NCAA reorg imminent

[OSVAlacrosse]

I’ve never once referenced the NCAA at all. You keep bringing that up. I’m talking federal civil rights compliance with title IX and colleges. I don’t know why you keep insisting I’ve referenced the NCAAs at all.

My mistake, I assumed that's what you meant when you wrote "There’s going to have to be some compliance." I thought you meant here that the NCAA would handle "compliance". And I also assumed you meant "compliance with agreed upon rules between schools". A reasonable assumption.

It seems you mean "compliance with Title IX" laws.

Your view is that what a student earns from a job ropes Title IX laws in?

Yes realize the thread is NcAA reorg which to me is “give up all influence over any and all colleges that participate in major athletics with revenues attached” but I imagine title IX compliance under NIL will be worse than anything the NCAA, a sad sack SRO that’s only served to keep congress and other authorities away from college presidents while they milked this cow using its field hands excessively for 40yrs. Now they don’t have the air cover of that with respect to “amateurism” and consequently it serves no value or purpose. The whole idea of student athletes is a joke, star basketball players at SUNY Binghamton don’t even go to classes. Football player at UGA are barley integrated in campus at all with separate housing etc. Their not part of the actual campus or student experience except when their performing in game day.


I think it can if it’s clear that the compensation is tied directly to the “students” athletic activities rather than market rate for other services performed then yes compensation for playing a sport while still being nominally a student will require record keeping for title IX. There’s nothing in the NIL ruling that supercedes title IX.

There is also nothing in the NIL ruling that mandates a private company to compensate athletes equally based on title IX. I am not sure where title IX would apply at all. The NCAA will want no part of record keeping or compliance as they would want to wash their hands of any obligation to the student athlete should the company sponsoring change an agreement or terms with an athlete. I also feel that not all sponsorship will be based on athletic performance so that adds another element. Specific to lacrosse, I know of more than one current player who is using the new opportunity to earn money through social media influence. For lacrosse specific athletes, this makes more sense and will be far more common than a lacrosse player signing a shoe deal. I think the Gait deal is an outlier. I see no connection to title IX compliance in any of this as male and female athletes will be allowed to seek any opportunities they choose. The institutions will want no part of tracking or regulating this.

[MDlaxfan76]

Why do the players have to be students?

The big time programs could just have minor league teams using the schools name and facilities for the entertainment of the students… just like Starbucks and Chick-fil-A in the food court.

That may be the other but then who cares when they get ripped from the tags they wear when they play. Living in the south you wouldn’t believe the jock sniffing by limited or non athletes around a player or program due to the jersey and belief they are part of the Same winstitution.

It would take title IX completely off the table.

That seems potentially right, assuming they are not students at all. No direct relationship with the school other than perhaps facilities lease and naming lease. But then the school would also need to have no authority over the hiring and firing of coaches, discipline, etc. Needs to be entirely independent which also means the teams would be free to move, etc. Probably other implications as well.

[MDlaxfan76]

I’ve never once referenced the NCAA at all. You keep bringing that up. I’m talking federal civil rights compliance with title IX and colleges. I don’t know why you keep insisting I’ve referenced the NCAAs at all.

My mistake, I assumed that's what you meant when you wrote "There’s going to have to be some compliance." I thought you meant here that the NCAA would handle "compliance". And I also assumed you meant "compliance with agreed upon rules between schools". A reasonable assumption.

It seems you mean "compliance with Title IX" laws.

Your view is that what a student earns from a job ropes Title IX laws in?

Yes realize the thread is NcAA reorg which to me is “give up all influence over any and all colleges that participate in major athletics with revenues attached” but I imagine title IX compliance under NIL will be worse than anything the NCAA, a sad sack SRO that’s only served to keep congress and other authorities away from college presidents while they milked this cow using its field hands excessively for 40yrs. Now they don’t have the air cover of that with respect to “amateurism” and consequently it serves no value or purpose. The whole idea of student athletes is a joke, star basketball players at SUNY Binghamton don’t even go to classes. Football player at UGA are barley integrated in campus at all with separate housing etc. Their not part of the actual campus or student experience except when their performing in game day.


I think it can if it’s clear that the compensation is tied directly to the “students” athletic activities rather than market rate for other services performed then yes compensation for playing a sport while still being nominally a student will require record keeping for title IX. There’s nothing in the NIL ruling that supercedes title IX.

There is also nothing in the NIL ruling that mandates a private company to compensate athletes equally based on title IX. I am not sure where title IX would apply at all. The NCAA will want no part of record keeping or compliance as they would want to wash their hands of any obligation to the student athlete should the company sponsoring change an agreement or terms with an athlete. I also feel that not all sponsorship will be based on athletic performance so that adds another element. Specific to lacrosse, I know of more than one current player who is using the new opportunity to earn money through social media influence. For lacrosse specific athletes, this makes more sense and will be far more common than a lacrosse player signing a shoe deal. I think the Gait deal is an outlier. I see no connection to title IX compliance in any of this as male and female athletes will be allowed to seek any opportunities they choose. The institutions will want no part of tracking or regulating this.

hmmm, they may not have a choice, if the Title IX legal cases are brought. While I agree that the female athletes ostensibly have the same rights to pursue and exploit whatever personal opportunities they can, we're already seeing schools actively promoting that joining their program has a virtual guarantee of such economic benefit...and that's going to certainly trigger the schools being involved. Will those proffers be equivalent for men and women?

Unless those economic opportunities are truly third party, no relationship to the decision to join or continue with a program/school, I'd bet that Title IX will become an issue. (I'm not a lawyer so could well be mistaken in my logic).

[Typical Lax Dad]

Why do the players have to be students?

The big time programs could just have minor league teams using the schools name and facilities for the entertainment of the students… just like Starbucks and Chick-fil-A in the food court.

That may be the other but then who cares when they get ripped from the tags they wear when they play. Living in the south you wouldn’t believe the jock sniffing by limited or non athletes around a player or program due to the jersey and belief they are part of the Same winstitution.

It would take title IX completely off the table.

They don’t have to be students is right. Guys that can’t quite make the NFL or NBA but are good players or can make more than the minimum could populate the rosters. Don’t have to play for 4 years maximum either. Can play 10 if they want. Why go G League or abroad when you can have a long career playing basketball for “The Wake Forest” branded team or the “NC State” branded team? Rabil should be pitching this idea to college ADs. Farm out lacrosse to the PLL. Teams can just license the name from the school. It doesn’t matter who is on these teams. It’s the laundry that’s important. This will raise the level of play actually. The leagues would he run by booster clubs like Friends of Virginia Athletics, or Ohio State Athletic Foundation or something like that. Colleges could just take the revenue from licensing without the administrative burden. It would be a win win. Of course if it doesn’t work out kids can always apply to a school like everyone else. Would be really good for basketball as all these guys playing abroad wouldn’t have to. May end up with less opportunities for HS kids but air needs to be let out of that balloon also.

[MDlaxfan76]

Why do the players have to be students?

The big time programs could just have minor league teams using the schools name and facilities for the entertainment of the students… just like Starbucks and Chick-fil-A in the food court.

That may be the other but then who cares when they get ripped from the tags they wear when they play. Living in the south you wouldn’t believe the jock sniffing by limited or non athletes around a player or program due to the jersey and belief they are part of the Same winstitution.

It would take title IX completely off the table.

They don’t have to be students is right. Guys that can’t quite make the NFL or NBA but are good players or can make more than the minimum could populate the rosters. Don’t have to play for 4 years maximum either. Can play 10 if they want. Why go G League or abroad when you can have a long career playing basketball for “The Wake Forest” branded team or the “NC State” branded team? Rabil should be pitching this idea to college ADs. Farm out lacrosse to the PLL. Teams can just license the name from the school. It doesn’t matter who is on these teams. It’s the laundry that’s important. This will raise the level of play actually. The leagues would he run by booster clubs like Friends of Virginia Athletics, or Ohio State Athletic Foundation or something like that. Colleges could just take the revenue from licensing without the administrative burden. It would be a win win. Of course if it doesn’t work out kids can always apply to a school like everyone else. Would be really good for basketball as all these guys playing abroad wouldn’t have to. May end up with less opportunities for HS kids but air needs to be let out of that balloon also.

I'd be bummed if this concept permeated to the non revenue sports, but it's a feasible concept for the big time revenue sports.

specific to lax, anyone have thoughts about how these various scenarios would impact our sport?

How about Ivy League where sports are all "non-revenue" and supported by the school and alumni...do they actually have an advantage? (who'd have thunk...)

[Farfromgeneva]

Why do the players have to be students?

The big time programs could just have minor league teams using the schools name and facilities for the entertainment of the students… just like Starbucks and Chick-fil-A in the food court.

That may be the other but then who cares when they get ripped from the tags they wear when they play. Living in the south you wouldn’t believe the jock sniffing by limited or non athletes around a player or program due to the jersey and belief they are part of the Same winstitution.

It would take title IX completely off the table.

Correct but would people care about minor league sports that had a, over time shrinking to make more room for other logos like Ricky Bobby, college crest? When do the programs decide they don’t like the goofy colors or mascot of the college and bounce it? 5yrs into this structure? How long before the relationship to a university erodes to next to nothing? Once you go down that path a full separation is the only end result. Maybe that’s a good thing and colleges could go back to real amateurism, without the cash, but that’s what such a solution would lead to I have to think.

[Farfromgeneva]

I’ve never once referenced the NCAA at all. You keep bringing that up. I’m talking federal civil rights compliance with title IX and colleges. I don’t know why you keep insisting I’ve referenced the NCAAs at all.

My mistake, I assumed that's what you meant when you wrote "There’s going to have to be some compliance." I thought you meant here that the NCAA would handle "compliance". And I also assumed you meant "compliance with agreed upon rules between schools". A reasonable assumption.

It seems you mean "compliance with Title IX" laws.

Your view is that what a student earns from a job ropes Title IX laws in?

Yes realize the thread is NcAA reorg which to me is “give up all influence over any and all colleges that participate in major athletics with revenues attached” but I imagine title IX compliance under NIL will be worse than anything the NCAA, a sad sack SRO that’s only served to keep congress and other authorities away from college presidents while they milked this cow using its field hands excessively for 40yrs. Now they don’t have the air cover of that with respect to “amateurism” and consequently it serves no value or purpose. The whole idea of student athletes is a joke, star basketball players at SUNY Binghamton don’t even go to classes. Football player at UGA are barley integrated in campus at all with separate housing etc. Their not part of the actual campus or student experience except when their performing in game day.


I think it can if it’s clear that the compensation is tied directly to the “students” athletic activities rather than market rate for other services performed then yes compensation for playing a sport while still being nominally a student will require record keeping for title IX. There’s nothing in the NIL ruling that supercedes title IX.

There is also nothing in the NIL ruling that mandates a private company to compensate athletes equally based on title IX. I am not sure where title IX would apply at all. The NCAA will want no part of record keeping or compliance as they would want to wash their hands of any obligation to the student athlete should the company sponsoring change an agreement or terms with an athlete. I also feel that not all sponsorship will be based on athletic performance so that adds another element. Specific to lacrosse, I know of more than one current player who is using the new opportunity to earn money through social media influence. For lacrosse specific athletes, this makes more sense and will be far more common than a lacrosse player signing a shoe deal. I think the Gait deal is an outlier. I see no connection to title IX compliance in any of this as male and female athletes will be allowed to seek any opportunities they choose. The institutions will want no part of tracking or regulating this.

Title IX isn’t NCAA is federal civil rights law. Of course the NCAA wants no part of this but they were set up to be oversight of amateurism which was the basis for their existence (and again like all SROs to keep the govt out of their business, like FINRA as another example, or how Facebook is trying to influence regulation so it can capture its agent when it comes if they can). Colleges get federal funding and therefor have to comply federally or lose federal funding. Disproportionate opportunities provided by more money, wherever it comes from be it tv money through a SRO or the local car dealership, will get challengers eventually so every institution would be brain damaged to not attempt to keep records. Go ask ten different university administrators involved in some capacity if they think they’ll need to keep track of this in any way.

NCAA is done. I don’t think it’ll even keep it’s influence over D 3 ultimately.

[Farfromgeneva]

Why do the players have to be students?

The big time programs could just have minor league teams using the schools name and facilities for the entertainment of the students… just like Starbucks and Chick-fil-A in the food court.

That may be the other but then who cares when they get ripped from the tags they wear when they play. Living in the south you wouldn’t believe the jock sniffing by limited or non athletes around a player or program due to the jersey and belief they are part of the Same winstitution.

It would take title IX completely off the table.

That seems potentially right, assuming they are not students at all. No direct relationship with the school other than perhaps facilities lease and naming lease. But then the school would also need to have no authority over the hiring and firing of coaches, discipline, etc. Needs to be entirely independent which also means the teams would be free to move, etc. Probably other implications as well.

How about when you have a Lawrence Phillips situation and the guy is rocking a U Nebraska sweatshirt and the media refers tot he Nebraska football player? Reputational risk with the upside being a stadium lease that may or may not cover the true operating and debt service cost?

I don’t know where it’s going but I strongly believe this isn’t a minor tweak to the current system and that it’s all going to be flipped on its head in the reasonably near future (3-5yrs).

[OSVAlacrosse]

Why do the players have to be students?

The big time programs could just have minor league teams using the schools name and facilities for the entertainment of the students… just like Starbucks and Chick-fil-A in the food court.

That may be the other but then who cares when they get ripped from the tags they wear when they play. Living in the south you wouldn’t believe the jock sniffing by limited or non athletes around a player or program due to the jersey and belief they are part of the Same winstitution.

It would take title IX completely off the table.

They don’t have to be students is right. Guys that can’t quite make the NFL or NBA but are good players or can make more than the minimum could populate the rosters. Don’t have to play for 4 years maximum either. Can play 10 if they want. Why go G League or abroad when you can have a long career playing basketball for “The Wake Forest” branded team or the “NC State” branded team? Rabil should be pitching this idea to college ADs. Farm out lacrosse to the PLL. Teams can just license the name from the school. It doesn’t matter who is on these teams. It’s the laundry that’s important. This will raise the level of play actually. The leagues would he run by booster clubs like Friends of Virginia Athletics, or Ohio State Athletic Foundation or something like that. Colleges could just take the revenue from licensing without the administrative burden. It would be a win win. Of course if it doesn’t work out kids can always apply to a school like everyone else. Would be really good for basketball as all these guys playing abroad wouldn’t have to. May end up with less opportunities for HS kids but air needs to be let out of that balloon also.

I could see this path if NIL and other issues facing the NCAA break the organization. On the plus side in this scenario I think you automatically get lacrosse programs at all of the SEC and Pac12 schools. There is a market if the NCAA got out of the way.

[10stone5]

Here is the actual crux of the SI article,
not Title IX,
not NIL,

If anyone knows the issues within the NCAA, it’s Betsy Mitchell.

She was an athlete at one of college athletics’ richest juggernauts, Texas, has been a coach at Division I’s lowest tier and now is the athletic director of one of the NCAA’s smallest schools, Division III Caltech. She intimately understands the disparities between the NCAA’s 1,000 member schools. And she’s got a suggestion to fix it.

“The commercial priorities of some members means they need to go do their own thing,” says Mitchell. “I kind of wish they would.”

At this week’s 2022 NCAA convention in Indianapolis, just blocks away from the NCAA’s own headquarters, college leaders are poised to take the first step in the process of transforming how college athletics governs itself. A new, streamlined constitution—one that grants authority to each division to create its own policy—is expected to be approved Thursday in a vote of Division I, II and III members.

[MDlaxfan76]

Why do the players have to be students?

The big time programs could just have minor league teams using the schools name and facilities for the entertainment of the students… just like Starbucks and Chick-fil-A in the food court.

That may be the other but then who cares when they get ripped from the tags they wear when they play. Living in the south you wouldn’t believe the jock sniffing by limited or non athletes around a player or program due to the jersey and belief they are part of the Same winstitution.

It would take title IX completely off the table.

They don’t have to be students is right. Guys that can’t quite make the NFL or NBA but are good players or can make more than the minimum could populate the rosters. Don’t have to play for 4 years maximum either. Can play 10 if they want. Why go G League or abroad when you can have a long career playing basketball for “The Wake Forest” branded team or the “NC State” branded team? Rabil should be pitching this idea to college ADs. Farm out lacrosse to the PLL. Teams can just license the name from the school. It doesn’t matter who is on these teams. It’s the laundry that’s important. This will raise the level of play actually. The leagues would he run by booster clubs like Friends of Virginia Athletics, or Ohio State Athletic Foundation or something like that. Colleges could just take the revenue from licensing without the administrative burden. It would be a win win. Of course if it doesn’t work out kids can always apply to a school like everyone else. Would be really good for basketball as all these guys playing abroad wouldn’t have to. May end up with less opportunities for HS kids but air needs to be let out of that balloon also.

I could see this path if NIL and other issues facing the NCAA break the organization. On the plus side in this scenario I think you automatically get lacrosse programs at all of the SEC and Pac12 schools. There is a market if the NCAA got out of the way.

NCAA or Title IX ?

Isn't the issue Title IX?..or do you mean that if, say, football was "out of the way" (not students) then all those slots would open up for non-revenue sports with lots of demand like lax?

[Typical Lax Dad]

Why do the players have to be students?

The big time programs could just have minor league teams using the schools name and facilities for the entertainment of the students… just like Starbucks and Chick-fil-A in the food court.

That may be the other but then who cares when they get ripped from the tags they wear when they play. Living in the south you wouldn’t believe the jock sniffing by limited or non athletes around a player or program due to the jersey and belief they are part of the Same winstitution.

It would take title IX completely off the table.

They don’t have to be students is right. Guys that can’t quite make the NFL or NBA but are good players or can make more than the minimum could populate the rosters. Don’t have to play for 4 years maximum either. Can play 10 if they want. Why go G League or abroad when you can have a long career playing basketball for “The Wake Forest” branded team or the “NC State” branded team? Rabil should be pitching this idea to college ADs. Farm out lacrosse to the PLL. Teams can just license the name from the school. It doesn’t matter who is on these teams. It’s the laundry that’s important. This will raise the level of play actually. The leagues would he run by booster clubs like Friends of Virginia Athletics, or Ohio State Athletic Foundation or something like that. Colleges could just take the revenue from licensing without the administrative burden. It would be a win win. Of course if it doesn’t work out kids can always apply to a school like everyone else. Would be really good for basketball as all these guys playing abroad wouldn’t have to. May end up with less opportunities for HS kids but air needs to be let out of that balloon also.

I could see this path if NIL and other issues facing the NCAA break the organization. On the plus side in this scenario I think you automatically get lacrosse programs at all of the SEC and Pac12 schools. There is a market if the NCAA got out of the way.

Yep. NCAA is in the way of lacrosse being a revenue generating sport. They need to step aside and let Paul and Michael run it. Maybe even go the “Sixies” route.

[OSVAlacrosse]

Why do the players have to be students?

The big time programs could just have minor league teams using the schools name and facilities for the entertainment of the students… just like Starbucks and Chick-fil-A in the food court.

That may be the other but then who cares when they get ripped from the tags they wear when they play. Living in the south you wouldn’t believe the jock sniffing by limited or non athletes around a player or program due to the jersey and belief they are part of the Same winstitution.

It would take title IX completely off the table.

They don’t have to be students is right. Guys that can’t quite make the NFL or NBA but are good players or can make more than the minimum could populate the rosters. Don’t have to play for 4 years maximum either. Can play 10 if they want. Why go G League or abroad when you can have a long career playing basketball for “The Wake Forest” branded team or the “NC State” branded team? Rabil should be pitching this idea to college ADs. Farm out lacrosse to the PLL. Teams can just license the name from the school. It doesn’t matter who is on these teams. It’s the laundry that’s important. This will raise the level of play actually. The leagues would he run by booster clubs like Friends of Virginia Athletics, or Ohio State Athletic Foundation or something like that. Colleges could just take the revenue from licensing without the administrative burden. It would be a win win. Of course if it doesn’t work out kids can always apply to a school like everyone else. Would be really good for basketball as all these guys playing abroad wouldn’t have to. May end up with less opportunities for HS kids but air needs to be let out of that balloon also.

I could see this path if NIL and other issues facing the NCAA break the organization. On the plus side in this scenario I think you automatically get lacrosse programs at all of the SEC and Pac12 schools. There is a market if the NCAA got out of the way.

NCAA or Title IX ?

Isn't the issue Title IX?..or do you mean that if, say, football was "out of the way" (not students) then all those slots would open up for non-revenue sports with lots of demand like lax?

I think the NCAA could go away. Title IX will not "go away" as it is legislation and those things never die. SEC football will not go away either. I was referring to the previous post where big time football goes private in a few programs like the SEC. I think the comment was the "Wake Forrest branded team" If lacrosse applied the idea and expanded the MCLA through a third party like PLL I think the upside would be more exposure to these teams. Does title IX currently have a huge impact on the MCLA teams? I also do not see Title IX as the issue with NIL. As I understand it the agreements would be between an athlete and a company not the school and the sponsor. How would title IX impact a player making millions off of a Youtube channel? The biggest athlete in HS currently could make a million dollars tonight streaming his NBA 2K games if he wanted to. What changes with the new policy is that less money goes directly to the school and more directly to athletes unless you think the consumer will spend more money than what they currently spend.

[Farfromgeneva]

NCAA just approved financial aid legislation changes yesterday which will allow hobart to offer athletic aid.

[MDlaxfan76]

Why do the players have to be students?

The big time programs could just have minor league teams using the schools name and facilities for the entertainment of the students… just like Starbucks and Chick-fil-A in the food court.

That may be the other but then who cares when they get ripped from the tags they wear when they play. Living in the south you wouldn’t believe the jock sniffing by limited or non athletes around a player or program due to the jersey and belief they are part of the Same winstitution.

It would take title IX completely off the table.

They don’t have to be students is right. Guys that can’t quite make the NFL or NBA but are good players or can make more than the minimum could populate the rosters. Don’t have to play for 4 years maximum either. Can play 10 if they want. Why go G League or abroad when you can have a long career playing basketball for “The Wake Forest” branded team or the “NC State” branded team? Rabil should be pitching this idea to college ADs. Farm out lacrosse to the PLL. Teams can just license the name from the school. It doesn’t matter who is on these teams. It’s the laundry that’s important. This will raise the level of play actually. The leagues would he run by booster clubs like Friends of Virginia Athletics, or Ohio State Athletic Foundation or something like that. Colleges could just take the revenue from licensing without the administrative burden. It would be a win win. Of course if it doesn’t work out kids can always apply to a school like everyone else. Would be really good for basketball as all these guys playing abroad wouldn’t have to. May end up with less opportunities for HS kids but air needs to be let out of that balloon also.

I could see this path if NIL and other issues facing the NCAA break the organization. On the plus side in this scenario I think you automatically get lacrosse programs at all of the SEC and Pac12 schools. There is a market if the NCAA got out of the way.

NCAA or Title IX ?

Isn't the issue Title IX?..or do you mean that if, say, football was "out of the way" (not students) then all those slots would open up for non-revenue sports with lots of demand like lax?

I think the NCAA could go away. Title IX will not "go away" as it is legislation and those things never die. SEC football will not go away either. I was referring to the previous post where big time football goes private in a few programs like the SEC. I think the comment was the "Wake Forrest branded team" If lacrosse applied the idea and expanded the MCLA through a third party like PLL I think the upside would be more exposure to these teams. Does title IX currently have a huge impact on the MCLA teams? I also do not see Title IX as the issue with NIL. As I understand it the agreements would be between an athlete and a company not the school and the sponsor. How would title IX impact a player making millions off of a Youtube channel? The biggest athlete in HS currently could make a million dollars tonight streaming his NBA 2K games if he wanted to. What changes with the new policy is that less money goes directly to the school and more directly to athletes unless you think the consumer will spend more money than what they currently spend.

I could be wrong, but I think that if schools are in any way involved in channeling the athletes to NIL money as part of their attraction to their programs, Title IX may well be triggered.

And some of these schools appear to already be doing so...

Agreed that if certain sports and specific programs were taken 100% independent of the school, Title IX wouldn't apply.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Why do the players have to be students?

The big time programs could just have minor league teams using the schools name and facilities for the entertainment of the students… just like Starbucks and Chick-fil-A in the food court.

That may be the other but then who cares when they get ripped from the tags they wear when they play. Living in the south you wouldn’t believe the jock sniffing by limited or non athletes around a player or program due to the jersey and belief they are part of the Same winstitution.

It would take title IX completely off the table.

They don’t have to be students is right. Guys that can’t quite make the NFL or NBA but are good players or can make more than the minimum could populate the rosters. Don’t have to play for 4 years maximum either. Can play 10 if they want. Why go G League or abroad when you can have a long career playing basketball for “The Wake Forest” branded team or the “NC State” branded team? Rabil should be pitching this idea to college ADs. Farm out lacrosse to the PLL. Teams can just license the name from the school. It doesn’t matter who is on these teams. It’s the laundry that’s important. This will raise the level of play actually. The leagues would he run by booster clubs like Friends of Virginia Athletics, or Ohio State Athletic Foundation or something like that. Colleges could just take the revenue from licensing without the administrative burden. It would be a win win. Of course if it doesn’t work out kids can always apply to a school like everyone else. Would be really good for basketball as all these guys playing abroad wouldn’t have to. May end up with less opportunities for HS kids but air needs to be let out of that balloon also.

I could see this path if NIL and other issues facing the NCAA break the organization. On the plus side in this scenario I think you automatically get lacrosse programs at all of the SEC and Pac12 schools. There is a market if the NCAA got out of the way.

NCAA or Title IX ?

Isn't the issue Title IX?..or do you mean that if, say, football was "out of the way" (not students) then all those slots would open up for non-revenue sports with lots of demand like lax?

I think the NCAA could go away. Title IX will not "go away" as it is legislation and those things never die. SEC football will not go away either. I was referring to the previous post where big time football goes private in a few programs like the SEC. I think the comment was the "Wake Forrest branded team" If lacrosse applied the idea and expanded the MCLA through a third party like PLL I think the upside would be more exposure to these teams. Does title IX currently have a huge impact on the MCLA teams? I also do not see Title IX as the issue with NIL. As I understand it the agreements would be between an athlete and a company not the school and the sponsor. How would title IX impact a player making millions off of a Youtube channel? The biggest athlete in HS currently could make a million dollars tonight streaming his NBA 2K games if he wanted to. What changes with the new policy is that less money goes directly to the school and more directly to athletes unless you think the consumer will spend more money than what they currently spend.

Players can take the “pro” route and go to community college or go to a local school in the off season for classes. Colleges wouldn’t offer scholarships or admission lifts anymore. Win-win.

[a fan]

I’ve never once referenced the NCAA at all. You keep bringing that up. I’m talking federal civil rights compliance with title IX and colleges. I don’t know why you keep insisting I’ve referenced the NCAAs at all.

My mistake, I assumed that's what you meant when you wrote "There’s going to have to be some compliance." I thought you meant here that the NCAA would handle "compliance". And I also assumed you meant "compliance with agreed upon rules between schools". A reasonable assumption.

It seems you mean "compliance with Title IX" laws.

Your view is that what a student earns from a job ropes Title IX laws in?

Yes realize the thread is NcAA reorg which to me is “give up all influence over any and all colleges that participate in major athletics with revenues attached” but I imagine title IX compliance under NIL will be worse than anything the NCAA, a sad sack SRO that’s only served to keep congress and other authorities away from college presidents while they milked this cow using its field hands excessively for 40yrs. Now they don’t have the air cover of that with respect to “amateurism” and consequently it serves no value or purpose. The whole idea of student athletes is a joke, star basketball players at SUNY Binghamton don’t even go to classes. Football player at UGA are barley integrated in campus at all with separate housing etc. Their not part of the actual campus or student experience except when their performing in game day.


I think it can if it’s clear that the compensation is tied directly to the “students” athletic activities rather than market rate for other services performed then yes compensation for playing a sport while still being nominally a student will require record keeping for title IX. There’s nothing in the NIL ruling that supercedes title IX.

There is also nothing in the NIL ruling that mandates a private company to compensate athletes equally based on title IX. I am not sure where title IX would apply at all. The NCAA will want no part of record keeping or compliance as they would want to wash their hands of any obligation to the student athlete should the company sponsoring change an agreement or terms with an athlete.

That's my thinking, too. It's why I keep saying that this is none of the School's business any more than it is their business what a Music major earns from his rock band over the summer. This is America....it's none of their business.

And Title IX applies to employees of these institutions, as well. So to me, we already know that Title IX doesn't apply to what someone earns away from school, because there are male coaches with massive NIL deals that the women coaches simply don't have. No one seems to care.

[a fan]

NCAA just approved financial aid legislation changes yesterday which will allow hobart to offer athletic aid.

I had no idea.....they've been playing D1 all this time with no scholarships? Huh.

[ggait]

A lot of the above discussion is quite random and wrong. Let me set a few things straight:

1. The players are ALWAYS going to be students. ALWAYS. The schools have spent the last 10 years furiously and expensively litigating primarily to establish this principle. And they have been completely successful in establishing that principle. Having won on that principle, they will NEVER abandon that. NEVER.

Athletes being students, per the schools in sworn testimony to federal judges, is THE CORE CONCEPT of college sports. It fundamentally defines the college sports business (and all now agree/admit that it is a business) as a product (under anti-trust law principles) distinct from the pro sports business. The schools have ZERO interest in operating the Tuscaloosa Crimson football team and NEVER will do that.

Back in the olden days, schools like Yale and Chicago did operate commercial teams that featured non-students. The NCAA came into existence over 100 years ago to get rid of that. That concept is, and will remain, dead dead dead dead dead.

The only real proposal for a pro/college sports league was the HBCU-oriented Professional Collegiate League. The PCL concept, which makes a lot of sense on a whiteboard, has been really struggling. So no evidence that such concept would ever catch on more broadly.

2. Title IX has NOTHING to do with NIL. NOTHING. The whole concept of NIL, after all, is that it is separate from the schools and personal. Title IX has NOTHING to do with regulating what a college athlete makes in his side hussle as a waiter, Uber driver or Instagram influencer. Because non-athlete students are also free and unregulated to have side hussles too.

Kids can make money on side hussles, get their earnings reported to the IRS, and then pay taxes. Doesn't matter if you are an athlete or not. Doesn't matter if the job is working at Starbucks or doing TV commercials for the local car dealer.

In fact, the whole NIL being separate is the key thing that will maintain the current system and allow it to continue to evolve. T9 would be strongly implicated if schools started paying actual salaries and then adjusted the salaries to reflect actual market value. Instead, the schools stay removed from all that. If star QB makes more on the side than the XC runner, so what? That's the market, not the school, making that happen.

[Typical Lax Dad]

A lot of the above discussion is quite random and wrong. Let me set a few things straight:

1. The players are ALWAYS going to be students. ALWAYS. The schools have spent the last 10 years furiously and expensively litigating primarily to establish this principle. And they have been completely successful in establishing that principle. Having won on that principle, they will NEVER abandon that. NEVER.

Athletes being students, per the schools in sworn testimony to federal judges, is THE CORE CONCEPT of college sports. It fundamentally defines the college sports business (and all now agree/admit that it is a business) as a product (under anti-trust law principles) distinct from the pro sports business. The schools have ZERO interest in operating the Tuscaloosa Crimson football team and NEVER will do that.

Back in the olden days, schools like Yale and Chicago did operate commercial teams that featured non-students. The NCAA came into existence over 100 years ago to get rid of that. That concept is, and will remain, dead dead dead dead dead.

The only real proposal for a pro/college sports league was the HBCU-oriented Professional Collegiate League. The PCL concept, which makes a lot of sense on a whiteboard, has been really struggling. So no evidence that such concept would ever catch on more broadly.

2. Title IX has NOTHING to do with NIL. NOTHING. The whole concept of NIL, after all, is that it is separate from the schools and personal. Title IX has NOTHING to do with regulating what a college athlete makes in his side hussle as a waiter, Uber driver or Instagram influencer. Because non-athlete students are also free and unregulated to have side hussles too.

Kids can make money on side hussles, get their earnings reported to the IRS, and then pay taxes. Doesn't matter if you are an athlete or not. Doesn't matter if the job is working at Starbucks or doing TV commercials for the local car dealer.

In fact, the whole NIL being separate is the key thing that will maintain the current system and allow it to continue to evolve. T9 would be strongly implicated if schools started paying actual salaries and then adjusted the salaries to reflect actual market value. Instead, the schools stay removed from all that. If star QB makes more on the side than the XC runner, so what? That's the market, not the school, making that happen.

You mean Alabama can’t cut an sponsorship deal with a CFL team and have them play as the Crimson Tide?