Looks like power 5 conferences are going to get their autonomy from the other 27 conferences

[Madbiker]

The schools won't pay full cost scholarships to ALL SPORTS. The schools legal department have the rational basis defense as to why football and basketball players will get the full cost scholarships for their universities because they are responsible for the TV revenue those college generate because of FB/BB money. I am sure a men's hockey player or women's lacrosse player at a P5 conference may file a lawsuit asking for the full-cost scholarship just to see if they can get it, but the courts would have to be a very liberal judge IMO to rule in favor of those athletes. A men's or women's soccer player at North Carolina, Alabama, UCLA, Texas, Syracuse are getting a free education in exchange for playing their sport I doubt any players leave college early to play professional sports. The schools are LOSING money on these sports thus the athletes are getting the benefit of bargin in these sports. In football/basketball universities are PROFITING millions on these athletes and because of NCAA rules can't give their athletes anything, but academic scholarships this autonomy allows these P5 conferences to give these athletes stipends, free scholarships if they leave early to come back, medical coverage after their playing days etc.

This autonomy helps P5 football players because they will be getting more of the pie because they are those ones generating the increase in the P5 conferences pie. It is fair IMO. Basketball players who produce revenue are going to benefit as well, but Men's Volleyball or Women's Softball aren't producing profits so I don't think they will or should get these increased benefits.

I agree with the rationale you lay out here. But IMO there will be dozens of lawsuits filed by scholarship athletes in non revenue sports and somewhere some court is going to give them a win...in fact IMO they will win the majority of the suites. I don't believe the federal government under liberal control will allow this type of "discrimination". Major change is coming that will dramatically alter college athletics and I would not be surprised if in the process all non-revenue sports are eventually eliminated...the unintended consequence being to kill the golden goose for non revenue sport scholarships.

 

[Madbiker]

Teams outside of the P5 that are in the MWC/AAC/MAC/Sun Belt/WAC will either move to D-1AA, continue their current affiliation is cannon fodder for the P5, or lose a crap load of money to give the same benefits as the P5 will offer their players.

Will schools in the non P5 in the MWC , AAC be allowed to offer the same amenities as the P5 if they want to? It's not clear if the NCAA will allow that. It would have to be voted on by the D1 non P5 conferences and I can't see it passing. How can you have a D1 (non P5) where some conferences are playing by different rules?

 

[Alsacs]

Will schools in the non P5 in the MWC , AAC be allowed to offer the same amenities as the P5 if they want to? It's not clear if the NCAA will allow that. It would have to be voted on by the D1 non P5 conferences and I can't see it passing. How can you have a D1 (non P5) where some conferences are playing by different rules?

The rules won't prohibit the non-P5 from playing by the P5 rules that is the definition of anti-trust legislation. The rules passed by the P5 will just make financially unattainable for the AAC/MWC/Sun Belt/MAC/WAC schools from being able to afford the rules that the P5 wants to pass. If the P5 want to give a 5k stipend and medical coverage for like that it would cost about 800k-millions of dollars depending on the cost of medical coverage annually. The P5 have TV contracts in excess of 20 million dollars a year and can afford these costs. Non P5 conferences get 2-5 million dollars a year. They would have to pay their coaching staffs, full-cost scholarships and PRAY TO BREAK EVEN. The non P5 teams won't be able to afford those costs and not hemorrhage money.

 

[General20]

With the power conferences being able to provide perks that smaller conferences cannot AND with the NBA forcing kids to stay in college until they are twenty, you are going to see a HUGE divide grow between power conferences and everybody else. In time, power conferences teams will be the only "division 1" teams and only play each other in the regular season, which is the way it should be.

I heard Jake Crouthamel talk about this decades ago (sometime in the 90's). He said Syracuse had to join the ACC back then because the power conferences were going to consolidate all the power and split away from everybody else, and if you were not included you were not going to have a relevant sports program.

Its a slow process but its happening, and college sports as a whole will be better off when it does.

 

[SU2NASA]

Basketball only? Give me 4 NCs in 15 years and I'll move to the America East till I die.

All sports.

And football >>>>>>>>> basketball

 

[orange79]

Basketball only? Give me 4 NCs in 15 years and I'll move to the America East till I die.

Yikes! Glad you don't have to.

 

[HeaterCuse22]

I'd take their NC and their success the past decade in basketball, but we can't go backwards. So looking forward, no way no how would I trade places with them.

Looking forward, except when it comes to jerseys right bees?

PS Im just breakin your balls.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Alsacs I still don't understand how this makes it financially doable if you have to pay for all sports. You know more about this stuff then I do and it just doesn't add up to me...ironically you said house of cards and that does seem fitting as I'm waiting for Frank Underwood to be involved somehow.

I think the idea is, the Power 5 see the writing on the wall - the union movement, the player name and likeness rights, the video game lawsuit. If they don't do something like this soon to make P5 athletes "whole", then the shirt will hit the fan.

 

[rrlbees]

Looking forward, except when it comes to jerseys right bees?

PS Im just breakin your balls.

Just keep the schools color. The rest is details.

 

[Hoo's That]

Because the men's Olympic sports and the women's sports other than bball give partial scholarships, I would assume that the schools would be able to give that proportion of the "full cost of attendance" money. The football and all the bball players would get full stipends and, for example, a MLax player on a 50% scholarhip would get 50% of the stipend. The schools might be able to get away with giving stipends only to football and both bball teams and "any other sport that decides to change their rules and give only full scholarships" (none will) to get a pass on Title IX.

 

[RandygoCuse]

I wonder how this will effect/affect (pick one I can never remember the right one) admissions.

I think "affect" is the verb

 

[timkay99]

The rules won't prohibit the non-P5 from playing by the P5 rules that is the definition of anti-trust legislation. The rules passed by the P5 will just make financially unattainable for the AAC/MWC/Sun Belt/MAC/WAC schools from being able to afford the rules that the P5 wants to pass. If the P5 want to give a 5k stipend and medical coverage for like that it would cost about 800k-millions of dollars depending on the cost of medical coverage annually. The P5 have TV contracts in excess of 20 million dollars a year and can afford these costs. Non P5 conferences get 2-5 million dollars a year. They would have to pay their coaching staffs, full-cost scholarships and PRAY TO BREAK EVEN. The non P5 teams won't be able to afford those costs and not hemorrhage money.

Given ESPN and its relationship with college baseball, baseball will likely be a part of any type of compensation for athletes, as this is a definite moneymaker for athletic departments with good teams (schools pay 11.7 scholarship dollars). So, any SEC team that draws about 10,000 fans makes significant money based on their investment with scholarship dollars. Also, given their relationship with ESPN, women's basketball probably has an argument for money.

 

[Alsacs]

Given ESPN and its relationship with college baseball, baseball will likely be a part of any type of compensation for athletes, as this is a definite moneymaker for athletic departments with good teams (schools pay 11.7 scholarship dollars). So, any SEC team that draws about 10,000 fans makes significant money based on their investment with scholarship dollars. Also, given their relationship with ESPN, women's basketball probably has an argument for money.

ESPN pays the NCAA 55 million dollars for the NCAA Women's Basketball and 20 other NCAA Championships including the College World Series.
http://content.usatoday.com/communi...es-14-year-deal-with-cbsturner/1#.U1rEC1c-t-w
http://content.usatoday.com/communi...es-14-year-deal-with-cbsturner/1#.U1rEC1c-t-w

That's atop a current agreement with ESPN for the women's basketball tournament, College World Series and 20 other NCAA championships worth $55 million over the next three years. Negotiations are underway for the rights to 60-plus other NCAA championships.

Thus, the NCAA gets 771 million a year from JUST the Men's Basketball Tournament from Turner/CBS and only 55 million for the Women's tournament and the College Baseball WS, College Softball WS.

Those sports even with the 55 million dollars when divided among the conferences DOES NOT allow schools to generate profits. I am sure their outlier programs in every sport that are profitable like UConn women's BB, Tennessee women's BB, LSU baseball, but schools won't keep those sports IMO if those kids are going to get full cost benefits because they are subsidized by P5 TV money and College Football/men's basketball.

 

[BallHugger]

Would you trade places with UConn?

Didn't think so.

If you told me right now I'd get to experience 4 championships in 15 years but I'd be stuck in the AAC, I'd do it in a heartbeat. There's no better feeling as a fan than riding the wave and being the last one standing. They've done it 4 times, including 2 that fell out of the sky cinderalla style.

to be honest though, while I like football, I'm more of a hoops fan and quite frankly I can't get too ramped up about the football team when we will likely never win a national championship in football. I prefer the teams I watch to have a shot and winning a championship. i might get killed for that, but sorry. So while football drives the bus, I don't mind being in the back with hoops where you have a shot at winning it all if you're in the Northeast. [duck]
.

 

[pfister1]

Its a slow process but its happening, and college sports as a whole will be better off when it does.

I'm not sure how this is going to make college sports better. I have never been a big believer that kids who are preparing for a career as a professional athlete should go to college to get that training without any real intent to get the traditional education that colleges were established to provide.

For the one and dones and all the other kids that aren't there for an education their should be professional developmental leagues run by the professional sports leagues.

If you took the kids that have no intention of playing 4 years out of the equation entirely there might be a drop off in elite talent in the college game, but it might be offset by having more seasoned players playing. I don't think there would be a long term drop off in the product.

 

[AlaskaSU]

The P5 already control the Division 1 FB right now. This doesn't open up more cash for the P5 it just allows them to give their football players more money/advantages and get rid of this union crap/movement. If football/basketball players who generate millions of dollars for universities get more than just academic scholarship it will keep the NCAA House of Cards from completely falling over. I would assume any sport where the school is making any money would get these advantages as well. However, these full cost scholarships would probably get challenged by a Title IX attorney, but they would lose because those sports don't generate profits and thus the academic scholarships are fair compensate. I think this argument would pass a rational basis test by any judge would wasn't completely biased.

Since when do activist judges care about anything but their own agenda?

 

[Alsacs]

Since when do activist judges care about anything but their own agenda?

Judges don't like to get overturned on appeal it affects their ability to be perceived as good. In states where judges are elected it matters even more. In the federal courts and states were judges are appointed it doesn't hurt them as much, but judges don't like to get overturned.