surprisingly difficult to google that question, but it looks like New York is the only state with a D1 football program at a state university where a coach isn't the highest-paid state employee. That would certainly suggest to me that most can use state money on athletics.

Agreed

There are plenty of state government willing to overlook things to find money for state universities and their athletic departments

 

[SuFTW]

Is that true, though? It's surprisingly difficult to google that question, but it looks like New York is the only state with a D1 football program at a state university where a coach isn't the highest-paid state employee. That would certainly suggest to me that most can use state money on athletics.

Tax money and state money are not necessarily the same thing as Athletic departments and football programs can generate money that is not from taxes.

 

[baggerbob]

Sounds pretty similar to men’s lax really, but you categorize them as SC. Is SU not at the top of the metrics you provide? We have a NC and as a program we’ve improved year over year for probably the past 10-15 years. As a whole, I prefer college soccer in the same way I prefer college basketball. It isn’t perfect, it’s a bit messy, but you can see greatness develop, and they play defense (how many NBA players scored more than 50 points just last week!?)

I grew up in the late 80’s and 90’s liking the NJ Nets because they weren’t great, but because of that, they tried! Also Derrick Coleman

And they had some bad luck. They were a young team just coming around, had the best shooter in basketball. Drazen Petrovich. He was Seth Curry before he came along. Kenny Anderson DC, Drazen, had a high flying 6-8 small forward, Sam Bouie at center, and a good bench.
And Chuck Daley had just taken over as coach.
Then during the summer, Drazen got killed on the German autoban.
Everything fell apart after that.

 

[WoadBlue]

You just don’t get it.

Now that's an understatement.

 

[WoadBlue]

Agree that it is broken. Completely disagree that there are 100 schools with football history that need to be saved. Maybe a 1/4 of that.

I assume you mean saved for whatever the top level is called. Only 25 is far too small. 100 might be to many. But year ago talk koan aP5 with 64 or so total teams being made its own new top tier could work well. But that cannot be what happens now, after the BT and SEC have gone utterly insane with greed to make Gordon Gekko look almost moderate.

 

[NJCuse97]

And they had some bad luck. They were a young team just coming around, had the best shooter in basketball. Drazen Petrovich. He was Seth Curry before he came along. Kenny Anderson DC, Drazen, had a high flying 6-8 small forward, Sam Bouie at center, and a good bench.
And Chuck Daley had just taken over as coach.
Then during the summer, Drazen got killed on the German autoban.
Everything fell apart after that.

Chris Morris

 

[baggerbob]

Chris Morris

Yes, and playing alongside DC that was a good young team getting better.

 

[NJCuse97]

Yes, and playing alongside DC that was a good young team getting better.

They had Mookie Blaylock at PG before Kenny Anderson. He of Pearl Jam fame.

 

[Hoo's That]

Is that true, though? It's surprisingly difficult to google that question, but it looks like New York is the only state with a D1 football program at a state university where a coach isn't the highest-paid state employee. That would certainly suggest to me that most can use state money on athletics.

That "highest paid state employee" stuff is horribly, horribly deceptive. I imagine you're talking about the coach at Buffalo IRT NYS. Nick Saban was "the highest paid state employee in Alabama" because he was paid ~$7MM per year. But when you look at the breakdown, he received only $100K from state funds as a line item in the school's budget (they make him a state employee so the president can fire him if necessary), the remaining $6+MM came from booster money. It's like that at just about every state school, the coach has a state budget line item job so the president can fire him/her and anything over say ~$100K is from booster money. The state budgets are not paying millions for coaches.

What's interesting, at some schools it's Med School professors who are the highest compensated, based on their endowed chairs and money they make from research patents, etc.