BigRedChant wrote: ↑Thu May 23, 2024 12:10 pm
I have to think getting recruited for soccer is a million times more difficult than lacrosse (and I know lax is tough) - since you are competing with the world
Yes and no. Alot more kids play soccer, but almost every college has a fully funded women's soccer team.
The biggest difference between lax and soccer recruiting is that ECNL and GA have created leagues and tournaments with all of the top players which makes it easier for coaches to identify talents. In lax terms, think of 6 lax for the cures each year. Every year there are girls on the top YJ team, M&D Black and Heros Green who don't go to top 50 D1 programs. That doesn't happen at top girls soccer clubs.
If you aren't on a top club program in soccer, going to a decent D1 program is effectively impossible.
To get back to the original question, I think the lack of scholarship caps could create an imbalance at the top of women's lax.
If a school chooses to fund 30 women's lax scholarships (something our favorite USF assistant proposed earlier this year), any school that could fund this would have a massive edge. Could get back to the old days when only 5 schools had a legit chance to win a national title.
LaxDadMax wrote: ↑Fri May 24, 2024 9:03 am
To get back to the original question, I think the lack of scholarship caps could create an imbalance at the top of women's lax.
If a school chooses to fund 30 women's lax scholarships (something our favorite USF assistant proposed earlier this year), any school that could fund this would have a massive edge. Could get back to the old days when only 5 schools had a legit chance to win a national title.
I can't even pretend to understand what is going on. I read Seacoaster post and still was lost. However, I assume school Presidents and AD's are getting some legal advice on what they feel this means to Title IX, scholarships, etc.
So maybe a silly question, but if you were an AD heading into this Women's Lax summer recruiting period, is there a chance they will slam the breaks now on scholarship money? If I felt the landscape was changing dramatically, why would I not want to take a "wait and see" on non-revenue generating sports rather than make commitments to athletes who will not be in my program until the '26-'30 graduation years? The peanut butter spread around was required before, will it still?
LaxDadMax wrote: ↑Fri May 24, 2024 9:03 am
To get back to the original question, I think the lack of scholarship caps could create an imbalance at the top of women's lax.
If a school chooses to fund 30 women's lax scholarships (something our favorite USF assistant proposed earlier this year), any school that could fund this would have a massive edge. Could get back to the old days when only 5 schools had a legit chance to win a national title.
I can't even pretend to understand what is going on. I read Seacoaster post and still was lost. However, I assume school Presidents and AD's are getting some legal advice on what they feel this means to Title IX, scholarships, etc.
So maybe a silly question, but if you were an AD heading into this Women's Lax summer recruiting period, is there a chance they will slam the breaks now on scholarship money? If I felt the landscape was changing dramatically, why would I not want to take a "wait and see" on non-revenue generating sports rather than make commitments to athletes who will not be in my program until the '26-'30 graduation years? The peanut butter spread around was required before, will it still?
Scholarships/Scholarship caps are essentially about to end. The school will have up to $10M for male athletes and $10M for female athletes to pay to those athletes starting in the 2025-2026 school year. Scholarships can still exist, but are pretty much irrelevant.
The issue will be schools, like UNC, who are already operating at a deficit will now have another $20M bill on top of their current expenses. Some schools like BC and Syracuse aren't going to be able to swing that $20M bill, so they'll do less (and likely get crushed with recruiting big time talent).
Another factor is how schools will spend that money. I guarantee you athletic directors will push that money toward the only women's sport that has a chance to become profitable (basketball) and sports like WLax will get leftovers.
LaxDadMax wrote: ↑Fri May 24, 2024 9:03 am
To get back to the original question, I think the lack of scholarship caps could create an imbalance at the top of women's lax.
If a school chooses to fund 30 women's lax scholarships (something our favorite USF assistant proposed earlier this year), any school that could fund this would have a massive edge. Could get back to the old days when only 5 schools had a legit chance to win a national title.
I can't even pretend to understand what is going on. I read Seacoaster post and still was lost. However, I assume school Presidents and AD's are getting some legal advice on what they feel this means to Title IX, scholarships, etc.
So maybe a silly question, but if you were an AD heading into this Women's Lax summer recruiting period, is there a chance they will slam the breaks now on scholarship money? If I felt the landscape was changing dramatically, why would I not want to take a "wait and see" on non-revenue generating sports rather than make commitments to athletes who will not be in my program until the '26-'30 graduation years? The peanut butter spread around was required before, will it still?
Scholarships/Scholarship caps are essentially about to end. The school will have up to $10M for male athletes and $10M for female athletes to pay to those athletes starting in the 2025-2026 school year. Scholarships can still exist, but are pretty much irrelevant.
The issue will be schools, like UNC, who are already operating at a deficit will now have another $20M bill on top of their current expenses. Some schools like BC and Syracuse aren't going to be able to swing that $20M bill, so they'll do less (and likely get crushed with recruiting big time talent).
Another factor is how schools will spend that money. I guarantee you athletic directors will push that money toward the only women's sport that has a chance to become profitable (basketball) and sports like WLax will get leftovers.
In terms of wlax, Cuse is one of the top NIL schools out there. There are girls making money going to Cuse as NIL is providing more than the cost of attendance.
LaxDadMax wrote: ↑Fri May 24, 2024 9:03 am
To get back to the original question, I think the lack of scholarship caps could create an imbalance at the top of women's lax.
If a school chooses to fund 30 women's lax scholarships (something our favorite USF assistant proposed earlier this year), any school that could fund this would have a massive edge. Could get back to the old days when only 5 schools had a legit chance to win a national title.
I can't even pretend to understand what is going on. I read Seacoaster post and still was lost. However, I assume school Presidents and AD's are getting some legal advice on what they feel this means to Title IX, scholarships, etc.
So maybe a silly question, but if you were an AD heading into this Women's Lax summer recruiting period, is there a chance they will slam the breaks now on scholarship money? If I felt the landscape was changing dramatically, why would I not want to take a "wait and see" on non-revenue generating sports rather than make commitments to athletes who will not be in my program until the '26-'30 graduation years? The peanut butter spread around was required before, will it still?
Scholarships/Scholarship caps are essentially about to end. The school will have up to $10M for male athletes and $10M for female athletes to pay to those athletes starting in the 2025-2026 school year. Scholarships can still exist, but are pretty much irrelevant.
The issue will be schools, like UNC, who are already operating at a deficit will now have another $20M bill on top of their current expenses. Some schools like BC and Syracuse aren't going to be able to swing that $20M bill, so they'll do less (and likely get crushed with recruiting big time talent).
Another factor is how schools will spend that money. I guarantee you athletic directors will push that money toward the only women's sport that has a chance to become profitable (basketball) and sports like WLax will get leftovers.
In terms of wlax, Cuse is one of the top NIL schools out there. There are girls making money going to Cuse as NIL is providing more than the cost of attendance.
Great, but Cuse can't afford $20M a year coming right out of their budget. That NIL money (that comes from donors) will go right to that payment to athletes.
1) Because a scholarship given by a school is essentially paying yourself - wouldn’t that still be possibly a cheaper alternative than paying out cash and expecting to get it back in tuition ?
2) looks like Syracuse is almost 80,000 a year - good for those girls if they are making more than that in NIL!
LiveLaxLove wrote: ↑Thu May 23, 2024 8:45 am
Not if WLax leadership doesn't create more fan interest. Other sports are way less of a drain than WLax (Women's BB actually makes money at a ton of schools).
Things that are ruining WLax fan interest:
-The draw -- I took someone who was a huge sports person to his first ever WLax game between two ACC teams, and he about lost his mind every time the refs took forever to get the sticks set with the ball wedged between them, only to have the ball shoot up in the air like a jump ball, followed by a round of "follow ball" like it's a Pee-wee soccer game. He said, "Does the men's game do this?! Clearly there's a better way to re-start the game!" He was also very frustrated with the 'make it, take it' aspect of the draw followed by a 90 second possession. His statement there -- "So if I win most of the ridiculous draws, unless I have an atrocious offense, I can pretty much kill most of the game? This sport is horribly managed." When I told him what happens when you false start, and how you could do it on purpose to gain possession, he was ready to leave.
-The complex rules -- what new fan can understand the rules if there are parents in the stands that have watched tons of games that don't even have a confident grasp of the rules? Even more so, there's even coaches admitting that the rules are so complex that they don't feel like they know every rule.
-The mind-numbing post-season selection process -- It's very clear to me that this process is politically driven for D1 WLax. See Duke getting in over head to head losses/blowouts from other bubble teams, Maryland's seeding, and the history of questionable selections from these idiots.
I could go on and on, but it's clear that WLax isn't going to grow and become a priority at any school to balance Title 9 requirements if there's no interest.
I couldn’t disagree more with regards to the draw. First off what sport doesn’t have a gap in between scoring other than basketball? Football, baseball/softball, soccer, hockey, they all have time to restart and for tv it’s a good way to replay the goal. In addition, not having a “losers possession” automatically adds a lot to the game and makes the end of the game way more exciting than if its losers ball. This would create slow play and really no point of playing the last portion of the 4th quarter if you are up by more than 2-3 goals. It would turn into that feeling of playing monopoly when you know you are going to lose but you have to still roll the damn dice into a slow death. They can simply make it faster by putting a timer on the clock for both refs and players after a goal to take the next draw. Just have the goalie throw it out of bounds and a sideline ball is tossed to the ref not checking the stick and boom you stripped out a minute of waiting.
LaxDadMax wrote: ↑Fri May 24, 2024 9:03 am
To get back to the original question, I think the lack of scholarship caps could create an imbalance at the top of women's lax.
If a school chooses to fund 30 women's lax scholarships (something our favorite USF assistant proposed earlier this year), any school that could fund this would have a massive edge. Could get back to the old days when only 5 schools had a legit chance to win a national title.
I can't even pretend to understand what is going on. I read Seacoaster post and still was lost. However, I assume school Presidents and AD's are getting some legal advice on what they feel this means to Title IX, scholarships, etc.
So maybe a silly question, but if you were an AD heading into this Women's Lax summer recruiting period, is there a chance they will slam the breaks now on scholarship money? If I felt the landscape was changing dramatically, why would I not want to take a "wait and see" on non-revenue generating sports rather than make commitments to athletes who will not be in my program until the '26-'30 graduation years? The peanut butter spread around was required before, will it still?
Scholarships/Scholarship caps are essentially about to end. The school will have up to $10M for male athletes and $10M for female athletes to pay to those athletes starting in the 2025-2026 school year. Scholarships can still exist, but are pretty much irrelevant.
The issue will be schools, like UNC, who are already operating at a deficit will now have another $20M bill on top of their current expenses. Some schools like BC and Syracuse aren't going to be able to swing that $20M bill, so they'll do less (and likely get crushed with recruiting big time talent).
Another factor is how schools will spend that money. I guarantee you athletic directors will push that money toward the only women's sport that has a chance to become profitable (basketball) and sports like WLax will get leftovers.
In terms of wlax, Cuse is one of the top NIL schools out there. There are girls making money going to Cuse as NIL is providing more than the cost of attendance.
Fair point, but I think you are going to see lots of the $$ which are currently NIL $$ now being funnelled back to athletic department to fund operational costs / lawsuit payments.
Also, after talking to a few folks in college athletics today, there isn't clarity around whether it is $20m per school or if it would be pro-rated based on revenue created, meaning UNC/Florida could be on the hook for far more than $20m.
In terms of women's lax, I think the biggest impact will be to the 26 recruiting class (who most folks think is one of the deepest ones ever). Since final rules/allocations won't clear until sometime in the fall. This means coaches will walk into recruiting without a sense of their scholarship budget or roster caps.
Also think there could be an impact to 25 committed recruits depending on where the roster cap lands. Even if it is as high as 40, this means schools like Mercer, Stetson, Bryant and Marquette who bring in massive recruiting classes may need to drop some of their 25 commits to make the new roster limits.
LiveLaxLove wrote: ↑Thu May 23, 2024 8:45 am
Not if WLax leadership doesn't create more fan interest. Other sports are way less of a drain than WLax (Women's BB actually makes money at a ton of schools).
Things that are ruining WLax fan interest:
-The draw -- I took someone who was a huge sports person to his first ever WLax game between two ACC teams, and he about lost his mind every time the refs took forever to get the sticks set with the ball wedged between them, only to have the ball shoot up in the air like a jump ball, followed by a round of "follow ball" like it's a Pee-wee soccer game. He said, "Does the men's game do this?! Clearly there's a better way to re-start the game!" He was also very frustrated with the 'make it, take it' aspect of the draw followed by a 90 second possession. His statement there -- "So if I win most of the ridiculous draws, unless I have an atrocious offense, I can pretty much kill most of the game? This sport is horribly managed." When I told him what happens when you false start, and how you could do it on purpose to gain possession, he was ready to leave.
-The complex rules -- what new fan can understand the rules if there are parents in the stands that have watched tons of games that don't even have a confident grasp of the rules? Even more so, there's even coaches admitting that the rules are so complex that they don't feel like they know every rule.
-The mind-numbing post-season selection process -- It's very clear to me that this process is politically driven for D1 WLax. See Duke getting in over head to head losses/blowouts from other bubble teams, Maryland's seeding, and the history of questionable selections from these idiots.
I could go on and on, but it's clear that WLax isn't going to grow and become a priority at any school to balance Title 9 requirements if there's no interest.
I couldn’t disagree more with regards to the draw. First off what sport doesn’t have a gap in between scoring other than basketball? Football, baseball/softball, soccer, hockey, they all have time to restart and for tv it’s a good way to replay the goal. In addition, not having a “losers possession” automatically adds a lot to the game and makes the end of the game way more exciting than if its losers ball. This would create slow play and really no point of playing the last portion of the 4th quarter if you are up by more than 2-3 goals. It would turn into that feeling of playing monopoly when you know you are going to lose but you have to still roll the damn dice into a slow death. They can simply make it faster by putting a timer on the clock for both refs and players after a goal to take the next draw. Just have the goalie throw it out of bounds and a sideline ball is tossed to the ref not checking the stick and boom you stripped out a minute of waiting.
90 seconds of shot clock = 10% of the entire quarter. Talk about a boring time if the team winning wants to crush the clock.
BigRedChant wrote: ↑Fri May 24, 2024 1:11 pm
1) Because a scholarship given by a school is essentially paying yourself - wouldn’t that still be possibly a cheaper alternative than paying out cash and expecting to get it back in tuition ?
2) looks like Syracuse is almost 80,000 a year - good for those girls if they are making more than that in NIL!
Great point on the cost of the school. $80k a year!? Ouch!
LiveLaxLove wrote: ↑Thu May 23, 2024 8:45 am
Not if WLax leadership doesn't create more fan interest. Other sports are way less of a drain than WLax (Women's BB actually makes money at a ton of schools).
Things that are ruining WLax fan interest:
-The draw -- I took someone who was a huge sports person to his first ever WLax game between two ACC teams, and he about lost his mind every time the refs took forever to get the sticks set with the ball wedged between them, only to have the ball shoot up in the air like a jump ball, followed by a round of "follow ball" like it's a Pee-wee soccer game. He said, "Does the men's game do this?! Clearly there's a better way to re-start the game!" He was also very frustrated with the 'make it, take it' aspect of the draw followed by a 90 second possession. His statement there -- "So if I win most of the ridiculous draws, unless I have an atrocious offense, I can pretty much kill most of the game? This sport is horribly managed." When I told him what happens when you false start, and how you could do it on purpose to gain possession, he was ready to leave.
-The complex rules -- what new fan can understand the rules if there are parents in the stands that have watched tons of games that don't even have a confident grasp of the rules? Even more so, there's even coaches admitting that the rules are so complex that they don't feel like they know every rule.
-The mind-numbing post-season selection process -- It's very clear to me that this process is politically driven for D1 WLax. See Duke getting in over head to head losses/blowouts from other bubble teams, Maryland's seeding, and the history of questionable selections from these idiots.
I could go on and on, but it's clear that WLax isn't going to grow and become a priority at any school to balance Title 9 requirements if there's no interest.
I couldn’t disagree more with regards to the draw. First off what sport doesn’t have a gap in between scoring other than basketball? Football, baseball/softball, soccer, hockey, they all have time to restart and for tv it’s a good way to replay the goal. In addition, not having a “losers possession” automatically adds a lot to the game and makes the end of the game way more exciting than if its losers ball. This would create slow play and really no point of playing the last portion of the 4th quarter if you are up by more than 2-3 goals. It would turn into that feeling of playing monopoly when you know you are going to lose but you have to still roll the damn dice into a slow death. They can simply make it faster by putting a timer on the clock for both refs and players after a goal to take the next draw. Just have the goalie throw it out of bounds and a sideline ball is tossed to the ref not checking the stick and boom you stripped out a minute of waiting.
90 seconds of shot clock = 10% of the entire quarter. Talk about a boring time if the team winning wants to crush the clock.
If you look at analytics, top men's teams usually have longer possessions than top women's teams. I don't think anyone called last week's Cuse/Denver game boring where there were 8-10 shot clock violations.
To your point, there are things I think the women's game can do to make games more watchable/ a bit quicker
1) eliminate mandatory stick checks after goals. Give coaches a couple of challenges like in other sports
2) Fix the green card issue in midfield. Only call it when a foul would disrupt a transition opportunity; no green cards at all when possession hasn't been established
3) Speed up free positions. Not exactly sure how to write the rule here, but need to eliminate goalies stretching, jumping, and setting up for 30-40 seconds before each shot.
4) Eliminate shooting space for goalies. They have pads so injury shouldn't be an issue. Let goalies show their athleticism and make some great saves.
LiveLaxLove wrote: ↑Thu May 23, 2024 8:45 am
Not if WLax leadership doesn't create more fan interest. Other sports are way less of a drain than WLax (Women's BB actually makes money at a ton of schools).
Things that are ruining WLax fan interest:
-The draw -- I took someone who was a huge sports person to his first ever WLax game between two ACC teams, and he about lost his mind every time the refs took forever to get the sticks set with the ball wedged between them, only to have the ball shoot up in the air like a jump ball, followed by a round of "follow ball" like it's a Pee-wee soccer game. He said, "Does the men's game do this?! Clearly there's a better way to re-start the game!" He was also very frustrated with the 'make it, take it' aspect of the draw followed by a 90 second possession. His statement there -- "So if I win most of the ridiculous draws, unless I have an atrocious offense, I can pretty much kill most of the game? This sport is horribly managed." When I told him what happens when you false start, and how you could do it on purpose to gain possession, he was ready to leave.
-The complex rules -- what new fan can understand the rules if there are parents in the stands that have watched tons of games that don't even have a confident grasp of the rules? Even more so, there's even coaches admitting that the rules are so complex that they don't feel like they know every rule.
-The mind-numbing post-season selection process -- It's very clear to me that this process is politically driven for D1 WLax. See Duke getting in over head to head losses/blowouts from other bubble teams, Maryland's seeding, and the history of questionable selections from these idiots.
I could go on and on, but it's clear that WLax isn't going to grow and become a priority at any school to balance Title 9 requirements if there's no interest.
I couldn’t disagree more with regards to the draw. First off what sport doesn’t have a gap in between scoring other than basketball? Football, baseball/softball, soccer, hockey, they all have time to restart and for tv it’s a good way to replay the goal. In addition, not having a “losers possession” automatically adds a lot to the game and makes the end of the game way more exciting than if its losers ball. This would create slow play and really no point of playing the last portion of the 4th quarter if you are up by more than 2-3 goals. It would turn into that feeling of playing monopoly when you know you are going to lose but you have to still roll the damn dice into a slow death. They can simply make it faster by putting a timer on the clock for both refs and players after a goal to take the next draw. Just have the goalie throw it out of bounds and a sideline ball is tossed to the ref not checking the stick and boom you stripped out a minute of waiting.
90 seconds of shot clock = 10% of the entire quarter. Talk about a boring time if the team winning wants to crush the clock.
If you look at analytics, top men's teams usually have longer possessions than top women's teams. I don't think anyone called last week's Cuse/Denver game boring where there were 8-10 shot clock violations.
To your point, there are things I think the women's game can do to make games more watchable/ a bit quicker
1) eliminate mandatory stick checks after goals. Give coaches a couple of challenges like in other sports
2) Fix the green card issue in midfield. Only call it when a foul would disrupt a transition opportunity; no green cards at all when possession hasn't been established
3) Speed up free positions. Not exactly sure how to write the rule here, but need to eliminate goalies stretching, jumping, and setting up for 30-40 seconds before each shot.
4) Eliminate shooting space for goalies. They have pads so injury shouldn't be an issue. Let goalies show their athleticism and make some great saves.
How many people in America watched the Cuse/Denver game? Now let's compare those views with other collegiate sports.
See what I'm saying?
More people watched the Women's Volleyball National Championship last year than the Men's Lacrosse National Championship. That's sad.
LiveLaxLove wrote: ↑Thu May 23, 2024 8:45 am
Not if WLax leadership doesn't create more fan interest. Other sports are way less of a drain than WLax (Women's BB actually makes money at a ton of schools).
Things that are ruining WLax fan interest:
-The draw -- I took someone who was a huge sports person to his first ever WLax game between two ACC teams, and he about lost his mind every time the refs took forever to get the sticks set with the ball wedged between them, only to have the ball shoot up in the air like a jump ball, followed by a round of "follow ball" like it's a Pee-wee soccer game. He said, "Does the men's game do this?! Clearly there's a better way to re-start the game!" He was also very frustrated with the 'make it, take it' aspect of the draw followed by a 90 second possession. His statement there -- "So if I win most of the ridiculous draws, unless I have an atrocious offense, I can pretty much kill most of the game? This sport is horribly managed." When I told him what happens when you false start, and how you could do it on purpose to gain possession, he was ready to leave.
-The complex rules -- what new fan can understand the rules if there are parents in the stands that have watched tons of games that don't even have a confident grasp of the rules? Even more so, there's even coaches admitting that the rules are so complex that they don't feel like they know every rule.
-The mind-numbing post-season selection process -- It's very clear to me that this process is politically driven for D1 WLax. See Duke getting in over head to head losses/blowouts from other bubble teams, Maryland's seeding, and the history of questionable selections from these idiots.
I could go on and on, but it's clear that WLax isn't going to grow and become a priority at any school to balance Title 9 requirements if there's no interest.
I couldn’t disagree more with regards to the draw. First off what sport doesn’t have a gap in between scoring other than basketball? Football, baseball/softball, soccer, hockey, they all have time to restart and for tv it’s a good way to replay the goal. In addition, not having a “losers possession” automatically adds a lot to the game and makes the end of the game way more exciting than if its losers ball. This would create slow play and really no point of playing the last portion of the 4th quarter if you are up by more than 2-3 goals. It would turn into that feeling of playing monopoly when you know you are going to lose but you have to still roll the damn dice into a slow death. They can simply make it faster by putting a timer on the clock for both refs and players after a goal to take the next draw. Just have the goalie throw it out of bounds and a sideline ball is tossed to the ref not checking the stick and boom you stripped out a minute of waiting.
90 seconds of shot clock = 10% of the entire quarter. Talk about a boring time if the team winning wants to crush the clock.
If you look at analytics, top men's teams usually have longer possessions than top women's teams. I don't think anyone called last week's Cuse/Denver game boring where there were 8-10 shot clock violations.
To your point, there are things I think the women's game can do to make games more watchable/ a bit quicker
1) eliminate mandatory stick checks after goals. Give coaches a couple of challenges like in other sports
2) Fix the green card issue in midfield. Only call it when a foul would disrupt a transition opportunity; no green cards at all when possession hasn't been established
3) Speed up free positions. Not exactly sure how to write the rule here, but need to eliminate goalies stretching, jumping, and setting up for 30-40 seconds before each shot.
4) Eliminate shooting space for goalies. They have pads so injury shouldn't be an issue. Let goalies show their athleticism and make some great saves.
Don’t forget the innumerable mandatory stoppages to adjust and fix players’ hair.
Back to the original question, how will this impact women's lax.
My perspective.
First off, some clarity around the settlement. The settlement calls for 22% of revenues to go to athletes, not a fixed $$ amount. Obviously, impact is much greater for power 5 schools than other schools.
Some impacts from my perspective
1) BIG LOSER -- 2026 recruits. Details of this settlement won't be finalized until mid-fall at the earliest. This means that coaches may be going into recruiting without understanding their budgets. I expect coaches to be very aggressive for the top 100 players and the very conservative for the rest. I would expect more late commits than in the previous few cycles
2) BIG LOSER -- kids on schools with big rosters. I think the roster cap could be the biggest potential impact for a majority of women's lax programs. No idea what the cap will be, but I can't see it being higher than 45, more than likely 40. Some schools may need to do some serious trimming, including potentially some 2025 commts
3) BIG WINNER -- Revenue driving women's sports. Despite what some folks on the internet say, if these payments are coming from the school, they are subject to Title IX. Expect women's hoop and volleyball to get the lion's share, but can see benefits acrosse women's sports
4) BIG BIG LOSER -- non-revenue male sports. No 2 ways about it. With new revenue streaming coming and Title IX compliance in effect, cuts need to come form somewhere. Expect to see many expensive low-revenue men's sports gone. Expect to see many men's track, wrestling and golf programs cut
5) BIG BIG WINNER -- SEC and BIG 10 women's lax. More $$ in play now and no scholarship caps. Can't see a few programs really leverage the lack of scholarship caps. Within 4 years, I expect Michigan, Penn State, USC, Florida, Clemson to be perennial top 10 teams. Will be interesting to see what these coaches do in 2026 recruiting. Will they over committ scholarship $$ before new rules come in place or will they wait until the 27s to bring in a full class of girls on full rides.
6) X factors -- Northwestern, Stony Brook, Hopkins, Denver. With these changes on the horizon, Northwestern could start very easily being outspent by a majority of the teams in its conference. Will it be able to compete? With Stony Brook no longer being on a level playing field with top schools and his kids graduated, how long does Joe S stay? I assume he may try to fundraise to get additional $$, but I think this could be the trigger at him leaving. Same story for Denver and Hopkins, if I were betting, I think they move to AAC sooner rather than later.
BigRedChant wrote: ↑Sun May 26, 2024 8:16 am
Northwestern is a full member BIG 10 school - why wouldn’t they be included with your other BiG schools?
Doubt NU will be affected. Alumni $ built lakeside stadium. It’s the most successful sports program at the school.
I think NU is an X factor. They are a full Big 10 member, but don't have close to the ticketing revenue from football or hoop that the rest of the conference does or more importantly massive $$ from NIL collectives which can now be rolled into university funding. . Plus they will go 2 years without a real football stadium
I think NU can be competitive, but it will be the result of separate fundraising, but the reallocation of $$ driven by these decisions.
to be fair, I still think KAH will deliever great teams, but I also expect her to get outspent but PSU, OSU and Michigan.
