Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NCAA To Allow Power 5 Conferences To Pay Players

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Sierra View Post

    It becomes a title IX issue. For every male athlete that gets paid, a female athlete must be paid. The university will decide what women programs to include. Womens Basketball, Volleyball, Hockey, and (pick another sport) It's going to be more than a free sandwich or smoothie.
    My head hurts trying to imagine how the money will be distributed and say if the football team gets paid 50 million will that mean 50 million must go to the women?

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Hockeybuckeye View Post

      My head hurts trying to imagine how the money will be distributed and say if the football team gets paid 50 million will that mean 50 million must go to the women?
      Great question Hockeybuckeye... the talk has increased again, that the power 5 football schools will leave the NCAA. ITS UNSUSTAINABLE!!!

      Comment


      • #33
        Sierra - Title iX I believe will be the key reason why the P5 football playing schools will break out, at least their football programs. The players want to be treated as employees so they can get workmans comp, etc. (look at the current Johnson vrs NCAA lawsuit). It is much easier to simply split out the football program, created a 'company' around that licenses the school names, and treat it as a real minor league. The rest of the athletic department (maybe not mens or women's basketball since some of those upper program players will want to get paid as well) keep things the way they are. For athletes that want the education instead of pro experience, they will go to a non-P5 school. Still does not solve the NIL issue but I suspect once the main programs split out, the donators to NIL funds will follow that. I think again this is the 'least worst' outcome of all of this but may be too optimistic.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Cornholio View Post
          I don't see how they can now say the schollys are not "salary" with this new structure.
          Because, under existing tax law, they could be fairly easily structured such that they don't need to be included in gross income.

          Here is an analysis of exactly this question: https://lira.bc.edu/work/sc/801a2f33...2-16bb67bb84d7

          The quick summary is that it wouldn't be hard for universities to structure their athletic scholarships in ways that would keep the educational expenses exempted from taxes. The portions of scholarships that are for room and board are already taxable, in most instances. Only the value of the direct academic expenses, such as tuition and books, is excluded from taxation.

          It is a benefit received for service rendered.
          Not all benefits received for employment are taxable.

          The IRS and state tax authorities will want their hands on all of that.
          In 2014, Sen Richard Burr argued that, if scholarship athletes become employees, then their scholarships should be taxed. IRS Commissioner John Koskinen responded with a letter saying that this was incorrect.

          I fully suspect the power 5 will move to a model that has their paid athletic departments (football and men's, possibly women's basketball) be a new entity where they license the school names, all that, but the employees (i.e. athletes) will not be real students unless they get admitted through the general pool and pay like everyone else. Scholly can be part of that payment but it is 'income' like getting a check. There is a chance non-revenue sports could still survive in the current structure.
          I'm not saying that universities aren't short sighted enough to try something like this, but, over the long term, it's probably pretty stupid. College football and basketball only generate as much revenue as they do because they are a part of their universities. As you start to sever that connection, and turn them more explicitly into professional minor leagues, my guess is that the universities would learn why it is that the AHL and baseball's minor leagues generate a lot less revenue than college football and basketball.

          This looks like it will force the split between the power 5 and everyone else. I fully expect nearly all other non-power 5 to follow the ivy model of no scholly, benefits, etc., other than admission for playing the sport. Things are starting to get really out of hand here. NCAA sports works very well for everyone not playing power 5 football and basketball. I'm not sure why they can't just split that out and leave everything else alone.
          I have no idea why you would think that the Power 5 conferences paying their players has any impact at all on whether it makes sense for non-Power 5 schools to offer scholarships.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Cornholio View Post
            Sierra - Title iX I believe will be the key reason why the P5 football playing schools will break out, at least their football programs. The players want to be treated as employees so they can get workmans comp, etc. (look at the current Johnson vrs NCAA lawsuit). It is much easier to simply split out the football program, created a 'company' around that licenses the school names, and treat it as a real minor league. The rest of the athletic department (maybe not mens or women's basketball since some of those upper program players will want to get paid as well) keep things the way they are. For athletes that want the education instead of pro experience, they will go to a non-P5 school. Still does not solve the NIL issue but I suspect once the main programs split out, the donators to NIL funds will follow that. I think again this is the 'least worst' outcome of all of this but may be too optimistic.
            Well said, I pray for your optimism...

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Russell Jaslow View Post
              Just because this deal was signed by the Power 5, what's to stop other conferences and schools to follow a similar model?
              Because the settlement only changes the rules to allow for paying athletes at Power 5 schools. Everyone else is still operating under the old rules.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Cornholio View Post
                @Zed - if there is some kind of "must share with all sports" type of mandate, watch a lot of P5 schools drop a lot of sports. Football is everything to the athletic departments.
                There is no "must share with all sports" mandate in the settlement. Title IX might require that money be allocated to women's sports as well as men's, but it might not. It's not clear, so expect litigation on this question.

                This will still result unfortunately schools dropping sports since the football money will not be there . . .
                Why wouldn't the football money still be there? It won't just vanish. Unless the licensing that you speak of involves not actually charging the football and basketball teams any money, the athletic department would still be collecting revenue from the programs.

                One issue is that splitting football and basketball off from the athletic department would probably have Title IX implications. If those sports are not considered core educational activities, then Title IX wouldn't apply. This would lead to massive shakeups, because the schools would then be providing substantially more opportunities, as defined under the law, to women than they are to men, since the resources devoted to sports that are now exclusively money makers would no longer be included in the calculations. Probably. Again, expect litigation.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Sierra View Post

                  It becomes a title IX issue. For every male athlete that gets paid, a female athlete must be paid.
                  Maybe. That's actually unclear, and will likely depend upon exactly how things are structured, and the outcome of the inevitable lawsuits.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Hockeybuckeye View Post

                    I feel there has been a culture problem for many many years but it was the culture withing the NCAA and how they kept student athletes under their thumb in the name of amateurism while raking in billions over the years for itself.
                    I'm sorry, but I'm tired of this age old whining. The NCAA is run by the college presidents. They ultimately decide what the rules are and what the NCAA does. If they didn't like it, they could change the rules. The colleges are the ultimate "board of directors" for the NCAA and they are the ones who select the president.
                    Russell Jaslow
                    [Former] SUNYAC Correspondent
                    U.S. College Hockey Online

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Still Eeyore View Post
                      I'm not saying that universities aren't short sighted enough to try something like this, but, over the long term, it's probably pretty stupid. College football and basketball only generate as much revenue as they do because they are a part of their universities. As you start to sever that connection, and turn them more explicitly into professional minor leagues, my guess is that the universities would learn why it is that the AHL and baseball's minor leagues generate a lot less revenue than college football and basketball.
                      This is an interesting thought.
                      Russell Jaslow
                      [Former] SUNYAC Correspondent
                      U.S. College Hockey Online

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Still Eeyore View Post

                        Because the settlement only changes the rules to allow for paying athletes at Power 5 schools. Everyone else is still operating under the old rules.
                        I get that. Kind of. I just don't see how this stops the lawsuits from those outside the Power 5.
                        Russell Jaslow
                        [Former] SUNYAC Correspondent
                        U.S. College Hockey Online

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Russell Jaslow View Post

                          I get that. Kind of. I just don't see how this stops the lawsuits from those outside the Power 5.
                          What stops them is the lack of revenue. Not in the sense that they couldn't pay the athletes if they really wanted to, whether that's true or not. But a significant component of the various lawsuits is that, after a century of litigation, the courts have finally recognized that revenue generation is a significant element in how big athletic departments are run. If a conference is making decisions based upon hundreds of millions of dollar in TV contracts, it firmly establishes them as a commercial enterprise.

                          Antitrust law, which is what these cases have been decided upon, regulates economic activity. Below the Power 5, the schools will have a much easier time arguing that their sports programs aren't run on a commercial basis. Hence, they would win cases where the Power 5 schools lost them.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Not sure how this will all shakeout as I don't follow football all that much and it seems that is the genesis for much of this activity. Will be fun to watch though!

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Still Eeyore View Post


                              Antitrust law, which is what these cases have been decided upon, regulates economic activity. Below the Power 5, the schools will have a much easier time arguing that their sports programs aren't run on a commercial basis. Hence, they would win cases where the Power 5 schools lost them.
                              What you say makes sense but these days there's zero consistency in court rulings and how the law is applied and the appeal process seems endless. How many years will it take for any cases involving antitrust, Title IX or any others involving college athletes?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X