BREAKING: NCAA prez Charlie Baker to propose new FBS subdivision for direct compensation of players

[18IsTheMan]

One that is based on teams directly compensating players for NIL. Schools can opt in but participation requires a minimum of $30,000/yr/athlete (must abide by Title IX, meaning 50% must go to female athletes). This is a minimum $6 million/year investment, but...and this is major...there is no cap. Schools would be able to directly pay players with no cap.

NCAA proposing new college athletics subdivision rooted in direct athlete compensation

The NCAA will introduce a proposal that would grant certain schools more power to compensate athletes in a new way.

sports.yahoo.com

In case you're curious, no, this is not a move that will favor us. At all. We can barely keep our noses out of the water with the current NIL.

 

[Gamecock72]

One that is based on teams directly compensating players for NIL. Schools can opt in but participation requires a minimum of $30,000/yr/athlete (must abide by Title IX, meaning 50% must go to female athletes). This is a minimum $6 million/year investment, but...and this is major...there is no cap. Schools would be able to directly pay players with no cap.

NCAA proposing new college athletics subdivision rooted in direct athlete compensation

The NCAA will introduce a proposal that would grant certain schools more power to compensate athletes in a new way.

sports.yahoo.com

In case you're curious, no, this is not a move that will favor us. At all. We can barely keep our noses out of the water with the current NIL.

Would it be limited to NIL or with this change, could they use athletic department money? I have not read the article. Just taking a quick work break and do not have the time to read it at the moment but plan on later.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Would it be limited to NIL or with this change, could they use athletic department money? I have not read the article. Just taking a quick work break and do not have the time to read it at the moment but plan on later.

Does not sound like details are not worked out, but direct compensation of player is direct compensation of players, whether you label it NIL or something else.

This is terrible for USC football.

 

[Deleted11512]

Does not sound like details are not worked out, but direct compensation of player is direct compensation of players, whether you label it NIL or something else.

This is terrible for USC football.

It’s actually much better for us than the current structure.

 

[18IsTheMan]

It’s actually much better for us than the current structure.

lol, zero chance this is advantageous for us in ANY way. Way back when NIL was announced, our fans said the same thing. "This is great. It'll allow us to compete with the big boys." How wrong was that? Nothing has ever been more wrong in this history of wrong.

We are paupers in the current NIL framework. With schools being able to directly compensate players with NO cap, we're screwed. Nothing that requires more money to compete favors us in anyway.

 

[Gamecock72]

Does not sound like details are not worked out, but direct compensation of player is direct compensation of players, whether you label it NIL or something else.

This is terrible for USC football.

My point is that if they can use athletic department money, that opens up the pocketbook a whole lot more.

Personally, I think the best thing to do at this point is to set up CFB like a semi-pro sports league with a players union, collective bargaining agreement, and contracts with the teams that can cut down on transferring and go to a true pay-for-play system. The fact is major college sports have not been amateur for a long time now. Not when it is a billion-dollar industry. We need to stop pretending it is still amateur sport. And if we just embrace it, we can have enforceable rules setup to keep things in check like tampering rules and such.

 

[Gamecock72]

It’s actually much better for us than the current structure.

That is my thinking also If we can use the athletic department money.

 

[18IsTheMan]

My point is that if they can use athletic department money, that opens up the pocketbook a whole lot more.

Personally, I think the best thing to do at this point is to set up CFB like a semi-pro sports league with a players union, collective bargaining agreement, and contracts with the teams that can cut down on transferring and go to a true pay-for-play system. The fact is major college sports have not been amateur for a long time now. Not when it is a billion-dollar industry. We need to stop pretending it is still amateur sport. And if we just embrace it, we can have enforceable rules setup to keep things in check like tampering rules and such.

Using AD money is one thing. But when you get into donor money, we are not even on the radar. Not even in the conversation.

 

[Deleted11512]

lol, zero chance this is advantageous for us in ANY way. Way back when NIL was announced, our fans said the same thing. "This is great. It'll allow us to compete with the big boys." How wrong was that? Nothing has ever been more wrong in this history of wrong.

We are paupers in the current NIL framework. With schools being able to directly compensate players with NO cap, we're screwed. Nothing that requires more money to compete favors us in anyway.

When you look at the conference revenue projections compared to the ACC, that’s what I’m talking about. That’s exactly what the ACC has feared this whole time. That the schools would be allowed to share revenue with players and they’d have much less to share. If they can’t get out of the ACC cleanly, they are cooked.

And, our revenue and value has always been ahead of our actual performance.

 

[18IsTheMan]

When you look at the conference revenue projections compared to the ACC, that’s what I’m talking about. That’s exactly what the ACC has feared this whole time. That the schools would be allowed to share revenue with players and they’d have much less to share. If they can’t get out of the ACC cleanly, they are cooked.

And, our revenue and value has always been ahead of our actual performance.

We ranked 12th in our own conference in revenue...and that's before Texas and OU join.

 

[Deleted11512]

We ranked 12th in our own conference in revenue...and that's before Texas and OU join.

Link?

 

[18IsTheMan]

Link?

It's other places as well

Which are the richest and poorest SEC football programs? (And where do Texas and Oklahoma fit in?) | Jones

On Thursday, we showed you Big Ten football revenue figures from the U.S. Department of Education's annual Equity in Athletics data dump. Now it's time for the Southeastern Conference. And you will see how much more fiscally impressive the SEC's new additions are than USC and UCLA.

www.pennlive.com

 

[vacock]

No more non US players. They are not allowed to work. I posted this earlier.

 

[ClemDent]

Is there a minimum number of sports that have to be offered? If not, then why would you carry anything on the mens side other than football and basketball. More mens sports beyond that just mean more women’s scholarships and therefore more “student athletes” you have to distribute money to. I hope I’m missing something here.

 

[hillna2]

It's other places as well

Which are the richest and poorest SEC football programs? (And where do Texas and Oklahoma fit in?) | Jones

On Thursday, we showed you Big Ten football revenue figures from the U.S. Department of Education's annual Equity in Athletics data dump. Now it's time for the Southeastern Conference. And you will see how much more fiscally impressive the SEC's new additions are than USC and UCLA.

www.pennlive.com

Definitely interesting to look at, but the author of this had no direction on the numbers.

It would be helpful to look at the actual numbers offered and actually list them. It seems like there was just some weird decisions of where and when to include financial numbers. They obviously filed a FOIA request if they're putting the info down, which means that they had all the info.

Not saying that the info is wrong by any means, but this is a jumbled mess of an article trying to share the financials.

 

[Gamecock72]

It's other places as well

Which are the richest and poorest SEC football programs? (And where do Texas and Oklahoma fit in?) | Jones

On Thursday, we showed you Big Ten football revenue figures from the U.S. Department of Education's annual Equity in Athletics data dump. Now it's time for the Southeastern Conference. And you will see how much more fiscally impressive the SEC's new additions are than USC and UCLA.

www.pennlive.com

That is actually with Texas and Oklahoma included.

 

[18IsTheMan]

That is actually with Texas and Oklahoma included.

My bad, you're right. Ha...it was even in the title. Need to get my eyes checked!

We're still bringing up the rear in our own conference though.

 

[Deleted11512]

My bad, you're right. Ha...it was even in the title. Need to get my eyes checked!

We're still bringing up the rear in our own conference though.

True, and that’s the way it’s always been. I like this link from USA Today. Gives a good bit of detail. The 2022 numbers would be for academic year ending 2021. So it’s a year lag. I think one thing that has been killing us is a bad bball team. A 30% full 18k seat arena is a big drag. When we were a better football program we were in the 20-25 range.

NCAA Finances: Revenue & Expenses by School - USA TODAY

Which are the most profitable college athletic programs in the country? See a ranked listed, including total revenue and expenses. Brought to you by USA TODAY.

sports.usatoday.com

 

[18IsTheMan]

True, and that’s the way it’s always been. I like this link from USA Today. Gives a good bit of detail. The 2022 numbers would be for academic year ending 2021. So it’s a year lag. I think one thing that has been killing us is a bad bball team. A 30% full 18k seat arena is a big drag. When we were a better football program we were in the 20-25 range.

NCAA Finances: Revenue & Expenses by School - USA TODAY

Which are the most profitable college athletic programs in the country? See a ranked listed, including total revenue and expenses. Brought to you by USA TODAY.

sports.usatoday.com

Color me pessimistic. I just don't see us competing in any climate where finances are an increasingly major factor.

A different topic entirely, but where NIL weakened the fabric of what makes college football college football, this obliterates it entirely. My fear is that I won't personally be able to keep up the charade of pretending it's still college football and my interest will dwindle completely. Which sort of makes me sad because I've always loved college football. But, in the big picture, it's just entertainment and there are more important things in my life. I do love watching some college football on a crisp fall afternoon. Guess that will soon be residing only in my memory banks.

 

[Deleted11512]

Color me pessimistic. I just don't see us competing in any climate where finances are an increasingly major factor.

A different topic entirely, but where NIL weakened the fabric of what makes college football college football, this obliterates it entirely. My fear is that I won't personally be able to keep up the charade of pretending it's still college football and my interest will dwindle completely. Which sort of makes me sad because I've always loved college football. But, in the big picture, it's just entertainment and there are more important things in my life. I do love watching some college football on a crisp fall afternoon. Guess that will soon be residing only in my memory banks.

It’s a step in the right direction. If it’s going through schools, they can regulate it easier. They can also cap funds at some point.

 

[18IsTheMan]

It’s a step in the right direction. If it’s going through schools, they can regulate it easier. They can also cap funds at some point.

But what is there going to be to regulate? It's straight pay to play with no cap set by the NCAA. There's nothing to cheat at anymore, haha.

 

[HI Cock1]

One that is based on teams directly compensating players for NIL. Schools can opt in but participation requires a minimum of $30,000/yr/athlete (must abide by Title IX, meaning 50% must go to female athletes). This is a minimum $6 million/year investment, but...and this is major...there is no cap. Schools would be able to directly pay players with no cap.

NCAA proposing new college athletics subdivision rooted in direct athlete compensation

The NCAA will introduce a proposal that would grant certain schools more power to compensate athletes in a new way.

sports.yahoo.com

In case you're curious, no, this is not a move that will favor us. At all. We can barely keep our noses out of the water with the current NIL.

If they're employees, make them sign contracts. No more of this full-time free agency.

 

[18IsTheMan]

One that is based on teams directly compensating players for NIL. Schools can opt in but participation requires a minimum of $30,000/yr/athlete (must abide by Title IX, meaning 50% must go to female athletes). This is a minimum $6 million/year investment, but...and this is major...there is no cap. Schools would be able to directly pay players with no cap.

NCAA proposing new college athletics subdivision rooted in direct athlete compensation

The NCAA will introduce a proposal that would grant certain schools more power to compensate athletes in a new way.

sports.yahoo.com

In case you're curious, no, this is not a move that will favor us. At all. We can barely keep our noses out of the water with the current NIL.

I suppose the one "restraint" is the Title IX guidelines. 50% of whatever is paid to athletes must go to female sports.

Frankly, I can easily see that aspect of Title IX getting challenged at some point. There's too much money up for grabs for schools to be flushing 50% down the toilet on women's sports.

 

[18IsTheMan]

It’s a step in the right direction. If it’s going through schools, they can regulate it easier. They can also cap funds at some point.

Let me ask you this: under this proposed scenario, do you think we would stand a snowball's chance of landing Harbor? Nobody knows the details, but it's assumed he turned down a more lucrative NIL offer from Oregon to come here. Under this proposal, with a direct compensation system in which there is no cap, would we be able to compete with Oregon/Phil Knight for a recruit?

 

[18IsTheMan]

One interesting excerpt: "The new rules would...allow each of those schools to create its own set of rules for recruiting, transfers, roster size and a wide range of other policies."

 

[18IsTheMan]

And, hey, maybe we could finally be competitive in the SEC once Florida, UGA, UT, Bama, LSU, Auburn, Texas and OU leave for the new division!

 

[gamecock stock]

I am wondering if we are headed to a 2-division FBS: 1. where the "rich" schools are in one division and 2. the remainder of the schools. You know where we would fall.

I did not read the whole thread. Looks like you guys are thinking the same.

 

[18IsTheMan]

I am wondering if we are headed to a 2-division FBS: 1. where the "rich" schools are in one division and 2. the remainder of the schools. You know where we would fall.

I did not read the whole thread. Looks like you guys are thinking the same.

It will definitely be a separation of the haves and have-nots.

Participation in the new division will be voluntary, so it will be very interesting to see how that works. We are currently 30th nationally in revenue at about $64 million, but we get $49 million from the SEC (for 2023). With the new division, conferences would get obliterated though...I have to imagine. It's unlikely the SEC would move, en masse, to the new division. In which case, we lose our SEC revenue and I imagine new TV revenue deals are worked out for teams in the new division.

Do we warrant inclusion in that division? If not and we lose our SEC revenue, that's where we are screwed.

 

[Crutcher]

I suppose the one "restraint" is the Title IX guidelines. 50% of whatever is paid to athletes must go to female sports.

Frankly, I can easily see that aspect of Title IX getting challenged at some point. There's too much money up for grabs for schools to be flushing 50% down the toilet on women's sports.

Really?
Only men are athletes?
Women's sports is "flushing money down the toilet?"

 

[gamecock stock]

It will definitely be a separation of the haves and have-nots.

Participation in the new division will be voluntary, so it will be very interesting to see how that works. We are currently 30th nationally in revenue at about $64 million, but we get $49 million from the SEC (for 2023). With the new division, conferences would get obliterated though...I have to imagine. It's unlikely the SEC would move, en masse, to the new division. In which case, we lose our SEC revenue and I imagine new TV revenue deals are worked out for teams in the new division.

Do we warrant inclusion in that division? If not and we lose our SEC revenue, that's where we are screwed.

18, you are spot on.

I don't know the "ins and outs".....BUT cannot schools on their own put in as much money, in our case "Garnet Trust"? We get SEC TV money, which should be an advantage. Of course, other SEC schools could do the same. But maybe we would not be at a real disadvantage against most non-SEC teams.

I sense, could be wrong, that you are a young man with a young family. I feel bad for people of your generation to have to be a fan through this mess. As for me, I'm old enough that I can see the exit ramp off this "road of life". So, I can roll with the punches, all the way to the end.

 

[18IsTheMan]

18, you are spot on.

I don't know the "ins and outs".....BUT cannot schools on their own put in as much money, in our case "Garnet Trust"? We get SEC TV money, which should be an advantage. Of course, other SEC schools could do the same. But maybe we would not be at a real disadvantage against most non-SEC teams.

I sense, could be wrong, that you are a young man with a young family. I feel bad for people of your generation to have to be a fan through this mess. As for me, I'm old enough that I can see the exit ramp off this "road of life". So, I can roll with the punches, all the way to the end.

haha, I have a young family, but I was a late starter

 

[18IsTheMan]

Really?
Only men are athletes?
Women's sports is "flushing money down the toilet?"

In terms of return on investment, yes. Women's athletics are a money pit.

When It's Okay To Lose Money: The Business Of Women's College Basketball

Almost every women's college basketball team lost money last year, but that's not a bad thing. Women's basketball is a "non-revenue" sport, which means that, like gymnastics or swimming, it is not expected to increase the school's profits.

www.forbes.com

 

[gamecock stock]

haha, I have a young family, but I was a late starter

One thing: we are screwed already by having someone as AD who is an incompetent administrator and leader. If that statement is stepping on RT fans' toes, well, so be it. If we had a Mike McGee type of AD, I'd feel much more secure.

 

[Crutcher]

In terms of return on investment, yes. Women's athletics are a money pit.

When It's Okay To Lose Money: The Business Of Women's College Basketball

Almost every women's college basketball team lost money last year, but that's not a bad thing. Women's basketball is a "non-revenue" sport, which means that, like gymnastics or swimming, it is not expected to increase the school's profits.

www.forbes.com

In terms of return on investment, yes. Women's athletics are a money pit.

When It's Okay To Lose Money: The Business Of Women's College Basketball

Almost every women's college basketball team lost money last year, but that's not a bad thing. Women's basketball is a "non-revenue" sport, which means that, like gymnastics or swimming, it is not expected to increase the school's profits.

www.forbes.com

Really, an 11 year old article?
Even so, according to that article, more than 80% of men's basketball teams lost money. Should only sports that make money be funded?
How about academics? Should we eliminate Theater department because only 170 people showed up for a production of Othello?
Should we stop printing the student newspaper because it is given away free?
Since when is the mission of the university to turn a profit?

 

[18IsTheMan]

Should only sports that make money be funded?

Yes.

 

[Rogue Cock]

My point is that if they can use athletic department money, that opens up the pocketbook a whole lot more.

Personally, I think the best thing to do at this point is to set up CFB like a semi-pro sports league with a players union, collective bargaining agreement, and contracts with the teams that can cut down on transferring and go to a true pay-for-play system. The fact is major college sports have not been amateur for a long time now. Not when it is a billion-dollar industry. We need to stop pretending it is still amateur sport. And if we just embrace it, we can have enforceable rules setup to keep things in check like tampering rules and such.

After they pay federal and state income taxes on the money they recieve, also withholding taxes for the employees, and worker's comp insurance payments, etc., etc.

And if the athletic department is no longer classified as an exempt entity, the university itself has an issue with unrelated business income.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

It will definitely be a separation of the haves and have-nots.

.

Do we warrant inclusion in that division? If not and we lose our SEC revenue, that's where we are screwed.

I am wondering if we are headed to a 2-division FBS: 1. where the "rich" schools are in one division and 2. the remainder of the schools. You know where we would fall.

I did not read the whole thread. Looks like you guys are thinking the same.

This was taken from the article provided from the OP. This should answer your questions. You can draw up your own conclusions on how, and where we would stand.

that in the near future SCHOOLS WILL BE ABLE TO DIRECTLY PAY NIL TO ATHLETES. A series of POTENTIAL changes were mentioned in a letter from the NCAA including "potentially different rules for programs with bigger brands and athletic budgets in a separate subdivision .... establishing their own rules on NIL limits, portal transfers...etc.

 

[gamecock stock]

This was taken from the article provided from the OP. This should answer your questions. You can draw up your own conclusions on how, and where we would stand.

that in the near future SCHOOLS WILL BE ABLE TO DIRECTLY PAY NIL TO ATHLETES. A series of POTENTIAL changes were mentioned in a letter from the NCAA including "potentially different rules for programs with bigger brands and athletic budgets in a separate subdivision .... establishing their own rules on NIL limits, portal transfers...etc.

What's the likelihood we would be thrown into the lesser of the 2 divisions while Clemson ends up in the top tier? That would be awful.

 

[18IsTheMan]

This was taken from the article provided from the OP. This should answer your questions. You can draw up your own conclusions on how, and where we would stand.

that in the near future SCHOOLS WILL BE ABLE TO DIRECTLY PAY NIL TO ATHLETES. A series of POTENTIAL changes were mentioned in a letter from the NCAA including "potentially different rules for programs with bigger brands and athletic budgets in a separate subdivision .... establishing their own rules on NIL limits, portal transfers...etc.

I don’t think it’s hard to figure out

 

[Deleted11512]

What's the likelihood we would be thrown into the lesser of the 2 divisions while Clemson ends up in the top tier? That would be awful.

Talked to a Clem guy today. He says they’re struggling to put NIL deals together to keep their players happy. He agreed that Dabo is going to have to go to the portal. When I asked how he expects to do that when they cant pay current players he didn’t have an answer. He seemed distraught about it.