This will end college basketball as we know it

[MU88]

...and the ruin of our program. Here is the BCS proposal for restructuring D-1 athletics. In short, the BCS schools in the 5 major conferences can pay players, allow players to sign with agents, and have an unlimited number of coaches. The other D-1 schools can play in the NCAA tourney, but under a different set of rules. No top level recruits for the non-BCS schools. Get paid at Northwestern or Penn State versus nothing at MU and Georgetown. The non-BCS schools will all become one and done fodder in the tourney.

http://content.ncaa.org/ncaa-membership_and_outreach/Board_SC_on_Governance_Draft_System_Design_1.9.14_ CONVENTION_v_5C.pdf

[Goose85]

So now the Big 5 want to put in new NCAA rules that only allow themselves to pay players to ensure everyone else is bascially done?
So what happens if the Mountain West or the Big East say we want to pay players too - the big guys say you can't? Here come the law suits.

I also saw a point about schollarship limits in all sports but football. Really, the big time schools can now give out 110 or more football scholies if they want?
They really want to kill all college football but D3.

Basically - screw everyone else when it comes to football and basketball. But in all other sports we really need the rest of you so, you are included for those.

[Mark Miller]

Greed. More Greed. And even more Greed.

[MKE_GoldenEagleFan]

That would really be too bad, it would really hurt a lot of major universities across the US, including Marquette. This would really have a much larger impact than sports. I hope something happens to stop it, but I highly doubt it.

[Gato78]

Freedom to contract vs. anti-trust. Interesting legal questions. Will the networks let this happen? Will university presidents be OK running minor league sports operations? Can Congress PLEASE get involved?

[TheSultan]

I don't think this would necessarily preclude the BE from offering full-cost-of-attendance grants in aid. In fact, I thought that for the non-BCS conferences, it was going to be a case by case decision. The BE is going to have to keep up with that. That is the cost of doing business.

And the "lack of scholarship limits in sports other than football," was under what would be applicable for all D1 schools. In other words, the BCS schools can set scholarship limitations different from those in the rest of D1. That doesn't necessarily mean that there would be no scholarship limits.

[TheSultan]

Freedom to contract vs. anti-trust. Interesting legal questions. Will the networks let this happen? Will university presidents be OK running minor league sports operations? Can Congress PLEASE get involved?


The answers...

1. I don't see how this affects the networks. This isn't going to impact their ratings significantly.
2. They already do...and have for years.
3. Ugh...no.

Let's really not get too hyperbolic about this. Increasing the value of a scholarship from its current "academic costs" to "full cost of attendance" isn't substantial. I have been arguing that those should be the value of the scholarships all along. As long as the BE is allowed to do this, the BE can certainly afford it. And frankly if it gets some of the poorer conferences to drop to D2, I am all for it.

[MayorBeluga]

Again, why are college conferences and atheltic departments allowed to retain their tax free status?

[TheSultan]

Again, why are college conferences and atheltic departments allowed to retain their tax free status?


Now that is a different question entirely. Having to deal with unrelated business income as a regular part of my job, I can say that I cannot believe that college athletics is not considered "unrelated" to the core mission of the institution.

[IWB]

I don't understand why forcing the smaller conferences to drop to D2 would be a good thing?

Part of this includes allowing players to sign with agents? Are they high? Handlers, street agents and full agents are already doing anything they can to get their hands on these guys, can you imagine what it would be like if these guys were out in the open? Imagine a college practice for Kentucky - every player's agent would have to be there, constantly telling coaches how their players should and shouldn't be used. You would have a guy like Burton, who would have signed before he got to MU, but I guy like Davante? Comes in without one, plays well then you suddenly have every street agent in the country on your campus trying to land him.

Then what about the programs working with agents? If you sing with agent X, we'll get you to Kentucky or UNC. Don't sign with us and you will have no shot at those schools.

This would be a disaster.

[Goose85]

I wonder if the Big 5 conferences may be effectively killing the golden goose here.

Alabama, LSU, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Texas, etc can’t be worried about competing with the other five FBS football conferences, so why go to these lengths to knock the Boise State’s down a peg?

Why are they in such a rush to pay players and add more football scholies? Currently BCS gets 85 and FCS gets 65. I can only imagine the BCS schools want to increase football schollies and maybe basketball too so the Big East conferences of the world are at a disadvantage.

Is the product really better if the eliminate the other five FBS conferences and make a much bigger FCS type level of play? If there becomes some type of D1 expansion with the five FBS conferences that are being kicked out, and the top FCS level conferences, then what happens when the Big 5 don’t have those buy games they so depend on?

They are now setting up a more expensive model for themselves (millions more in tuition expense just for football) that may not result in any increased revenue. I’d guess all athletes will need to be paid in the same manner. Any expansion of football scholies will need to be offset with womens programs.

What if attendance begins to dip? What if media rights money declines? College football is as popular as ever, but what if it has hit the peak?

What if the other schools stop scheduling the Big 5 schools in the non football / basketball sports as a big screw you type move?

The Big 5 already have it all, so I don’t see the need to go to this extreme.

[Goose85]

I don't understand why forcing the smaller conferences to drop to D2 would be a good thing?

Part of this includes allowing players to sign with agents? Are they high? Handlers, street agents and full agents are already doing anything they can to get their hands on these guys, can you imagine what it would be like if these guys were out in the open? Imagine a college practice for Kentucky - every player's agent would have to be there, constantly telling coaches how their players should and shouldn't be used. You would have a guy like Burton, who would have signed before he got to MU, but I guy like Davante? Comes in without one, plays well then you suddenly have every street agent in the country on your campus trying to land him.

Then what about the programs working with agents? If you sing with agent X, we'll get you to Kentucky or UNC. Don't sign with us and you will have no shot at those schools.

This would be a disaster.

Don't forget the block of time each year where they can pursue other opportunities - in other words jobs. Hey, go to play football at LSU and sign with this "advisor" and he will get you a job paying $100K for those two months.

[Gato78]

This is 100% correct. Agents would control college sports. This would be a total disaster.




Then what about the programs working with agents? If you sing with agent X, we'll get you to Kentucky or UNC. Don't sign with us and you will have no shot at those schools.

This would be a disaster.

[Markedman]

So the NCAA is going to tell some member schools that they can't pay athletes but expect them to compete with schools that can?

I mean seriously? If some schools can't or don't want to pay a stipend for cost of attendance fine but for schools like the Big East or the AAC that can clearly afford to do it this is ridiculous.

I can't believe they would just sit by and let it happen.....http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaa-poised-to-create-separate-division-for-sec--big-ten--acc--pac-12--big-12-212725211.html?soc_src=mediacontentstory

[WindyCityGoldenEagle]

[QUOTE=Goose85;52261]
Is the product really better if the eliminate the other five FBS conferences and make a much bigger FCS type level of play? If there becomes some type of D1 expansion with the five FBS conferences that are being kicked out, and the top FCS level conferences, then what happens when the Big 5 don’t have those buy games they so depend on?QUOTE]

Just a comment on this point, regarding football schools, I actually think the product from a fan entertainment standoint would be better. I would much rather watch MSU vs Vandy (crappy SEC school) than MSU vs Florida Atlantic. Dont you think the majority of the viewing public would feel this way too? Wouldnt the viewer prefer to avoid having to watch the typical bye games that occur at the begining of the season?

[IWB]

Yes, but will a school like Vandy always want to be the whipping boy? They need buy games too, as does Northwestern. Also, those 4 preseason buy games are always at home. Now they are split. Losing two home games for a school like Wisconsin is MILLIONS of dollars. Average ticket price is $42.

$3,360,000 per game just in ticket sales.
Then there are concessions.
Don't forget about seat licenses.
Merchandise sales.

You are looking at over $5 million per home game. Get rid of the buy games, and you drop $10 million per season. Is that worth it?

[Alan Bykowski, "brewcity77"]

On my phone so I haven't read the full proposal, but why would this preclude the big guys from buy games? If they are still going to let the non-Big 5 into the Dance, I figure that indicates they're still willing to play them. Bucky can still sell tickets to their game against Eastwestern Dakota A&M, but the power balance is going to be shifted that much more.

Still a death knell for college sports as we know it if it happens, especially the agent involvement.

[WindyCityGoldenEagle]

Yes, but will a school like Vandy always want to be the whipping boy? They need buy games too, as does Northwestern. Also, those 4 preseason buy games are always at home. Now they are split. Losing two home games for a school like Wisconsin is MILLIONS of dollars. Average ticket price is $42.

$3,360,000 per game just in ticket sales.
Then there are concessions.
Don't forget about seat licenses.
Merchandise sales.

You are looking at over $5 million per home game. Get rid of the buy games, and you drop $10 million per season. Is that worth it?

Good points. How much would the new TV package offset this though?

[Gato78]

College sports needs to commit to the concept of amateurism. The concept of the student-athlete would be toast. I am dead serious: I do not know if I want Marquette U involved in this type of college athletics. NCAA gets a lot of criticism but usually the NCAA decision making is driven by either amateurism or scholastics. Whenever an NCAA rule seems stupid, it can usually be better understood through those lenses. Paying players and having agents involved will ruin college athletics. I will be very interested in seeing how Notre Dame responds to these proposals based on its student-athlete model.

[TheSultan]

So the NCAA is going to tell some member schools that they can't pay athletes but expect them to compete with schools that can?

They aren't "paying athletes." They are increasing the value of the scholarship. It is my understanding that other conferences will be allowed to do the same.

[TheSultan]

I don't understand why forcing the smaller conferences to drop to D2 would be a good thing?


There are too many bad d1 schools who can't afford to play at that level. I would rather those schools / conferences go elsewhere.

[TheSultan]

College sports needs to commit to the concept of amateurism. The concept of the student-athlete would be toast. I am dead serious: I do not know if I want Marquette U involved in this type of college athletics. NCAA gets a lot of criticism but usually the NCAA decision making is driven by either amateurism or scholastics. Whenever an NCAA rule seems stupid, it can usually be better understood through those lenses. Paying players and having agents involved will ruin college athletics. I will be very interested in seeing how Notre Dame responds to these proposals based on its student-athlete model.


You do realize *why* the NCAA is dedicated to the concept of amateurism right? It certainly isn't out of the goodness of their heart. I mean, why do you think they are only willing to go to the "cost of attendance" scholarships?

[Gato78]

Sultan, I think NCAA gets it right most of the time. I think guys like Vitale and Bilas are wrong most of the time. Dickie railed on NCAA over the kid from UNC and Dickie was wrong. Student-athlete is the key. Professional amateurs is a joke.

[Goose85]

You do realize *why* the NCAA is dedicated to the concept of amateurism right? It certainly isn't out of the goodness of their heart. I mean, why do you think they are only willing to go to the "cost of attendance" scholarships?

The cost of attendance is what, paying for travel back home? A few bucks a week for extra meals?
I will be very interested to see what that becomes. These players already are given clothes, food, books tuition, residence, etc. is it cash, or plane tickets or what?


The Big 10 is pushing to eliminate FCS games. If the other 5 FBS conferences join with top level FCS conferences, then who is left to play if the Big 10 doesn't want FCS games.

Someone indicated they would rather watch MSU v. Vandy than a team from the other 5 FBS conferences. But coaches don't like that out of the gate type game. TV contracts are conference games generally, so if the money is there nothing is stopping teams from doing that now.

[TheSultan]

The cost of attendance is what, paying for travel back home? A few bucks a week for extra meals?
I will be very interested to see what that becomes. These players already are given clothes, food, books tuition, residence, etc. is it cash, or plane tickets or what?


The Big 10 is pushing to eliminate FCS games. If the other 5 FBS conferences join with top level FCS conferences, then who is left to play if the Big 10 doesn't want FCS games.

Someone indicated they would rather watch MSU v. Vandy than a team from the other 5 FBS conferences. But coaches don't like that out of the gate type game. TV contracts are conference games generally, so if the money is there nothing is stopping teams from doing that now.



If they offer more than the "cost of attendance," it has to be considered income per current IRS rules. For instance, Marquette can (and does) offer full cost of attendance academic scholarships, but if they offer one dollar more than that, they have to pay taxes. The reason they don't want to do that in the case of athletic scholarships is because they could easily be considered employees...and entitled to workman's compensation, etc. that schools have not had to provide to its athletes.

If the B10 eliminates FCS non-confererence games, there are all sorts of FBS conferences that aren't in the Big 5. (MAC, CUSA, MWC, etc.)

[Gato78]

Sultan: what about allowing agents into the mix? There is a disgusting underbelly of college basketball now--add agents to the mix?

[TheSultan]

Sultan: what about allowing agents into the mix? There is a disgusting underbelly of college basketball now--add agents to the mix?


It depends on the framework in which they are allowed to operate. Might actually be a good thing if it kept above board because contacts between agents and players already exist...it just exists where it can't be seen or monitored.

And basically, I just disagree with you on the concept of amateaurism in general. I think it is a relic of an era that no longer exists. It wouldn't bother me if Marquette players were getting extra money.

[Gato78]

We will never agree. The goal is an education, not to fill television schedules or prep kids for NBA rosters.

[Goose85]

If they offer more than the "cost of attendance," it has to be considered income per current IRS rules. For instance, Marquette can (and does) offer full cost of attendance academic scholarships, but if they offer one dollar more than that, they have to pay taxes. The reason they don't want to do that in the case of athletic scholarships is because they could easily be considered employees...and entitled to workman's compensation, etc. that schools have not had to provide to its athletes.

If the B10 eliminates FCS non-confererence games, there are all sorts of FBS conferences that aren't in the Big 5. (MAC, CUSA, MWC, etc.)

Not if the eliminate the other 5 FBS conferences from FBS like they seem to be proposing by having rules for just the big 5

[TheSultan]

Not if the eliminate the other 5 FBS conferences from FBS like they seem to be proposing by having rules for just the big 5


That's not what's happening.

[TheSultan]

We will never agree. The goal is an education, not to fill television schedules or prep kids for NBA rosters.


No reason you can't do all three.

[Markedman]

If the goal was just education they wouldn't be paying coaches multi-million dollars a year......


We will never agree. The goal is an education, not to fill television schedules or prep kids for NBA rosters.

[Gato78]

Balance is needed.

[TheSultan]

Balance is needed.


I don't really even know what that means. Balance is certainly needed. I just don't think that you can automatically say that cost of attendance scholarships and some type of agent involvement means it is all of the sudden out of balance.

To Markedman's point, college's can throw all of this money at coaches and on infrastructure that has nothing to do with education, and now that players get a bit more it is out of balance?