NCAA, Power Conferences agree to allow schools to pay players

[DwaynePurvis00]

Interesting….

NCAA, Power 5 agree to let schools pay players

The NCAA and its leagues are moving forward with a multibillion-dollar settlement agreement that will allow schools to directly pay players for the first time in the history of college sports.

www.espn.com

 

[BoilerAndy]

Interesting….

NCAA, Power 5 agree to let schools pay players

The NCAA and its leagues are moving forward with a multibillion-dollar settlement agreement that will allow schools to directly pay players for the first time in the history of college sports.

www.espn.com

Not the "first time in the history of college sports." It's just the first time it will be legal.

 

[Boiler Buck]

NCAA change keeps coming. Difficult to support everything, but happy for the players.

But one thing for sure, the consistency with Painter makes it easy to support Purdue.
What's the CMP saying??

 

[Wolegib]

I read several articles on the subject. They do not address schools such as Purdue that have booster clubs that basically pay for their athletic departments. Will the booster clubs revenue be part of this settlement? Or will loopholes be developed and booster club revenue will not be part of the legal settlement? I’m sure colleges like Alabama and Texas A&M will also look at loopholes for their booster club spending.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Interesting….

NCAA, Power 5 agree to let schools pay players

The NCAA and its leagues are moving forward with a multibillion-dollar settlement agreement that will allow schools to directly pay players for the first time in the history of college sports.

www.espn.com

Can the schools spend their $20 million any way they want ?

Do they have to spend half of it on women’s sports ? Could they spend it all on football or men’s basketball, and not spend a dime on all the other sports?

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

Can the schools spend their $20 million any way they want ?

Do they have to spend half of it on women’s sports ? Could they spend it all on football or men’s basketball, and not spend a dime on all the other sports?

I think it’s all up in the air right now and nothing is set. It sounds like all these details will get figured out in the coming months (or knowing the ncaa…they won’t)

 

[Smokestack91]

Can the schools spend their $20 million any way they want ?

Do they have to spend half of it on women’s sports ? Could they spend it all on football or men’s basketball, and not spend a dime on all the other sports?

If they don't use half for women's sports, I think we'll see a Title IX lawsuit very quickly.

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

If they don't use half for women's sports, I think we'll see a Title IX lawsuit very quickly.

Yeah I was wondering about that too. What happens with title IX in all this?

 

[Boiler Buck]

If they don't use half for women's sports, I think we'll see a Title IX lawsuit very quickly.

Will that matter that women do not have football? Or does equality expand $ to weird off women sports where women's lacrosse, rowing and bass fishing suddenly get paid?

 

[New Pal Boiler]

If they don't use half for women's sports, I think we'll see a Title IX lawsuit very quickly.

The argument against that would be since it’s “revenue sharing”, the teams creating the revenue should get a proportional share of the revenue pie.

 

[Boiler Buck]

The argument against that would be since it’s “revenue sharing”, the teams creating the revenue should get a proportional share of the revenue pie.

I like that argument....hope it holds up. Not that I have anything against female lacrosse or bass fishing....but come on.

 

[Wolegib]

i still believe some entire sports will be cut. Look at Ball St. before all this happened, they did not have a men's track team. they have the facilities, and the coaches and a women's track team; but no men's track team. i could easily see women's lacross, hockey and softball and gymnastics staying, and their respective mens teams being cut.

it should be noted that currently, not all BIG 10 teams field teams in every sport.

two questions still remain. 1. will it be up to the individual schools how they spend their money? or will that be dictated to them. 2. will booster club money be included and counted as revenue as part of the revenue sharing ? if it is not included, i could see a lot of schools telling their alumni to donate to booster clubs rather than the schools.

 

[Wolegib]

maybe coach's salaries will be lessened and we will see fewer buyouts, and more coaches getting their own sponsorship deals.

guys like woodson may end up staying for the duration of their contract.

 

[northside100]

i still believe some entire sports will be cut. Look at Ball St. before all this happened, they did not have a men's track team. they have the facilities, and the coaches and a women's track team; but no men's track team. i could easily see women's lacross, hockey and softball and gymnastics staying, and their respective mens teams being cut.

it should be noted that currently, not all BIG 10 teams field teams in every sport.

two questions still remain. 1. will it be up to the individual schools how they spend their money? or will that be dictated to them. 2. will booster club money be included and counted as revenue as part of the revenue sharing ? if it is not included, i could see a lot of schools telling their alumni to donate to booster clubs rather than the schools.

Agree 100% that sports will be cut

 

[northside100]

Will that matter that women do not have football? Or does equality expand $ to weird off women sports where women's lacrosse, rowing and bass fishing suddenly get paid?

I don’t see how Title IX would apply to revenue sharing beyond some minimal cost of living allowance. Too bad there are no attorneys willing to opine on this board 😉

“No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.”​

 

[JRKinn]

Would they not just go for a "employment contract"? I see this as the revenue sports just becoming a minor league.

 

[boilermaker75]

maybe coach's salaries will be lessened and we will see fewer buyouts, and more coaches getting their own sponsorship deals.

guys like woodson may end up staying for the duration of their contract.

We can only hope!

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

maybe coach's salaries will be lessened and we will see fewer buyouts, and more coaches getting their own sponsorship deals.

guys like woodson may end up staying for the duration of their contract.

I’m guessing it will go the other way

 

[boilermaker75]

Would they not just go for a "employment contract"? I see this as the revenue sports just becoming a minor league.

Universities should spin football and basketball out as independent entities and charge them to use on-campus facilities like stadiums, arenas, housing, food services, etc. with the players no longer being students at the universities.

 

[Tommaker]

i still believe some entire sports will be cut. Look at Ball St. before all this happened, they did not have a men's track team. they have the facilities, and the coaches and a women's track team; but no men's track team. i could easily see women's lacross, hockey and softball and gymnastics staying, and their respective mens teams being cut.

it should be noted that currently, not all BIG 10 teams field teams in every sport.

two questions still remain. 1. will it be up to the individual schools how they spend their money? or will that be dictated to them. 2. will booster club money be included and counted as revenue as part of the revenue sharing ? if it is not included, i could see a lot of schools telling their alumni to donate to booster clubs rather than the schools.

mens sports.

 

[TC4THREE]

Great. And you thought youth sports parents were bad before when it was just a scholarship at stake for little Johnny or Suzy. Now there's potentially a six-figure salary out there with it.

 

[TC4THREE]

Universities should spin football and basketball out as independent entities and charge them to use on-campus facilities like stadiums, arenas, housing, food services, etc. with the players no longer being students at the universities.

Public universities should step back. Running minor-league sports franchises is not within the mission of tax-payer-funded institutions of higher learning.

 

[PurdueDave]

Public universities should step back. Running minor-league sports franchises is not within the mission of tax-payer-funded institutions of higher learning.

I was thinking the same thing

 

[Smokestack91]

I don’t see how Title IX would apply to revenue sharing beyond some minimal cost of living allowance. Too bad there are no attorneys willing to opine on this board 😉

“No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.”​

I'm not very familiar with Title IX, other than what I see/hear in the media, but I guess they would focus on this. Plus, I think there would be some public pressure to equalize a bit. Not saying it's the right position, but likely what we will see.

 

[northside100]

I'm not very familiar with Title IX, other than what I see/hear in the media, but I guess they would focus on this. Plus, I think there would be some public pressure to equalize a bit. Not saying it's the right position, but likely what we will see.

That’s a great point. I would hope now that we are coming out and explicitly saying that athletes are entitled to a portion of the revenue generated, that we could be realistic around which sports are generating revenue.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

That’s a great point. I would hope now that we are coming out and explicitly saying that athletes are entitled to a portion of the revenue generated, that we could be realistic around which sports are generating revenue.

Tie the team revenue to a percentage of ticket and concession sales.

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

Tie the team revenue to a percentage of ticket and concession sales.

😂

 

[POTFHBTFU]

i still believe some entire sports will be cut. Look at Ball St. before all this happened, they did not have a men's track team. they have the facilities, and the coaches and a women's track team; but no men's track team. i could easily see women's lacross, hockey and softball and gymnastics staying, and their respective mens teams being cut.

it should be noted that currently, not all BIG 10 teams field teams in every sport.

two questions still remain. 1. will it be up to the individual schools how they spend their money? or will that be dictated to them. 2. will booster club money be included and counted as revenue as part of the revenue sharing ? if it is not included, i could see a lot of schools telling their alumni to donate to booster clubs rather than the schools.

I don’t see that happening. Those other sports won’t see a dime of the $20m and will continue as usual. If anything the athletic departments will get stronger with NIL contributions now going directly to the AD instead of to the collectives. That’s basically what the JPC was and probably gets expanded now where the donations go direct to them.

Purdue only has 18 teams I believe if you don’t count spirit squad. And 4 are cross country and track. A total of 9 men and 9 women. Of the ones you mention softball is the only one we have and I don’t see it going away. We don’t have any teams that require extensive travel like gymnastics or facilities like hockey. I guess the teams that are least competitive and have least facilities would be cross country and track but why get rid of them they cost almost nothing to run.

 

[POTFHBTFU]

My question on this is the breakdown of the $20m. Will schools like Duke put more stock in basketball? Will it matter if NIL are already over $20m and the money just gets routed through schools now?

This is the basketball board so I’ll leave it here but I’d rather see Purdue invest more proportionally in basketball. I had heard a couple years ago they wanted ALL basketball players to get $200k and all football players to get $100k plus whatever they individually earn. I think the $200k for the waddells and fursts are great but would like to see us get aggressive on retaining good players. Would Edey have taken his covid year if we gave him $3m? How about Ivey for $3m? Could we get Haralson for $2m? Will the dukes and North Carolinas throw $2-$3m at guys like Braden smith and we have to pay them that much to keep them? I’d rather see us tell players you will get $200k from university and if you play well we will reward you then try to use it to recruit, seems like you don’t get the bang for the Buck from those guys and it creates resentment and divisiveness from the team.

 

[northside100]

I don’t see that happening. Those other sports won’t see a dime of the $20m and will continue as usual. If anything the athletic departments will get stronger with NIL contributions now going directly to the AD instead of to the collectives. That’s basically what the JPC was and probably gets expanded now where the donations go direct to them.

That $20M has to come from somewhere.

itive and have least facilities would be cross country and track but why get rid of them they cost almost nothing to run.

Next to nothing relative to football and basketball but I’d guess the overall budget is well over $1 million. I tend to agree with you that there’s enough money in the Big Ten for Purdue to avoid cutting sports but absolutely believe that it will happen in smaller conferences.

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

My question on this is the breakdown of the $20m. Will schools like Duke put more stock in basketball? Will it matter if NIL are already over $20m and the money just gets routed through schools now?

This is the basketball board so I’ll leave it here but I’d rather see Purdue invest more proportionally in basketball. I had heard a couple years ago they wanted ALL basketball players to get $200k and all football players to get $100k plus whatever they individually earn. I think the $200k for the waddells and fursts are great but would like to see us get aggressive on retaining good players. Would Edey have taken his covid year if we gave him $3m? How about Ivey for $3m? Could we get Haralson for $2m? Will the dukes and North Carolinas throw $2-$3m at guys like Braden smith and we have to pay them that much to keep them? I’d rather see us tell players you will get $200k from university and if you play well we will reward you then try to use it to recruit, seems like you don’t get the bang for the Buck from those guys and it creates resentment and divisiveness from the team.

All very good questions. Only time will tell but I’ve seen some speculation that the 20m would be for athletics overall and then it’d be divvied up between sports. Also have seen it should be for the sports that bring in revenue…I don’t even think the ncaa knows at this point 😑

 

[northside100]

All very good questions. Only time will tell but I’ve seen some speculation that the 20m would be for athletics overall and then it’d be divvied up between sports. Also have seen it should be for the sports that bring in revenue…I don’t even think the ncaa knows at this point 😑

The $20M is for the full athletic department. Early indications are that schools will be able to decide how it’s allocated, but you’re right, I’m not sure that any of this is known for certain.

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

The $20M is for the full athletic department. Early indications are that schools will be able to decide how it’s allocated, but you’re right, I’m not sure that any of this is known for certain.

$19.5M for Purdue men’s team and then $500k everywhere else….KIDDING OF COURSE

 

[DonH]

Interesting….

NCAA, Power 5 agree to let schools pay players

The NCAA and its leagues are moving forward with a multibillion-dollar settlement agreement that will allow schools to directly pay players for the first time in the history of college sports.

www.espn.com

Does this ruling solve CMP’s scholarship problem?

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

Does this ruling solve CMP’s scholarship problem?

Yes that’s a lot to what we are referring to. Nothings been confirmed but talks to expand/just go to roster caps are in the works.

 

[northside100]

$19.5M for Purdue men’s team and then $500k everywhere else….KIDDING OF COURSE

In all seriousness, I'm not far off from that.

• Allocate enough to give football a chance to be competitive (5 to 7 wins a year) and maintain some level of fan support. Ensure that you have a coach who recognizes that his funding will be at best, in the middle of the conference. Both of these are easier said than done.
• Only allocate funds to women's sports to the higher of a) whatever amount is mandated or b) wbb and vb's percentages of total athletic revenue
• The rest goes to MBB. If boosters want to support athletes outside of FB and MBB they can support them directly through NIL deals

 

[POTFHBTFU]

In all seriousness, I'm not far off from that.

• Allocate enough to give football a chance to be competitive (5 to 7 wins a year) and maintain some level of fan support. Ensure that you have a coach who recognizes that his funding will be at best, in the middle of the conference. Both of these are easier said than done.
• Only allocate funds to women's sports to the higher of a) whatever amount is mandated or b) wbb and vb's percentages of total athletic revenue
• The rest goes to MBB. If boosters want to support athletes outside of FB and MBB they can support them directly through NIL deals

I would change part b of the second item to net profit. While volleyball has revenue it’s not enough to cover the expenses. I believe women’s basketball was neutral when they were good and I expect they now lose money (although maybe the Caitlin Clark impact may bump them up a bit.

I also prefer to support men’s basketball more. If shifting more there allows us to keep the edeys and Braden’s and not get poached then it’s a better return on investment over a football team that gets 5-7 wins.

 

[JRKinn]

I would change part b of the second item to net profit. While volleyball has revenue it’s not enough to cover the expenses. I believe women’s basketball was neutral when they were good and I expect they now lose money (although maybe the Caitlin Clark impact may bump them up a bit.

I also prefer to support men’s basketball more. If shifting more there allows us to keep the edeys and Braden’s and not get poached then it’s a better return on investment over a football team that gets 5-7 wins.

One Caveat is that you have to keep the FB team performing at a decent level or risk pruning in the future when the SEC and B1G are the 2 power conferences. Can't set ourselves up for getting kicked out of the league when we aren't able to pull our weight in the sport that generates the most revenue.