Future of College Lacrosse

[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.

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, womens bowling, beach volleyball, ultimate frisbee, etc. etc. etc. And just never add any new non-revenue mens sports -- like D1 mlax. Easy peasey.

Nick Saban said football doesn’t make any money with a straight face:

[44WeWantMore]

Non-revenue sport: We want a cut.
Alabama FBall: You want a percent? Fine. Of the net

That said, I watched as many JHU FBall playoff games as I did of all others combined.

[wgdsr]

Non-revenue sport: We want a cut.
Alabama FBall: You want a percent? Fine. Of the net

That said, I watched as many JHU FBall playoff games as I did of all others combined.

pro sports are too smart to play that "net" game. if it comes to that, pro-college sports will be, too.

you're not the target audience.

[44WeWantMore]

Non-revenue sport: We want a cut.
Alabama FBall: You want a percent? Fine. Of the net

That said, I watched as many JHU FBall playoff games as I did of all others combined.

pro sports are too smart to play that "net" game. if it comes to that, pro-college sports will be, too.

Assuming that SEC Football teams and big-time MBBall teams can create separate legal entities, not tied to the University's core educational mission, then they are the equivalent of the big motion-picture studio.
Non-revenue sports are the equivalent of the unknown screenwriter, who gets the net because "You'll Get Nothing and Like It"

you're not the target audience.

Right, I am part of the long tail. The fatter part of the long tail may start with Army-Navy, Stanford-Cal, Harvard-Yale, etc. but I do not think the establishment of openly professional college-branded sports (should it succeed), necessarily erases the long tail, let alone eliminates college athletics. I know I am biased, and I always want my Jays to play and beat the best in Lax, but I saw D-III sports close-up, and if I had to choose one or the other, I would take the D-III model over the SEC Football model every time.

[HowieT3]

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.

Title IX does not apply to clubs because they are not sponsored by the universities like varsities are, which is why the athletic departments love having club lacrosse teams. Their names are out there in the lacrosse world, it doesn't cost the departments a dime (AMOF they may even make money on field rentals), and it has no effect on their Title IX numbers. That's why very few schools with MCLA teams will go varsity.

[a fan]

Title IX does not apply to clubs because they are not sponsored by the universities like varsities are,

Do you have to be a student at the school to be a member of the team? Does the school accept Federal funds? If the answer is yes to both, then Title IX applies.

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

[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.

Title IX does not apply to clubs because they are not sponsored by the universities like varsities are, which is why the athletic departments love having club lacrosse teams. Their names are out there in the lacrosse world, it doesn't cost the departments a dime (AMOF they may even make money on field rentals), and it has no effect on their Title IX numbers. That's why very few schools with MCLA teams will go varsity.

Who told you title IX doesn’t apply to clubs? Those Schools with MCLA clubs don’t have clubs for women?

[HowieT3]

Title IX does not apply to clubs because they are not sponsored by the universities like varsities are,

Do you have to be a student at the school to be a member of the team? Does the school accept Federal funds? If the answer is yes to both, then Title IX applies.

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

The club is a private organization within the school. The school does not run the club. The clubs usually get funds from the student activity fund just like the chess club, the film club, ultimate Frisbee club, etc., that may require it to follow non-discriminatory policies established by the school. It is not run by the school. It is not a direct part of the school like the athletic department is. The fraternities and sororities are also private organizations within the school. There is no equivalence in that if 53% of you student body is female, then 53% of your Greek organizations must be sororities. How do you think Title IX applies? Limitations on numbers of people on the roster so that the men's club and the women's have equal numbers? There's no requirement that the whoever controls the activity money (usually the student government) fund them equally. The only limitation on men's lacrosse clubs is that the MCLA will not allow a school that has a varsity to be a member of the MCLA; they must join the NCLL. I imagine the women's club association does something similar. If there's a men's club and the school doesn't allow the formation of a women's club, that's a different matter.

[HowieT3]

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.

Title IX does not apply to clubs because they are not sponsored by the universities like varsities are, which is why the athletic departments love having club lacrosse teams. Their names are out there in the lacrosse world, it doesn't cost the departments a dime (AMOF they may even make money on field rentals), and it has no effect on their Title IX numbers. That's why very few schools with MCLA teams will go varsity.

Who told you title IX doesn’t apply to clubs? Those Schools with MCLA clubs don’t have clubs for women?

They probably have club for multiple women's sports because a group of women got together and decided to form a club because they didn't make the varsities. If no women decide to form a soccer club or a softball club, etc., then there isn't one and the school is under no obligation to start one because all the clubs are private organizations and not part and parcel owned by the school like varsity teams are. If schools with MCLA clubs have a lacrosse club for women it's because a group of women decided to have one. The school is under no obligation to start any club, they just must follow anti-discrimination procedures in allowing their formation and funding.

[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.

Title IX does not apply to clubs because they are not sponsored by the universities like varsities are, which is why the athletic departments love having club lacrosse teams. Their names are out there in the lacrosse world, it doesn't cost the departments a dime (AMOF they may even make money on field rentals), and it has no effect on their Title IX numbers. That's why very few schools with MCLA teams will go varsity.

Who told you title IX doesn’t apply to clubs? Those Schools with MCLA clubs don’t have clubs for women?

They probably have club for multiple women's sports because a group of women got together and decided to form a club because they didn't make the varsities. If no women decide to form a soccer club or a softball club, etc., then there isn't one and the school is under no obligation to start one because all the clubs are private organizations and not part and parcel owned by the school like varsity teams are. If schools with MCLA clubs have a lacrosse club for women it's because a group of women decided to have one. The school is under no obligation to start any club, they just must follow anti-discrimination procedures in allowing their formation and funding.

So title IX does apply to clubs?

https://uclaclubsports.com/index.aspx

https://recsports.virginia.edu/club-sports

https://nirsa.net/nirsa/2017/04/18/new- ... -mcdowell/

[ggait]

T9 nominally applies to clubs. But in a way so that it is a complete non-issue that no one cares about.

So as a practical matter, saying T9 only applies to varsity sports is fairly accurate though technically incorrect.

Under T9, varsity sports are apples, club sports are oranges, and intramural sports are pears.

So the male and female varsity sports have to be gendered balanced against each other. That's the only thing that matters, because varsity sports are where the major revenues and expenses are. What happens with club and intramurals has no bearing on varsity sport T9 compliance.

No one much cares or has much difficulty providing club and intramural opportunities for both genders. If the guys want an ultimate frisbee club, school says fine. If the gals want one, that's fine too. If some kids want co-ed ultimate, school says fine whatever.

The university GC does not lose sleep at night about potential T9 lawsuits over club/intramural sports. They do worry about varsity sports lawsuits.

[OSVAlacrosse]

I think the issue for the future is scholarships and coaches pay. With the move to create a professional college football system in the SEC, schools could stop funding football scholarships and coach salaries. These funds would be generated by sponsorships. If the university is not funding the cost and the program is essentially a club this would impact all other sports and women’s sports. Title IX would no longer require the football team to pay for women’s soccer.

[Typical Lax Dad]

T9 nominally applies to clubs. But in a way so that it is a complete non-issue that no one cares about.

So as a practical matter, saying T9 only applies to varsity sports is fairly accurate though technically incorrect.

Under T9, varsity sports are apples, club sports are oranges, and intramural sports are pears.

So the male and female varsity sports have to be gendered balanced against each other. That's the only thing that matters, because varsity sports are where the major revenues and expenses are. What happens with club and intramurals has no bearing on varsity sport T9 compliance.

No one much cares or has much difficulty providing club and intramural opportunities for both genders. If the guys want an ultimate frisbee club, school says fine. If the gals want one, that's fine too. If some kids want co-ed ultimate, school says fine whatever.

The university GC does not lose sleep at night about potential T9 lawsuits over club/intramural sports. They do worry about varsity sports lawsuits.

Someone is going to care when football and basketball are set up as “clubs” in a SPV.

[Farfromgeneva]

T9 nominally applies to clubs. But in a way so that it is a complete non-issue that no one cares about.

So as a practical matter, saying T9 only applies to varsity sports is fairly accurate though technically incorrect.

Under T9, varsity sports are apples, club sports are oranges, and intramural sports are pears.

So the male and female varsity sports have to be gendered balanced against each other. That's the only thing that matters, because varsity sports are where the major revenues and expenses are. What happens with club and intramurals has no bearing on varsity sport T9 compliance.

No one much cares or has much difficulty providing club and intramural opportunities for both genders. If the guys want an ultimate frisbee club, school says fine. If the gals want one, that's fine too. If some kids want co-ed ultimate, school says fine whatever.

The university GC does not lose sleep at night about potential T9 lawsuits over club/intramural sports. They do worry about varsity sports lawsuits.

Someone is going to care when football and basketball are set up as “clubs” in a SPV.

Then you’ll have master trustees making medical decisions on players...

[Typical Lax Dad]

T9 nominally applies to clubs. But in a way so that it is a complete non-issue that no one cares about.

So as a practical matter, saying T9 only applies to varsity sports is fairly accurate though technically incorrect.

Under T9, varsity sports are apples, club sports are oranges, and intramural sports are pears.

So the male and female varsity sports have to be gendered balanced against each other. That's the only thing that matters, because varsity sports are where the major revenues and expenses are. What happens with club and intramurals has no bearing on varsity sport T9 compliance.

No one much cares or has much difficulty providing club and intramural opportunities for both genders. If the guys want an ultimate frisbee club, school says fine. If the gals want one, that's fine too. If some kids want co-ed ultimate, school says fine whatever.

The university GC does not lose sleep at night about potential T9 lawsuits over club/intramural sports. They do worry about varsity sports lawsuits.

Someone is going to care when football and basketball are set up as “clubs” in a SPV.

Then you’ll have master trustees making medical decisions on players...

I don’t know how Ohio State is going to classify men’s football and basketball as club sports and people will shrug their shoulders like its Jacks or Quidditch.

[OSVAlacrosse]

[quote=Farfromgeneva post_id=282248 time=<a href="tel:1627825450">1627825450</a> user_id=1206]
[quote="Typical Lax Dad" post_id=282247 time=<a href="tel:1627825400">1627825400</a> user_id=269]
[quote=ggait post_id=282218 time=<a href="tel:1627798444">1627798444</a> user_id=487]
T9 nominally applies to clubs. But in a way so that it is a complete non-issue that no one cares about.

So as a practical matter, saying T9 only applies to varsity sports is fairly accurate though technically incorrect.

Under T9, varsity sports are apples, club sports are oranges, and intramural sports are pears.

So the male and female varsity sports have to be gendered balanced against each other. That's the only thing that matters, because varsity sports are where the major revenues and expenses are. What happens with club and intramurals has no bearing on varsity sport T9 compliance.

No one much cares or has much difficulty providing club and intramural opportunities for both genders. If the guys want an ultimate frisbee club, school says fine. If the gals want one, that's fine too. If some kids want co-ed ultimate, school says fine whatever.

The university GC does not lose sleep at night about potential T9 lawsuits over club/intramural sports. They do worry about varsity sports lawsuits.

Someone is going to care when football and basketball are set up as “clubs” in a SPV.
[/quote]

Then you’ll have master trustees making medical decisions on players...
[/quote]

I don’t know how Ohio State is going to classify men’s football and basketball as club sports and people will shrug their shoulders like its Jacks or Quidditch.
[/quote]

It will happen the first time they are trying to land a top recruit and now need to offer a 500k per semester sponsorship that MI is offering

[Farfromgeneva]

T9 nominally applies to clubs. But in a way so that it is a complete non-issue that no one cares about.

So as a practical matter, saying T9 only applies to varsity sports is fairly accurate though technically incorrect.

Under T9, varsity sports are apples, club sports are oranges, and intramural sports are pears.

So the male and female varsity sports have to be gendered balanced against each other. That's the only thing that matters, because varsity sports are where the major revenues and expenses are. What happens with club and intramurals has no bearing on varsity sport T9 compliance.

No one much cares or has much difficulty providing club and intramural opportunities for both genders. If the guys want an ultimate frisbee club, school says fine. If the gals want one, that's fine too. If some kids want co-ed ultimate, school says fine whatever.

The university GC does not lose sleep at night about potential T9 lawsuits over club/intramural sports. They do worry about varsity sports lawsuits.

Someone is going to care when football and basketball are set up as “clubs” in a SPV.

Then you’ll have master trustees making medical decisions on players...

I don’t know how Ohio State is going to classify men’s football and basketball as club sports and people will shrug their shoulders like its Jacks or Quidditch.

The lack of personal agency in society today probably means yes to your semi rhetorical question.

Problem with this club concept is you lose quality control like a spiraling bad quick service food franchiser. You’re going to have zero control over the culture of program and behavior but let them use your name and facilities. What happens when you have a college level version of Rae Carruth or the basketball player at Baylor who names escapes me (Patrick something maybe? My dad was older friends with Dave Bliss from when he spent some time in upstate NY but never pretended the guy wasn’t monsterly focused on his career.) what’s the civil liability? Is there antitrust protetection? What extends to the institution? Reality is anyone can sue anybody at any time so probably 1/3 of any “rents” collected need to be escrowed as legal liability funds and then debt service on facilities and there’s probably less than a solid industrial business left in terms of EBITDA for the school meanwhile you don’t have the asset/franchise terminal value which professional sports owners generally make their cake on. So what’s the point of a single digit, high risk, ROE/I to have this quasi professional entity floating around campus?

[Typical Lax Dad]

T9 nominally applies to clubs. But in a way so that it is a complete non-issue that no one cares about.

So as a practical matter, saying T9 only applies to varsity sports is fairly accurate though technically incorrect.

Under T9, varsity sports are apples, club sports are oranges, and intramural sports are pears.

So the male and female varsity sports have to be gendered balanced against each other. That's the only thing that matters, because varsity sports are where the major revenues and expenses are. What happens with club and intramurals has no bearing on varsity sport T9 compliance.

No one much cares or has much difficulty providing club and intramural opportunities for both genders. If the guys want an ultimate frisbee club, school says fine. If the gals want one, that's fine too. If some kids want co-ed ultimate, school says fine whatever.

The university GC does not lose sleep at night about potential T9 lawsuits over club/intramural sports. They do worry about varsity sports lawsuits.

Someone is going to care when football and basketball are set up as “clubs” in a SPV.

Then you’ll have master trustees making medical decisions on players...

I don’t know how Ohio State is going to classify men’s football and basketball as club sports and people will shrug their shoulders like its Jacks or Quidditch.

The lack of personal agency in society today probably means yes to your semi rhetorical question.

Problem with this club concept is you lose quality control like a spiraling bad quick service food franchiser. You’re going to have zero control over the culture of program and behavior but let them use your name and facilities. What happens when you have a college level version of Rae Carruth or the basketball player at Baylor who names escapes me (Patrick something maybe? My dad was older friends with Dave Bliss from when he spent some time in upstate NY but never pretended the guy wasn’t monsterly focused on his career.) what’s the civil liability? Is there antitrust protetection? What extends to the institution? Reality is anyone can sue anybody at any time so probably 1/3 of any “rents” collected need to be escrowed as legal liability funds and then debt service on facilities and there’s probably less than a solid industrial business left in terms of EBITDA for the school meanwhile you don’t have the asset/franchise terminal value which professional sports owners generally make their cake on. So what’s the point of a single digit, high risk, ROE/I to have this quasi professional entity floating around campus?

We will see if Duke and Wake Forest will run professional sports teams on campus.

[Farfromgeneva]

I just wonder if half the D1 athletics departments don’t just move to D3 by end of this decade give or take. I think the payoff is highly overrated vs all the various costs, many of which are long term in nature. You rock around half the sec states and it’s easy to understand why they may be fine with it but for most of the country the total loss of institutional control and tail wagging the dog just isn’t worth the benefits.

If I had to guess first to go will be broke ones whi don’t have existential considerations in the table (ie jax should probably drop athletics down but are hurting such that this may be a swing at survival for them) and the high quality schools that dont have certain millstones they’re carrying around - Vandy, Rice, Perhaps some of the UC systems schools not named Berkeley or LA, Wake, etc.

It’s going to be interesting for sure. I know I wouldn’t want to own NCAA long term revenue backed bonds sitting out there for sure.

[Farfromgeneva]

New York, March 23, 2020 -- Moody's Investors Service has revised the outlook on the National Collegiate Athletic Association, IN (NCAA) to negative from stable. At the same time the Aa2 rating has been affirmed. The NCAA has $9.6 million of debt issued through the Indiana Finance Authority.
RATINGS RATIONALE
The outlook revision to negative is driven by the financial impact of the cancellation of the Division I men's and women's 2020 basketball tournaments, as well as all remaining winter and spring NCAA championships in response to the coronavirus pandemic. The social risk evidenced by the disruption of the public health emergency directly impacts the NCAA through the loss of television and marketing rights revenue it receives related to the Division I men's basketball championship. The projected revenue from its media partners for fiscal 2020 was $827 million. With the cancellation, the NCAA will receive 30% of the expected $827 million. The recovery plan from that loss will be aided by insurance recoveries, a reduction to Division I member distributions, expense savings and a likely draw on an operating line of credit. Operating performance will weaken materially in 2020 and likely turn mildly negative. Investment losses during the current year will also weigh on credit quality should they persist.
The affirmation of the Aa2 rating reflects the NCAA's reduced but still very strong liquidity compared to relatively low fixed costs and a very modest amount of debt outstanding. Availability of a potential line of credit adds to the association's ability to respond to near term shocks. Favorably, the association's governance and risk management has long recognized and planned based on its revenue reliance on the men's basketball championship. The NCAA will be guided by its Financial Recovery Plan in making expense adjustments following the revenue loss.
The rating also recognizes the NCAA's established role as a large and prominent membership organization with over $1 billion in operating revenue reported in fiscal year 2019, valuable multi-year media rights contracts, and normally breakeven operating performance. In addition to ongoing litigation risks, the rating is constrained by significant revenue concentration with more than 75% of revenue tied to a single, annual championship event. While the NCAA's role in intercollegiate athletics is well established, it also faces multi-faceted pressures including its enforcement role for complex safety and other rules and the perceived disconnect between the amateurism of student-athletes, as codified by the NCAA and the increasing commercial success of high profile college sports.
The rating and outlook incorporate Moody's current base case macroeconomic scenario, including that disruption in economic activity in the first half of the year will be followed by some recovery in the second half. However, uncertainty will remain for at least several months as to how long it will take to contain the spread of the virus and how businesses and households will cope with the resulting financial losses.
RATING OUTLOOK
The negative outlook incorporates expectations of weak operating performance in fiscal 2020 and potential increase in debt through an operating line of credit as the association responds to its event disruption revenue contraction through reduction to its Division I member distributions and other expenses. The outlook could return to stable following the receipt of 2021 basketball championship revenue especially if any amounts drawn on the line of credit are repaid and financial reserves remain relatively stable.
FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE
- Significant rebound in financial reserves to serve as a buffer for potential future shocks
- Favorable resolution of litigation risks and reduction in business model risks
FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO A DOWNGRADE
- Additional disruption in contractual payments from media agreements or marked decline in viewer demand
- Material erosion of financial reserves
- Unfavorable outcome of litigation or contingencies likely to translate into decline in financial resources of operating performance
LEGAL SECURITY
Bond repayment is a general unsecured obligation of the NCAA.
PROFILE
The National Collegiate Athletic Association is a voluntary membership organization for over 1,200 colleges, universities, athletic conferences and other members. The NCAA serves as the primary rule-making, enforcement, and sports certification body for intercollegiate athletics. The high profile of the Association is supported by its membership because the president of each participating college or university serves as the primary representative.
METHODOLOGY
The principal methodology used in this rating was Nonprofit Organizations (Other Than Healthcare and Higher Education) published in May 2019. Please see the Rating Methodologies page on www.moodys.com for a copy of this methodology.
REGULATORY DISCLOSURES
For ratings issued on a program, series, category/class of debt or security this announcement provides certain regulatory disclosures in relation to each rating of a subsequently issued bond or note of the same series, category/class of debt, security or pursuant to a program for which the ratings are derived exclusively from existing ratings in accordance with Moody's rating practices. For ratings issued on a support provider, this announcement provides certain regulatory disclosures in relation to the credit rating action on the support provider and in relation to each particular credit rating action for securities that derive their credit ratings from the support provider's credit rating. For provisional ratings, this announcement provides certain regulatory disclosures in relation to the provisional rating assigned, and in relation to a definitive rating that may be assigned subsequent to the final issuance of the debt, in each case where the transaction structure and terms have not changed prior to the assignment of the definitive rating in a manner that would have affected the rating. For further information please see the ratings tab on the issuer/entity page for the respective issuer on www.moodys.com.
Regulatory disclosures contained in this press release apply to the credit rating and, if applicable, the related rati