Photo

EDIT: Future of College Sports


  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#41 CantonJester

CantonJester

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,139 posts

Posted 06 February 2024 - 11:49 AM


Just put all the old conferences back the way they were for everything but football.

 

Perhaps. Or just let the Big Ten and the SEC remove themselves from the NCAA entirely. The ACC would immediately shed its west coast teams (as I would assume other larger conferences reduce their own footprints). 

 

Let the athletes who choose the Big Ten or SEC worry about studying at some drop pod in Tumbleweed, Kansas because it’s equidistance relative to their team schedules. 



#42 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 19,681 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 06 February 2024 - 06:38 PM

You may have read yesterday that the NCAA is investigating Tennessee football for violations of NIL policies (which the Vols have, along with practically everyone else). Now the attorneys general for Tennessee and Virginia have filed a motion in federal court for a TRO to prohibit the NCAA from enforcing NIL policies. I'm not sure that this is The Big One (the case that blows up amateurism in college sports), but we're getting very close.

 

https://twitter.com/...732371764265211


The TRO was denied, so for now the NCAA can enforce its NIL rules. However, the judge also stated the Plaintiffs (Tennessee) are “likely to succeed” based on the merits of their claim under antitrust laws.



#43 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 19,681 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 17 April 2024 - 05:17 PM

Late last year a federal judge in WV issued a preliminary injunction against the NCAA in enforcing its relatively new "only one free transfer for undergrads" policy. Rather than fight it in court it appears the NCAA will throw in the towel on that one, as the D-1 Council voted today to approve unlimited transfers without penalty (provided the player is in good academic standing with the school he/she is departing). It's not official yet, the NCAA's executive board has to vote on it, but it almost certainly will be soon enough.



#44 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 19,681 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 18 April 2024 - 12:39 PM

Virginia has enacted a law that will allow schools in the state to directly pay athletes for NIL. It goes into effect July 1.

 

https://www.espn.com...ay-athletes-nil



#45 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 19,681 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 29 April 2024 - 02:08 PM

ESPN: UAB becomes first Division I football team to join players association



#46 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 19,681 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 29 April 2024 - 11:07 PM

ESPN: College sports leaders in deep talks to settle NIL antitrust case vs NCAA

 

This is what's colloquially referred to as the House class-action lawsuit seeking damages for lost NIL money before the NCAA allowed it in 2021. If the class prevailed in trial it could cost the NCAA and DI schools as much as $4B, hence they are very interested in seeking a settlement. As there is also an injunctive class, any settlement is expected to include a framework for future revenue sharing, quite possible via schools directly paying athletes for rights to their NIL.



#47 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 19,681 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 06 May 2024 - 10:25 AM

The College Football Players Association (CFBPA), which is seeking to represent all college athletes, aims to lobby Congress for the ability to collectively bargain on behalf of college athletes without employment status. Both players and schools now appear willing to negotiate revenue sharing and other controls, but the schools are still dead-set against players as employees, and it sounds like players don’t necessarily want that either. Stay tuned….it was a painfully slow journey to get here, but things seem to be ramping up quickly to reach the endgame.

 

https://www.on3.com/...f-pivotal-week/

 

EDIT: Just to add, the reason they need Congress’ help is that currently there is no mechanism for the sides to collectively bargain without players being employees. Hopefully with both sides appearing to have found a good deal of common ground (thanks to a combo of antitrust lawsuits and state laws) Congress will be more willing and able to help out versus before when it was just the NCAA doing all the lobbying.



#48 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 19,681 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 23 May 2024 - 09:05 PM

ESPN: NCAA, Power 5 agree to deal that will let schools pay players

 

If enacted this settlement would have the NCAA reimburse pre-NIL era athletes $2.7B. That money would come from a combination of cash on hand, insurance and future earnings (primarily from March Madness). Additionally schools would be allowed to share up to $20M annually per school with athletes.

 

This was voted on and negotiated by the NCAA and Power 5 conferences. The non-FBS and non football playing conferences (i.e. Big East) are pretty unhappy, as they will see their March Madness payouts reduced despite not being named defendants in the lawsuit that led to this settlement.



#49 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 19,681 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 23 May 2024 - 10:58 PM

This settlement, and there's still a ways to go before everything is finalized, will likely only provide a temporary reprieve from lawsuits. It does satisfy the NCAA's #1 tormentor of late, Jeffrey Kessler. But I don't believe this provides them long term protection from future antitrust suits, and since the NCAA's statement on this settlement still mentions wanting help from Congress, it tells me they know it doesn't help them long term either. And none of this covers the several existing lawsuits out there that directly challenge the stance that college athletes are not employees and that they are allowed to unionize.

 

Still, the NCAA and its biggest members just voted to directly pay athletes. That's pretty historic.



#50 Chris B

Chris B

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 22,266 posts
  • LocationBaltimore, MD

Posted 24 May 2024 - 05:34 AM

Absolute joke that the non-football playing conferences/schools are subsidizing the football conferences in this matter.

#51 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 19,681 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 24 May 2024 - 09:21 AM

Absolute joke that the non-football playing conferences/schools are subsidizing the football conferences in this matter.


To be fair, the NCAA was a named defendant in the suit, and the non football conferences do receive NCAA payouts. Someone on X threw together a bar chart and showed how much the non FBS and non football conferences would see their payout reduced vs what they normally get paid based on how many tournament units they earn, and the only one I could see that has a reasonable complaint is the Big East. I think the others are mad just because they feel like they didn’t have a seat at the table.

#52 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 157,067 posts

Posted 24 May 2024 - 09:38 AM

CBS Sports: House v. NCAA settlement winners and losers: Athletes take monumental step, non-revenue sports at risk

https://www.cbssport...sports-at-risk/



#53 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 19,681 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 24 May 2024 - 09:53 AM

Another potential loser: The US Olympic team. So many Olympic athletes come through college sports programs that if many of them go away, it’s going to have a noticeable effect at the Games.

#54 Chris B

Chris B

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 22,266 posts
  • LocationBaltimore, MD

Posted 24 May 2024 - 08:10 PM

To be fair, the NCAA was a named defendant in the suit, and the non football conferences do receive NCAA payouts. Someone on X threw together a bar chart and showed how much the non FBS and non football conferences would see their payout reduced vs what they normally get paid based on how many tournament units they earn, and the only one I could see that has a reasonable complaint is the Big East. I think the others are mad just because they feel like they didn’t have a seat at the table.


For sure.

I’m obviously biased.

#55 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 61,410 posts

Posted 30 May 2024 - 05:36 PM

In a very obvious and inevitable move, the NCAA just agreed to permanently end all transfer restrictions.  Also will give an extra year of eligibility to any players who transferred and sat out a season in the recent past.  Good for the students, bad for continuity.

 

It'll be interesting to see if the combination of this change and the change to allow teams to pay players directly leads to multi-year contractual agreements, thereby eliminating some of the transfers and concerns of new faces in new places every year.



#56 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 19,681 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 30 May 2024 - 08:00 PM

It'll be interesting to see if the combination of this change and the change to allow teams to pay players directly leads to multi-year contractual agreements, thereby eliminating some of the transfers and concerns of new faces in new places every year.

 

That's my hope, but I doubt we get there solely as a result the settlement agreement on the 3 antitrust lawsuits. A world where athletes could be contractually bound to the schools would be the sort of thing they have to collectively bargain...and that would require some form of legislation from Congress that would allow them to do that without the players being classified as employees. Same thing with the ~$20M per school limit they will be permitted to share, which is really just a salary cap in disguise. The NCAA can't just unilaterally impose that, and I'm not sure how or if that would pass muster with the judge overseeing the antitrust suit. This also isn't, or at least legally shouldn't be, the end of NIL deals either. So in that regard the schools with monied boosters motivated to win will still go above and beyond to get the players they want.

 

There are so many details left to be worked out on this I don't want to get too far ahead of my skis, but based just on the framework that has been publicized I don't think this shields the NCAA and schools from future antitrust suits at all. There are also still pending cases out there related to whether athletes should be classified as employees and unionization that have to be resolved. I think the chaos is going to be around for a while longer.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Our Sponsors


 width=