If the NCAA gives autonomy to the P5 conferences and those conferences allow a stipend

[Alsacs]

Then every school not in a P5 conference is D-O-N-E. I mean if those 5 conferences could give their athletes an additional 3,000 or 5,000 dollars as a stipend for full cost attendance can you imagine if you were a kid that was under-recruited as Senior and go to Toledo or UNLV and have a breakout Freshman season after that year. The MAC, Sun Belt, MWC, AAC, WAC, can't financially afford to give full-cost scholarships that would compete with P5 schools because these conferences make at most 2 million dollars a year for TV rights while the power 5 teams make a minimum 10 times more.

A lot of P5 schools would come and offer these kids a chance to transfer to a P5 school and get additional money to play there. That is why I can't see the P5 schools actually getting this autonomy. I mean a school like Rutgers would let the MAC and AAC do all their recruiting for them and then make any kids that breakout after their freshman year the ability to get paid.

 

[rosconey]

ncaa is a fraud and this shows just how much of one they are-

 

[orange79]

I just don't see how this stipend idea would be implemented. Is it only for FB? FB and hoops? Men only? Suppose it's only FB and mens BB. At $5K per scholarship student, that's $500K . I get that that might be doable. But does it extend to other sports? Where do you draw the line? How many scholarship athletes does SU have? Say it's 300 (just a WAG - no time to go through each team now). $1.5M. I know our newfound ACC riches would cover this, but is SU willing to spend this?

 

[Moontan]

Nobody's talking about $3-$5k... yet. Everything I've read uses a figures in the $2k range. These are funds to cover incidental expenses that are not covered by tuition, room, board and books. Think of laundry, a slice at the Varsity, clothing, cell phone, etc..

 

[Alsacs]

I just don't see how this stipend idea would be implemented. Is it only for FB? FB and hoops? Men only? Suppose it's only FB and mens BB. At $5K per scholarship student, that's $500K . I get that that might be doable. But does it extend to other sports? Where do you draw the line? How many scholarship athletes does SU have? Say it's 300 (just a WAG - no time to go through each team now). $1.5M. I know our newfound ACC riches would cover this, but is SU willing to spend this?

It would have to be EVERY student athlete or their would be Title IX and Equal Protection Lawsuits ups the wazoo. I think if a P5 school is pulling in 20 million dollars from TV money and 4-5 million from the college football playoff money and 2-4 million from NCAA credit money then paying out 6.5 million dollars in scholarship/stipend money would work for them, but non P-5 schools would be destroyed.

 

[Alsacs]

Nobody's talking about $3-$5k... yet. Everything I've read uses a figures in the $2k range. These are funds to cover incidental expenses that are not covered by tuition, room, board and books. Think of laundry, a slice at the Varsity, clothing, cell phone, etc..

The whole point of this autonomy is to allow the P5 to do whatever they want without interference from the NCAA. I don't think full cost will stop at 2k the P5 could decide to allow a 10k stipend after 3 years and the NCAA wouldn't be able to stop it. The P5 conferences will all be making north of 30 million dollars a year when you factor in TV money, College Football Playoff and Basketball Tournament money. They could afford to do it and bury the small conferences even more.

 

[BlazeOrange]

It would have to be EVERY student athlete or their would be Title IX and Equal Protection Lawsuits ups the wazoo.

I'd guess that just as some sports give out partial scholarships, stipends of varying amounts will be offered to recruits (even in FB and BB). To avoid litigation/loss of status, equal dollar amounts will need to be provided to the female athletes. I'm not sure how they currently even things out with football (hoops is a wash with mens and womens teams), but that is where you'll see an increase. Non-revenue mens sports will more or less get shorted, except for probably certain sports where a particular school has a tradition or desire to be at the top. Some, maybe many, schools may opt to make payments to all their athletes if they have the means, but it won't be required.

What it will do is open up another avenue to get recruits to flip - a diamond in the rough may initially be happy with a "regular" scholarship until someone else offers more of a stipend. Then his original choice will need to figure out if they can up the offer, etc. I see lots of promises being made and rescinded as coaches try to act as GMs on visits, then find that the school can't/won't cover the Title IX match or increase the budget for all of the money bantered about. Or kids misinterpreting what coaches say they will try to arrange for them.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Not sure I agree. There are more quality athletes than spots to occupy at P-5 schools. If they really want to rig it, they'd increase the number of spots too.

 

[Alsacs]

Rules I would like to see changed. All athletes on full-scholarship get to come back to their school if they leave early and finish their degree for free. Schools make millions of dollars off these athletes, and if they leave early and don't make it I would give the men/women who want to come back and finish their degrees without the means to do so have that ability to get a free education and finish the degree. Also, I would like it that if a kid leaves early for the NBA/NFL that scholarship goes away until the athlete's eligibility is extinguished. That means if you recruit all 1 and dones that is fine, but you lose that scholarship for 3 more years, or if a kid leaves early for the NFL draft that scholarship is gone for 1 year.

 

[Moontan]

I don't think full cost will stop at 2k the P5 could decide to allow a 10k stipend after 3 years and the NCAA wouldn't be able to stop it.

Yeah, that's not going to happen.

"Full cost" is "full cost", not "full cost plus $8k". Schools publish the expected "student expenses"/"full cost". The athletic scholarship stipend will track that figure with an agreed upon P-5 cap, which all schools will match.

Any gaming of this stipend figure (e.g. by increasing the "cost" figure) will have implications outside of the athletics programs.

 

[Alsacs]

Yeah, that's not going to happen.

"Full cost" is "full cost", not "full cost plus $8k". Schools publish the expected "student expenses"/"full cost". The athletic scholarship stipend will track that figure with an agreed upon P-5 cap, which all schools will match.

Any gaming of this stipend figure (e.g. by increasing the "cost" figure) will have implications outside of the athletics programs.

How would that not happen? If the P5 are given autonomy they could make the rules whatever the hell they want. Hell the P5 could allow autographs for money be legal and pay the kids the money that way. The schools could pay each kid 5k and then have the school sells those autographs and keep that money for themselves to cover the costs.

 

[Moontan]

How would that not happen?

"Full cost" is "full cost".

You're now changing the context to paying players to play. What's next, a return to 100+/unlimited scholarships?

There's a difference between giving the P-5 some leeway and removing all "rules". Many schools, including much of the ACC, could not compete in the latter environment.

 

[Alsacs]

"Full cost" is "full cost".

You're now changing the context to paying players to play. What's next, a return to 100+/unlimited scholarships?

There's a difference between giving the P-5 some leeway and removing all "rules". Many schools, including much of the ACC, could not compete in the latter environment.

I get what you are saying, but once the genie is let out of the bottle and the NCAA gives the P5 autonomy to run their programs without caring about the other conferences don't think their won't be more radical changes. The P5 aren't going to say this when they are fighting for autonomy they are only going to highlight the concerns that the non-P5 can't really argue with it. If the P5 get their autonomy their will be a push to compensate the athletes more and more to drive a wedge between the halves and halve-nots. Its why I am a bit concerned even though we are in a P5 conference.

 

[orange79]

Not sure I agree. There are more quality athletes than spots to occupy at P-5 schools. If they really want to rig it, they'd increase the number of spots too.

That was actually one of the items that would be under the auspices of the P5 in the proposed governance redesign document.

 

[orange79]

Not sure I agree. There are more quality athletes than spots to occupy at P-5 schools. If they really want to rig it, they'd increase the number of spots too.

In the attached file, see page 13. Under 'Examples of Shared Governance', one of the bullet items is 'Team scholarship limits in sports other than football'.

To me, this means that team scholarship limits in football would be totally under the control of the P5. As I said in a thread after this came out, it will be interesting to see what those FB limits go up to. Possibly a return to the hoarding of talent issues that used to exist? Regardless, if the scholarship limits increase, this would not be good for the have-nots, further widening the gap between us and them.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

In the attached file, see page 13. Under 'Examples of Shared Governance', one of the bullet items is 'Team scholarship limits in sports other than football'.

To me, this means that team scholarship limits in football would be totally under the control of the P5. As I said in a thread after this came out, it will be interesting to see what those FB limits go up to. Possibly a return to the hoarding of talent issues that used to exist? Regardless, if the scholarship limits increase, this would not be good for the have-nots, further widening the gap between us and them.

Thanks for being attentive to that and sharing it. Good stuff.

 

[Alsacs]

If the P5 are given autonomy as I said above the non P-5 teams are finished. Once the power is given the P5 will look at giving the kids bigger stipends, giving them the ability to sell autographs for $$$, and increase scholarship limits. However, scholarship distribution would still fall under Title IX which isn't an NCAA rule as much as its a law. Schools could give more football scholarships, but would have to reduce male scholarships in other sports to balance off the increase.

 

[Moontan]

I still don't buy your assumption of "autonomy". Taken to the extreme it would be the end of college athletics.

Most of the P-5 would fall into a group of 2nd class citizens, including SU. 2nd class is better than non-P-5, but it's still an undesirable spot to be in. Without a relatively even playing field (I realize that there really is no such thing) within the P-5 there will only be a handful of programs that will compete for the football championship, or make the playoffs. It would kill the sport... both competitively and financially.

 

[Crusty]

Not sure I agree. There are more quality athletes than spots to occupy at P-5 schools. If they really want to rig it, they'd increase the number of spots too.

They will.

 

[Toga]

How would that not happen? If the P5 are given autonomy they could make the rules whatever the hell they want. Hell the P5 could allow autographs for money be legal and pay the kids the money that way. The schools could pay each kid 5k and then have the school sells those autographs and keep that money for themselves to cover the costs.

Well hell - the NCAA apparently already allows J Football to sell autographs.