Future of College Lacrosse

[Typical Lax Dad]

If they are students but the team is a club, the university is not providing the opportunity. How does title IX impact club lacrosse right now at AL and UGA? Why would club or non NCAA football be any different? I think this move is all about separation from the NCAA and any school imposed limitations.

because no one cares about club. and for the record, alabama and georgia are probably square on title ix for club.

if you end up putting a b before "illions", people care.

How does title IX impact club? With NCAA sports scholarship money needs to match. I think the intent of the new college football and basketball model is to create a non scholarship model which turns big time football into a club sport. The whole idea being that the sports no longer need to fund all the other sports or be subject to title IX as it would be a club and the school would not be paying the benefit. The club would be free to raise their own funds. In this case a TV deal. This is all about keeping football money with the football team so they can pay enough to recruit the best players. In this scenario women’s sports do not get equal share of athletic funds under title IX any more than a sorority would get the beer money that a fraternity raised at a party. Both are just school clubs only this club raises B ‘illions

At the heart of title IX is equal or proportional opportunities. The money is just an aspect. Are those football and basketball players university students?

http://titleixspecialists.com/wp-conten ... Sports.pdf

[OSVAlacrosse]

[quote=OSVAlacrosse post_id=281815 time=<a href="tel:1627641348">1627641348</a> user_id=1353]
[quote=wgdsr post_id=281773 time=<a href="tel:1627602676">1627602676</a> user_id=472]
[quote=OSVAlacrosse post_id=281772 time=<a href="tel:1627602135">1627602135</a> user_id=1353]
If they are students but the team is a club, the university is not providing the opportunity. How does title IX impact club lacrosse right now at AL and UGA? Why would club or non NCAA football be any different? I think this move is all about separation from the NCAA and any school imposed limitations.

because no one cares about club. and for the record, alabama and georgia are probably square on title ix for club.

if you end up putting a b before "illions", people care.
[/quote]
How does title IX impact club? With NCAA sports scholarship money needs to match. I think the intent of the new college football and basketball model is to create a non scholarship model which turns big time football into a club sport. The whole idea being that the sports no longer need to fund all the other sports or be subject to title IX as it would be a club and the school would not be paying the benefit. The club would be free to raise their own funds. In this case a TV deal. This is all about keeping football money with the football team so they can pay enough to recruit the best players. In this scenario women’s sports do not get equal share of athletic funds under title IX any more than a sorority would get the beer money that a fraternity raised at a party. Both are just school clubs only this club raises B ‘illions
[/quote]

At the heart of title IX is equal or proportional opportunities. The money is just an aspect. Are those football and basketball players university students?

http://titleixspecialists.com/wp-conten ... Sports.pdf
[/quote]
This is all hypothetical but others have suggested that breaking from the NCAA is where we are headed. If these SEC students are just students who happen to be in a club and non NCAA athletes, what obligation does a school have under title IX? The schools clubs and activities department would only need to allow a group of women to also create a football or basketball club. The point is that this could change college sports. The reason schools are considering this move is that football under the current format cannot fund all other sports, adhere to title IX with respect to athletic scholarships, and now be forced to pay players. Or in other words ESPN is not providing more money yet the players will now require more than just a scholarship they now get sponsorship. These schools can find the money for the program by leaving the NCAA and scholarship format. This will hurt all other sports and impact title IX opportunities that have been created in the form of less overall scholarship funds. I do understand that title IX does not go away. But how it impacts college sports could change with this move.

[Typical Lax Dad]

[quote=OSVAlacrosse post_id=281815 time=<a href="tel:1627641348">1627641348</a> user_id=1353]
[quote=wgdsr post_id=281773 time=<a href="tel:1627602676">1627602676</a> user_id=472]
[quote=OSVAlacrosse post_id=281772 time=<a href="tel:1627602135">1627602135</a> user_id=1353]
If they are students but the team is a club, the university is not providing the opportunity. How does title IX impact club lacrosse right now at AL and UGA? Why would club or non NCAA football be any different? I think this move is all about separation from the NCAA and any school imposed limitations.

because no one cares about club. and for the record, alabama and georgia are probably square on title ix for club.

if you end up putting a b before "illions", people care.

How does title IX impact club? With NCAA sports scholarship money needs to match. I think the intent of the new college football and basketball model is to create a non scholarship model which turns big time football into a club sport. The whole idea being that the sports no longer need to fund all the other sports or be subject to title IX as it would be a club and the school would not be paying the benefit. The club would be free to raise their own funds. In this case a TV deal. This is all about keeping football money with the football team so they can pay enough to recruit the best players. In this scenario women’s sports do not get equal share of athletic funds under title IX any more than a sorority would get the beer money that a fraternity raised at a party. Both are just school clubs only this club raises B ‘illions
[/quote]

At the heart of title IX is equal or proportional opportunities. The money is just an aspect. Are those football and basketball players university students?

http://titleixspecialists.com/wp-conten ... Sports.pdf
[/quote]
This is all hypothetical but others have suggested that breaking from the NCAA is where we are headed. If these SEC students are just students who happen to be in a club and non NCAA athletes, what obligation does a school have under title IX? The schools clubs and activities department would only need to allow a group of women to also create a football or basketball club. The point is that this could change college sports. The reason schools are considering this move is that football under the current format cannot fund all other sports, adhere to title IX with respect to athletic scholarships, and now be forced to pay players. Or in other words ESPN is not providing more money yet the players will now require more than just a scholarship they now get sponsorship. These schools can find the money for the program by leaving the NCAA and scholarship format. This will hurt all other sports and impact title IX opportunities that have been created in the form of less overall scholarship funds. I do understand that title IX does not go away. But how it impacts college sports could change with this move.
[/quote]

Are these university students or not? You do realize the link covers title IX implications for club organizations for colleges and universities. If there is no nexus between these “teams” and universities then they would be clear of title IX. I am not an attorney buy that is my take. I could be wrong.

[wgdsr]

source that schools are considering going club?

[MDlaxfan76]

Relevant to Title IX as pertaining to club sports.

http://titleixspecialists.com/wp-conten ... Sports.pdf

The way I read this, universities would need to spend and have participation for women club sports roughly equivalent to the student body proportionality.

Moving football into club status would create a need to balance with additional women's club programs. On the other hand, it'd free up a lot of slots in the NCAA level men's programs.

Sounds like a mess.

[OSVAlacrosse]

source that schools are considering going club?

This is all just spit balling which is what a forum is all about. I used the reference to club but that is not really what we end up with. However the current format of NCAA sports will not work which is why I think OSU TX MI and others are rumored to be joining the SEC. I do think it is logical that a new business is created out of this that is separate from
All other NCAA sports. The financial ties to the school would reverse. The organization will pay the coaches and players thus looking at them as a club made of students with ties to the school rather than a traditional school sport. This only effects a very small number of collegiate athletes in the grand scheme

[OSVAlacrosse]

Relevant to Title IX as pertaining to club sports.

http://titleixspecialists.com/wp-conten ... Sports.pdf

The way I read this, universities would need to spend and have participation for women club sports roughly equivalent to the student body proportionality.

Moving football into club status would create a need to balance with additional women's club programs. On the other hand, it'd free up a lot of slots in the NCAA level men's programs.

Sounds like a mess.

Either way it is a mess but what if the school is not funding the sport but ESPN is via a contract with the SEC. the SEC pays the school fee for use of name and facilities and picks up the tab for coaches and sponsors players and pays players tuition. This would still leave more money in control of football and less forced funding of the entire department. Either way AL v Auburn is packed with fans.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Relevant to Title IX as pertaining to club sports.

http://titleixspecialists.com/wp-conten ... Sports.pdf

The way I read this, universities would need to spend and have participation for women club sports roughly equivalent to the student body proportionality.

Moving football into club status would create a need to balance with additional women's club programs. On the other hand, it'd free up a lot of slots in the NCAA level men's programs.

Sounds like a mess.

Either way it is a mess but what if the school is not funding the sport but ESPN is via a contract with the SEC. the SEC pays the school fee for use of name and facilities and picks up the tab for coaches and sponsors players and pays players tuition. This would still leave more money in control of football and less forced funding of the entire department. Either way AL v Auburn is packed with fans.

Is the school providing a proportional “opportunity” to do something similar for women students?

[MDlaxfan76]

Relevant to Title IX as pertaining to club sports.

http://titleixspecialists.com/wp-conten ... Sports.pdf

The way I read this, universities would need to spend and have participation for women club sports roughly equivalent to the student body proportionality.

Moving football into club status would create a need to balance with additional women's club programs. On the other hand, it'd free up a lot of slots in the NCAA level men's programs.

Sounds like a mess.

Either way it is a mess but what if the school is not funding the sport but ESPN is via a contract with the SEC. the SEC pays the school fee for use of name and facilities and picks up the tab for coaches and sponsors players and pays players tuition. This would still leave more money in control of football and less forced funding of the entire department. Either way AL v Auburn is packed with fans.

Is the school providing a proportional “opportunity” to do something similar for women students?

That's a whole lot of women club sports athletes.

[Typical Lax Dad]

source that schools are considering going club?

[44WeWantMore]

Relevant to Title IX as pertaining to club sports.

http://titleixspecialists.com/wp-conten ... Sports.pdf

The way I read this, universities would need to spend and have participation for women club sports roughly equivalent to the student body proportionality.

Moving football into club status would create a need to balance with additional women's club programs. On the other hand, it'd free up a lot of slots in the NCAA level men's programs.

Sounds like a mess.

Either way it is a mess but what if the school is not funding the sport but ESPN is via a contract with the SEC. the SEC pays the school fee for use of name and facilities and picks up the tab for coaches and sponsors players and pays players tuition. This would still leave more money in control of football and less forced funding of the entire department. Either way AL v Auburn is packed with fans.

Is the school providing a proportional “opportunity” to do something similar for women students?

If they wanted to, they could create a legal entity for any women's team, and distribute its ESPN broadcasting revenues it earns back to it, net of the licensing fee for the school's trademarks.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Relevant to Title IX as pertaining to club sports.

http://titleixspecialists.com/wp-conten ... Sports.pdf

The way I read this, universities would need to spend and have participation for women club sports roughly equivalent to the student body proportionality.

Moving football into club status would create a need to balance with additional women's club programs. On the other hand, it'd free up a lot of slots in the NCAA level men's programs.

Sounds like a mess.

Either way it is a mess but what if the school is not funding the sport but ESPN is via a contract with the SEC. the SEC pays the school fee for use of name and facilities and picks up the tab for coaches and sponsors players and pays players tuition. This would still leave more money in control of football and less forced funding of the entire department. Either way AL v Auburn is packed with fans.

Is the school providing a proportional “opportunity” to do something similar for women students?

If they wanted to, they could create a legal entity for any women's team, and distribute its ESPN broadcasting revenues it earns back to it, net of the licensing fee for the school's trademarks.

Thanks.

[a fan]

Relevant to Title IX as pertaining to club sports.

http://titleixspecialists.com/wp-conten ... Sports.pdf

The way I read this, universities would need to spend and have participation for women club sports roughly equivalent to the student body proportionality.

Moving football into club status would create a need to balance with additional women's club programs. On the other hand, it'd free up a lot of slots in the NCAA level men's programs.

Sounds like a mess.

Either way it is a mess but what if the school is not funding the sport but ESPN is via a contract with the SEC. the SEC pays the school fee for use of name and facilities and picks up the tab for coaches and sponsors players and pays players tuition. This would still leave more money in control of football and less forced funding of the entire department. Either way AL v Auburn is packed with fans.

Is the school providing a proportional “opportunity” to do something similar for women students?

If they wanted to, they could create a legal entity for any women's team, and distribute its ESPN broadcasting revenues it earns back to it, net of the licensing fee for the school's trademarks.

Thanks.

So many hurdles. These schools are almost all owned by the State's they're in. And all of them get Federal Funding.

Politics can torpedo big changes.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Relevant to Title IX as pertaining to club sports.

http://titleixspecialists.com/wp-conten ... Sports.pdf

The way I read this, universities would need to spend and have participation for women club sports roughly equivalent to the student body proportionality.

Moving football into club status would create a need to balance with additional women's club programs. On the other hand, it'd free up a lot of slots in the NCAA level men's programs.

Sounds like a mess.

Either way it is a mess but what if the school is not funding the sport but ESPN is via a contract with the SEC. the SEC pays the school fee for use of name and facilities and picks up the tab for coaches and sponsors players and pays players tuition. This would still leave more money in control of football and less forced funding of the entire department. Either way AL v Auburn is packed with fans.

Is the school providing a proportional “opportunity” to do something similar for women students?

If they wanted to, they could create a legal entity for any women's team, and distribute its ESPN broadcasting revenues it earns back to it, net of the licensing fee for the school's trademarks.

Thanks.

So many hurdles. These schools are almost all owned by the State's they're in. And all of them get Federal Funding.

Politics can torpedo big changes.

Yes. I believe it will be very hard to “circumvent” title IX. I have no idea why the majority or colleges and universities want to be in the pro sports business. If there isn’t a lot of vig in it for schools, don’t know why they will be interested. Take 1/3 of the vig out and someone may finally ask, why are we doing this. I believe NCAA basketball tournament ultimately funds many non-revenue sports.

[wgdsr]

Relevant to Title IX as pertaining to club sports.

http://titleixspecialists.com/wp-conten ... Sports.pdf

The way I read this, universities would need to spend and have participation for women club sports roughly equivalent to the student body proportionality.

Moving football into club status would create a need to balance with additional women's club programs. On the other hand, it'd free up a lot of slots in the NCAA level men's programs.

Sounds like a mess.

Either way it is a mess but what if the school is not funding the sport but ESPN is via a contract with the SEC. the SEC pays the school fee for use of name and facilities and picks up the tab for coaches and sponsors players and pays players tuition. This would still leave more money in control of football and less forced funding of the entire department. Either way AL v Auburn is packed with fans.

Is the school providing a proportional “opportunity” to do something similar for women students?

If they wanted to, they could create a legal entity for any women's team, and distribute its ESPN broadcasting revenues it earns back to it, net of the licensing fee for the school's trademarks.

Thanks.

So many hurdles. These schools are almost all owned by the State's they're in. And all of them get Federal Funding.

Politics can torpedo big changes.

Yes. I believe it will be very hard to “circumvent” title IX. I have no idea why the majority or colleges and universities want to be in the pro sports business. If there isn’t a lot of vig in it for schools, don’t know why they will be interested. Take 1/3 of the vig out and someone may finally ask, why are we doing this. I believe NCAA basketball tournament ultimately funds many non-revenue sports.

they have calculators. the vig is brand, donations, school pride, donations, school attractiveness, donations, connection and donations.

[a fan]

You left out "donations", wgdsr.......

[Typical Lax Dad]

Relevant to Title IX as pertaining to club sports.

http://titleixspecialists.com/wp-conten ... Sports.pdf

The way I read this, universities would need to spend and have participation for women club sports roughly equivalent to the student body proportionality.

Moving football into club status would create a need to balance with additional women's club programs. On the other hand, it'd free up a lot of slots in the NCAA level men's programs.

Sounds like a mess.

Either way it is a mess but what if the school is not funding the sport but ESPN is via a contract with the SEC. the SEC pays the school fee for use of name and facilities and picks up the tab for coaches and sponsors players and pays players tuition. This would still leave more money in control of football and less forced funding of the entire department. Either way AL v Auburn is packed with fans.

Is the school providing a proportional “opportunity” to do something similar for women students?

If they wanted to, they could create a legal entity for any women's team, and distribute its ESPN broadcasting revenues it earns back to it, net of the licensing fee for the school's trademarks.

Thanks.

So many hurdles. These schools are almost all owned by the State's they're in. And all of them get Federal Funding.

Politics can torpedo big changes.

Yes. I believe it will be very hard to “circumvent” title IX. I have no idea why the majority or colleges and universities want to be in the pro sports business. If there isn’t a lot of vig in it for schools, don’t know why they will be interested. Take 1/3 of the vig out and someone may finally ask, why are we doing this. I believe NCAA basketball tournament ultimately funds many non-revenue sports.

they have calculators. the vig is brand, donations, school pride, donations, school attractiveness, donations, connection and donations.

Donations for “Tulane Football, sponsored by Nike and brought to you by ESPN”…. Disclosure: “The players represented are not students of Tulane” in that pharmaceutical voice over style.

[Dip&Dunk]

As the one who originally mentioned title IX in this thread (as a wild card to this sports realignment), I think ultimately money will win out.

I am not saying this is correct but when all is said and done, more and more will be based on meritocracy. (Business meritocracy) It will be seen as no sport has a right to be funded as sports move away from being part of the educational process and into the business process. If a sport can be profitable, then they spend their $ as they see fit.

Eventually successful sports, just like successful businesses, will be able to spend their profits as they see fit given their over sight. The government may subsidize sports as they subsidize anything else but as college sports become more and more business like, they will operate more like a business and less like a part off an educational institution.

Politics will follow the money.

[Typical Lax Dad]

As the one who originally mentioned title IX in this thread (as a wild card to this sports realignment), I think ultimately money will win out.

I am not saying this is correct but when all is said and done, more and more will be based on meritocracy. (Business meritocracy) It will be seen as no sport has a right to be funded as sports move away from being part of the educational process and into the business process. If a sport can be profitable, then they spend their $ as they see fit.

Eventually successful sports, just like successful businesses, will be able to spend their profits as they see fit given their over sight. The government may subsidize sports as they subsidize anything else but as college sports become more and more business like, they will operate more like a business and less like a part off an educational institution.

Politics will follow the money.

How do you get around title IX other than decoupling sports from college…like Junior Hockey, minor league baseball or G-League or Overtime League basketball. A model outside of title IX compliance already exist. No college nexus.

[ggait]

As the one who originally mentioned title IX in this thread (as a wild card to this sports realignment), I think ultimately money will win out.

110% correct. Title ix and the womens cross-country team will pose absolutely zero obstacle to where the money sports are heading.

Look at what already exists. At, for example Kentucky, Calipari makes like $8 million a year. The hoops team has their own swank dorm specifically fitted out to accomodate 7-footers. Lots of other over-the-top facilities. Team plays in a 20k seat arena. They fly to away games in a private jet. And now their players will be signing 6 and 7 figure NIL deals.

The womens XC team has (and will never have) any of that.

Title ix is a problem? Bahahahahahaha.

It is quite cheap and easy to create extra high head count womens teams to keep the university GC happy -- womens rowing, rugby, bowling, riflery, horse riding, beach volleyball, ultimate frisbee, etc. etc. etc. And just never add any new non-revenue mens sports -- like D1 mlax. Easy peasey.