NCAA and Prig5 anti trust settlement

[ericsaid]

Important to remember that this settlement does not do away with payments from collectives. This is revenue sharing by the school. The collectives will still exist.

Also have heard some legal experts who believe Title IX does not apply to revenue sharing. It deals with equal opportunity for education not sharing athletic revenues. It will be an interesting debate.

What this will do is create an employment model for athletes and those athletes will be able to sign endorsement deals. The athletes will not be students and that will be the next lawsuit to be filed.

[VNova]

Important to remember that this settlement does not do away with payments from collectives. This is revenue sharing by the school. The collectives will still exist.

Also have heard some legal experts who believe Title IX does not apply to revenue sharing. It deals with equal opportunity for education not sharing athletic revenues. It will be an interesting debate.

That’s a great point about Title IX. As long as there are lawyers interested in lawyering then I wouldn’t discount some sort of tie in. The other side to that is that you have to pay female athletes now for NIl for promotional athletic events. It’s going to get interesting for sure.

Title IX isn’t just interesting here. The way the law is written, I really wouldn’t be surprised if the only way to keep up was to cut all men’s sports but football and then have three or four women’s sports. Women will have to be paid equal to men, regardless of their contribution to the revenue being shared.

It’s kind of like a communist or socialist economic system while the arguments in court were purely about Free Markets and monopolies.

Convoluted doesn’t begin to cover it. I’m of the opinion that, absent any other changes, App would continue to get many of the same players that they always would have gotten, and the big boys will get what they get.

My question comes into employment. How can you mandate that an employee also be a student? How can you mandate eligibility rules? How can you limit the number of years that someone can work?


This is going to turn into a new professional league where football teams are “sponsored” by universities. It will be the Michigan Wolverines sponsored by the University of Michigan. Or the Boise Broncos sponsored by Boise State University. Or the Appalachian Mountain Mountaineers sponsored by Appalachian State University.


These teams will be made up of employees and it will no longer be a requirement to be a student. The lack of intestinal fortitude by judges ruling on these cases blows my mind.

The same way you handle student positions at the university. Graduate research and teaching assistant jobs, tutors, some Rec Center jobs, some administrative across the various departments, etc. I had a part time job with (at the time called) Office of Multicultural Student Development and was a tutor. I had to be a student to hold those jobs. If those jobs can be student-only, then so can athletics.

[hapapp]

If schools are allowed to now work with their collectives, then they might be able to structure the revenue sharing through the collectives with NIL deals, which currently aren't subject to Title IX. This, in the end, likely will be resolved in court. Does Title IX require equal payment, or equal opportunities to receive the payment?

[appdaze]

If schools are allowed to now work with their collectives, then they might be able to structure the revenue sharing through the collectives with NIL deals, which currently aren't subject to Title IX. This, in the end, likely will be resolved in court. Does Title IX require equal payment, or equal opportunities to receive the payment?

Collectives are private money. Mixing that with institutional money would get even messier, and the gov/IRS might have something to say about that, as well as opening up schools to fraud by collectives.

[AtlAppMan]

Once this model goes into effect the players are only going to be paid employees with no requirements on being a student or academics. It will be a professional sports team/business (just like NFL/MLB/NBA) owned by the school. Nothing more. Eventually the owners may be a conglomerate of people that take over from the school to own and manage it. The only relationship to school will be the name only. No allegence to the school. Maybe teams will move form school to school like major league teams move to other cities based on incentives from local governments.

I hate it and this is not what “college sports” were ever about.

[hapapp]

I have no idea what things will eventually turn out to be as a result of this settlement and it is interesting to see everyone's speculation. However, no one really knows what things will look like. I think the only consensus is that it won't likely be good for college athletics.

[AppWyo]

Once this model goes into effect the players are only going to be paid employees with no requirements on being a student or academics. It will be a professional sports team/business (just like NFL/MLB/NBA) owned by the school. Nothing more. Eventually the owners may be a conglomerate of people that take over from the school to own and manage it. The only relationship to school will be the name only. No allegence to the school. Maybe teams will move form school to school like major league teams move to other cities based on incentives from local governments.

I hate it and this is not what “college sports” were ever about.

I think that schools like Alabama, The Ohio State, Michigan, USC, Georgia, the list goes on and on already have that where the students never even see the campus at all, because there is a seperate system set up by the university for their athletes, some even have majors that are only for athletes. I really think all these rule changes are really about the autonomous schools keeping their athletes and not letting them leave to go play for their rivals. As well as not leaving and going to the nonautonomous schools, rather than taking nonautonomous schools athletes.

I also believe that nonautonomous powers will be fine, because they were winning under the old system of doing things. Everything changes, you either adapt or get left behind. The trick is to use the rules to your advantage.

[AppfaninCAALand]

Important to remember that this settlement does not do away with payments from collectives. This is revenue sharing by the school. The collectives will still exist.

Also have heard some legal experts who believe Title IX does not apply to revenue sharing. It deals with equal opportunity for education not sharing athletic revenues. It will be an interesting debate.

What this will do is create an employment model for athletes and those athletes will be able to sign endorsement deals. The athletes will not be students and that will be the next lawsuit to be filed.

If college athletics isn't played by college students, what is the point colleges sponsoring athletics? Its like we have reached the level of farce.

[AtlAppMan]

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/55179 ... ed_article

May be paywall go to The Athletic.

Roster limits for P’s will swell, they all need more revenue, they will do everything beyond any reasonable limits that are good for equal playing field for any team short of about 10 schools.

[Rekdiver]

I’m a recruited Player and end up just a practice dummy. I’m busting my rear and by the end of year 2 I’m so full of resentment and I’m not alone. The locker room becomes toxic. The haves and the have nots….And in a right to work state I’m gonna get fired

[AtlAppMan]

Can I get some of that $2.7 billion?

I was in school in ‘80s but didn’t play sports because they weren’t paying players then so I deserve compensation for preventing me from getting money.

Sarcasm but there will be a ripple effect.

[AppSt94]

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/55179 ... ed_article

May be paywall go to The Athletic.

Roster limits for P’s will swell, they all need more revenue, they will do everything beyond any reasonable limits that are good for equal playing field for any team short of about 10 schools.

My understanding is that while roster limits will rise, there will be no walk-ons. Everyone is to be on scholarship. If they want to monopolize the talent, then let them try and pay that fee. It won’t make them better. It’s just going to have more talent riding the bench. Sure it will affect the G5, but it will affect all the same way.

[AtlAppMan]

This allows the top dawgs (pun intended) to use unlimited resources that they will have to throw all kinds of money “now legally” at as many players as they want. Yes there are only so many that can be on the field at any point in time but they will hoard resources.

[AppSt94]

This allows the top dawgs (pun intended) to use unlimited resources that they will have to throw all kinds of money “now legally” at as many players as they want. Yes there are only so many that can be on the field at any point in time but they will hoard resources.

That’s the thing. They don’t have unlimited resources. They aren’t going to have more money. They just have to figure out how to reallocate what they have. The “big dawgs” have huge budgets and huge revenue streams. But now they are going to have revenue cut as part of the settlement deal for the next 10 years. They can set aside up to $20 million of current revenue for NIL. The talk as I’ve seen it they are likely to increase scholarships for football to 100 and possibly up baseball to 30. That’s an increase of 33.5 new scholarships for mens sports. Double that for Title IX compliance. There are a few schools that can absorb that if they choose. I don’t think all of them will.

[ericsaid]

Important to remember that this settlement does not do away with payments from collectives. This is revenue sharing by the school. The collectives will still exist.

Also have heard some legal experts who believe Title IX does not apply to revenue sharing. It deals with equal opportunity for education not sharing athletic revenues. It will be an interesting debate.

That’s a great point about Title IX. As long as there are lawyers interested in lawyering then I wouldn’t discount some sort of tie in. The other side to that is that you have to pay female athletes now for NIl for promotional athletic events. It’s going to get interesting for sure.

Title IX isn’t just interesting here. The way the law is written, I really wouldn’t be surprised if the only way to keep up was to cut all men’s sports but football and then have three or four women’s sports. Women will have to be paid equal to men, regardless of their contribution to the revenue being shared.

It’s kind of like a communist or socialist economic system while the arguments in court were purely about Free Markets and monopolies.

Convoluted doesn’t begin to cover it. I’m of the opinion that, absent any other changes, App would continue to get many of the same players that they always would have gotten, and the big boys will get what they get.

My question comes into employment. How can you mandate that an employee also be a student? How can you mandate eligibility rules? How can you limit the number of years that someone can work?


This is going to turn into a new professional league where football teams are “sponsored” by universities. It will be the Michigan Wolverines sponsored by the University of Michigan. Or the Boise Broncos sponsored by Boise State University. Or the Appalachian Mountain Mountaineers sponsored by Appalachian State University.


These teams will be made up of employees and it will no longer be a requirement to be a student. The lack of intestinal fortitude by judges ruling on these cases blows my mind.

The same way you handle student positions at the university. Graduate research and teaching assistant jobs, tutors, some Rec Center jobs, some administrative across the various departments, etc. I had a part time job with (at the time called) Office of Multicultural Student Development and was a tutor. I had to be a student to hold those jobs. If those jobs can be student-only, then so can athletics.

I wouldn’t have said what I said if I agreed with what you’ve said. Graduate Research positions are typically open to students in the specific graduate research programs. Tutors are providing a service to other students but I was not under the impression that they were employees of the university, as students.

I just don’t see how playing football is at all similar to the other groups. The challenge will come in when someone files a lawsuit saying that your eligibility to earn an income cannot be restricted. It may be that simple at this point with the way all of the rulings have gone thus far.

There is far more money going into this than anything other than top of the line research, but that money is typically funneled to the research itself.


You seem optimistic that this doesn’t change much. I hope you’re right.

[Saint3333]

If I’m a P5 school and they allow 100 scholarships, my strategy would be grab 85 and leave 15 to flex and poach developed and proven talent from schools I know that can’t match what I can pay.

I’d also limit HS recruiting, probably shift down to around 75% of what they typically go after.

That would cut down on the HS “misses” and reduce time my staff has to spend on the road. I would invest in our capabilities to scout G5 programs. Sounds nefarious and we should expect nothing less.

[appdaze]

If I’m a P5 school and they allow 100 scholarships, my strategy would be grab 85 and leave 15 to flex and poach developed and proven talent from schools I know that can’t match what I can pay.

I’d also limit HS recruiting, probably shift down to around 75% of what they typically go after.

That would cut down on the HS “misses” and reduce time my staff has to spend on the road. I would invest in our capabilities to scout G5 programs. Sounds nefarious and we should expect nothing less.

This is already happening. HS athletes are already seeing the struggle of competing with current college athletes, especially at specific positions....pitchers/catchers, QBs, goalies. Its getting rough and parents of good athletes still can't wrap their minds around the lack of offers for HS kids who once upon a time would have at least gotten a low D1 offer.

[Mjohn1988]

If I’m a P5 school and they allow 100 scholarships, my strategy would be grab 85 and leave 15 to flex and poach developed and proven talent from schools I know that can’t match what I can pay.

I’d also limit HS recruiting, probably shift down to around 75% of what they typically go after.

That would cut down on the HS “misses” and reduce time my staff has to spend on the road. I would invest in our capabilities to scout G5 programs. Sounds nefarious and we should expect nothing less.

This is already happening. HS athletes are already seeing the struggle of competing with current college athletes, especially at specific positions....pitchers/catchers, QBs, goalies. Its getting rough and parents of good athletes still can't wrap their minds around the lack of offers for HS kids who once upon a time would have at least gotten a low D1 offer.

I don’t see anyway around the G5 just becoming a farm league for the P5. I guess now unless you’re an absolute star coming out of high school your going to spend a year or two in the FCS or the G5. I really hate this because one I the things I really love is watching a kid grow as a player. You see a guy start making special team plays and next thing you know he’s getting a few snaps with the starting unit. And then next year he’s playing for another team. Someone else mentioned no walk on players, that’s really sad. Again, so cool watching a kid earn a scholarship. I’ll say it again, I can’t in principle be against the NIL money. It just needs some structure. But simply paying everyone who plays, I’m not sure I can wrap my head around that idea.

[AppWyo]

If I’m a P5 school and they allow 100 scholarships, my strategy would be grab 85 and leave 15 to flex and poach developed and proven talent from schools I know that can’t match what I can pay.

I’d also limit HS recruiting, probably shift down to around 75% of what they typically go after.

That would cut down on the HS “misses” and reduce time my staff has to spend on the road. I would invest in our capabilities to scout G5 programs. Sounds nefarious and we should expect nothing less.

This is already happening. HS athletes are already seeing the struggle of competing with current college athletes, especially at specific positions....pitchers/catchers, QBs, goalies. Its getting rough and parents of good athletes still can't wrap their minds around the lack of offers for HS kids who once upon a time would have at least gotten a low D1 offer.

It may be an advantage for the G5 and FCS as well as D-2 and D-3, they are going to get students out of high school they would not normally get and have a stellar year or two from that player before they move to an Autonomous school.

[KentHogan]

Once this model goes into effect the players are only going to be paid employees with no requirements on being a student or academics. It will be a professional sports team/business (just like NFL/MLB/NBA) owned by the school. Nothing more. Eventually the owners may be a conglomerate of people that take over from the school to own and manage it. The only relationship to school will be the name only. No allegence to the school. Maybe teams will move form school to school like major league teams move to other cities based on incentives from local governments.

I hate it and this is not what “college sports” were ever about.

Yeah, I agree.

I’m not sure how a school can tell an employee that they must go to school in order to be an employee.

Probably only a matter of time before a kid refuses to go to class and dares the school to fire him off the football team.

I’m no attorney, but this is going to be a gigantic mess and likely the end of college sports, at least for a while.

It will most certainly lead to the loss of many sports like golf, volleyball etc. Most schools can’t afford to pay athletes who pay sports that don’t generate revenue, so those sports will go away.