House v NCAA

[wgdsr]

Last paragraph sums it up.

To maintain compliance with the federal Title IX law, any scholarship increases in a men’s sport will likely need to be replicated in a women’s sport, driving up the additional costs. But not all programs can afford to add so many additional scholarships. Some administrators are in the process of “tiering” their sports by decreasing investment on certain programs and increasing investment in others. This includes staff and salary cuts as well as the reduction in scholarships from Olympic sports, especially those that generate little to no revenue.

If D1 expansion wasn't already dead and buried it has now been placed in the Chernobyl sarcophagus. Toss in male enrollment declining to below 40 percent....
If I read this correctly a "one up team" like Hopkins could now offer 30 full rides if the Women's team offered 30 full rides and still be in compliance. It would be easier for JHU since they're not offsetting 105 Football Rides.

It's all temporary. Until we get a Union and a collective bargaining agreement, all this is a wet band aid that can fall off at any moment.

As of right now, the SCOTUS ruled the NCAA can't collude to cap compensation. Scholarships are compensation. And it will take YEARS to form a Union, and sign a Collective Bargaining Agreement.

If the NCAA tries to punish a school or athlete for having too many scholarships...the student can sue, and will win. You can't tell someone in America how much they are allowed to make for their work. The ONLY exception is in collective bargaining agreements.

The NCAA is hanging on by a thread. And no, I'm not a lawyer.....so take this with that in mind.

i'm amazed the nc$$ is even trying this re: caps. can any attorney out there explain how this settlement with a plaintiff group would give the nc$$ monopoly the ability to be protected from losing (again) to a challenge on roster and scholly caps?

[wgdsr]

Last paragraph sums it up.

To maintain compliance with the federal Title IX law, any scholarship increases in a men’s sport will likely need to be replicated in a women’s sport, driving up the additional costs. But not all programs can afford to add so many additional scholarships. Some administrators are in the process of “tiering” their sports by decreasing investment on certain programs and increasing investment in others. This includes staff and salary cuts as well as the reduction in scholarships from Olympic sports, especially those that generate little to no revenue.

If D1 expansion wasn't already dead and buried it has now been placed in the Chernobyl sarcophagus. Toss in male enrollment declining to below 40 percent....
If I read this correctly a "one up team" like Hopkins could now offer 30 full rides if the Women's team offered 30 full rides and still be in compliance. It would be easier for JHU since they're not offsetting 105 Football Rides.

the article is incorrect. almost no one is proportional for title ix, so having x scholarships for men and x for women, adding and dropping one for one is not a thing.
now, would it be a pretty bad look if men's scholly limits were jacked up and women's weren't, at the nc$$ and individual school level? yes. they'd have to come up somewhat i would imagine for appearances at the least.

with the new, increased expenses to operate a department, are some sports going to be reduced or eliminated? of course.

[steel_hop]

I'll save everyone the trouble for lax.

--This includes staff and salary cuts as well as the reduction in scholarships from Olympic sports, especially those that generate little to no revenue.--

The last sentence is the killer. In all likelihood, men's lax is going to be a big issue for many programs. It is likely we are going to move toward a top tier - ACC, IVY and B!G having programs. Everyone else is likely going to reduce numbers or eliminate programs. More than likely lax, like many Olympic sports are going to move to a club model, where student athletes pay to play. Saying that any roster limits are dead in the water under antitrust so I have no idea who is advising the NCAA.

There was a recent article on BIG and SEC swim programs limiting the number of swimmers. Maybe that has more leeway but I sort of doubt it.

As I said the NCAA desperately wants Congress to step in and save their bacon. I don't see that happening.

This is also why I laugh at all the people talking about holding their kid back for lax (or other sports). Not that it is absurd to hold a kid back for sports but college sports is going to look completely different in 5 years - less teams, less players, less competitive games, less scholarships, etc.

[Asgot]

I just read somewhere else that the scholarships are a maximum and that the schools do not have to offer everyone a scholarship, but there will be roster caps which I also do not understand then. I am not sure what the number will be for lacrosse but the expansion of scholarships will
Make it difficult for schools to keep fielding all of this programs.

[norcalhop]

Who is asking for roster caps and why?

[pcowlax]

Who is asking for roster caps and why?

Schools are asking for roster caps to keep costs down if scholarship limits go away. See this very interesting article about this may eliminate walkons in P4 football. Someone pasted crazy numbers about a roster cap in the low 30s for lax a few weeks ago which seems physically impassible. Also not sure how this is going to trickle over to non-money sports like lax. Even if they complete uncap it, are schools really going to have 45 lax players on full scholarship?

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... t-walk-onS

[steel_hop]

Who is asking for roster caps and why?

Schools are asking for roster caps to keep costs down if scholarship limits go away. See this very interesting article about this may eliminate walkons in P4 football. Someone pasted crazy numbers about a roster cap in the low 30s for lax a few weeks ago which seems physically impassible. Also not sure how this is going to trickle over to non-money sports like lax. Even if they complete uncap it, are schools really going to have 45 lax players on full scholarship?

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... t-walk-onS

There is literally no way you can get roster caps in under the current proposals. That is an antitrust violation because it would be considered price-fixing. If IVY league financial aid departments sharing information on merit aid is an antitrust violation this certainly is. The only way it works is if you turn the student-athletes into employees (which is likely coming), have them unionize, and work out the deals of a CBA.

[wgdsr]

Who is asking for roster caps and why?

Schools are asking for roster caps to keep costs down if scholarship limits go away. See this very interesting article about this may eliminate walkons in P4 football. Someone pasted crazy numbers about a roster cap in the low 30s for lax a few weeks ago which seems physically impassible. Also not sure how this is going to trickle over to non-money sports like lax. Even if they complete uncap it, are schools really going to have 45 lax players on full scholarship?

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... t-walk-onS

There is literally no way you can get roster caps in under the current proposals. That is an antitrust violation because it would be considered price-fixing. If IVY league financial aid departments sharing information on merit aid is an antitrust violation this certainly is. The only way it works is if you turn the student-athletes into employees (which is likely coming), have them unionize, and work out the deals of a CBA.

the only thing i can think of as a strategy here is a continuation of kicking the can down the road for as long as they can.
-it'll take x # of years of litigation including appeals in order to lose.
-ath dept's are now tasked with finding savings of 10-15% across the board to fund payouts. they need breathing space for the transition.
-they're being cute about not capping schollies compensation so using roster size.

the thing about even the above is these settlements were supposed to set them up to:
-avoid future litigation frequency.
-potentially set up the elusive congressional intervention for more antitrust protections, even if a long shot.

maybe they believe what they're doing (plus any congressional contributions, likely cheaper money spent) is enough to get what they want from congress. that's a helluva bet.

in the meantime, it's more chaos. more lawsuits. and probably will get a number of individual schools dropping programs. can't sue the school because they don't want to have a team.

an aside... there is a federal? judge who is going to weigh in on accepting the settlement(s). still don't get how that gives the nc$$ the license to put on caps on another unassigned class of peeps, but we'll see. this was always going to be like watching a car wreck in slow motion.

[a fan]

Even if they complete uncap it, are schools really going to have 45 lax players on full scholarship?

Maybe not, but I can a handful coming up with 20 full rides.

[a fan]

Who is asking for roster caps and why?

Schools are asking for roster caps to keep costs down if scholarship limits go away. See this very interesting article about this may eliminate walkons in P4 football. Someone pasted crazy numbers about a roster cap in the low 30s for lax a few weeks ago which seems physically impassible. Also not sure how this is going to trickle over to non-money sports like lax. Even if they complete uncap it, are schools really going to have 45 lax players on full scholarship?

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... t-walk-onS

There is literally no way you can get roster caps in under the current proposals. That is an antitrust violation because it would be considered price-fixing. If IVY league financial aid departments sharing information on merit aid is an antitrust violation this certainly is. The only way it works is if you turn the student-athletes into employees (which is likely coming), have them unionize, and work out the deals of a CBA.

the only thing i can think of as a strategy here is a continuation of kicking the can down the road for as long as they can.
-it'll take x # of years of litigation including appeals in order to lose.
-ath dept's are now tasked with finding savings of 10-15% across the board to fund payouts. they need breathing space for the transition.
-they're being cute about not capping schollies compensation so using roster size.

the thing about even the above is these settlements were supposed to set them up to:
-avoid future litigation frequency.
-potentially set up the elusive congressional intervention for more antitrust protections, even if a long shot.

maybe they believe what they're doing (plus any congressional contributions, likely cheaper money spent) is enough to get what they want from congress. that's a helluva bet.

in the meantime, it's more chaos. more lawsuits. and probably will get a number of individual schools dropping programs. can't sue the school because they don't want to have a team.

an aside... there is a federal? judge who is going to weigh in on accepting the settlement(s). still don't get how that gives the nc$$ the license to put on caps on another unassigned class of peeps, but we'll see. this was always going to be like watching a car wreck in slow motion.

It's all about keeping the party going, and not getting shut down.

And hoping kids don't wise up and sue.

[wgdsr]

Who is asking for roster caps and why?

Schools are asking for roster caps to keep costs down if scholarship limits go away. See this very interesting article about this may eliminate walkons in P4 football. Someone pasted crazy numbers about a roster cap in the low 30s for lax a few weeks ago which seems physically impassible. Also not sure how this is going to trickle over to non-money sports like lax. Even if they complete uncap it, are schools really going to have 45 lax players on full scholarship?

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... t-walk-onS

There is literally no way you can get roster caps in under the current proposals. That is an antitrust violation because it would be considered price-fixing. If IVY league financial aid departments sharing information on merit aid is an antitrust violation this certainly is. The only way it works is if you turn the student-athletes into employees (which is likely coming), have them unionize, and work out the deals of a CBA.

the only thing i can think of as a strategy here is a continuation of kicking the can down the road for as long as they can.
-it'll take x # of years of litigation including appeals in order to lose.
-ath dept's are now tasked with finding savings of 10-15% across the board to fund payouts. they need breathing space for the transition.
-they're being cute about not capping schollies compensation so using roster size.

the thing about even the above is these settlements were supposed to set them up to:
-avoid future litigation frequency.
-potentially set up the elusive congressional intervention for more antitrust protections, even if a long shot.

maybe they believe what they're doing (plus any congressional contributions, likely cheaper money spent) is enough to get what they want from congress. that's a helluva bet.

in the meantime, it's more chaos. more lawsuits. and probably will get a number of individual schools dropping programs. can't sue the school because they don't want to have a team.

an aside... there is a federal? judge who is going to weigh in on accepting the settlement(s). still don't get how that gives the nc$$ the license to put on caps on another unassigned class of peeps, but we'll see. this was always going to be like watching a car wreck in slow motion.

It's all about keeping the party going, and not getting shut down.

And hoping kids don't wise up and sue.

i can't imagine the nc$$ actually gets their act together and manages to negotiate (cb) for hundreds (thousands?) of schools and lord knows how many teams and athletes. have to believe it'll come first through conferences, and of course probably the most successful ones first. whether that is the separation point with nc$$ is tough to tell, but seems likely.

[coda]

Who is asking for roster caps and why?

Schools are asking for roster caps to keep costs down if scholarship limits go away. See this very interesting article about this may eliminate walkons in P4 football. Someone pasted crazy numbers about a roster cap in the low 30s for lax a few weeks ago which seems physically impassible. Also not sure how this is going to trickle over to non-money sports like lax. Even if they complete uncap it, are schools really going to have 45 lax players on full scholarship?

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... t-walk-onS

There is literally no way you can get roster caps in under the current proposals. That is an antitrust violation because it would be considered price-fixing. If IVY league financial aid departments sharing information on merit aid is an antitrust violation this certainly is. The only way it works is if you turn the student-athletes into employees (which is likely coming), have them unionize, and work out the deals of a CBA.

I’m am still not convinced on this. There is literally roster caps on every single organized sport played. The law is not always logical, but this theory flies in the face of logic

[a fan]

Who is asking for roster caps and why?

Schools are asking for roster caps to keep costs down if scholarship limits go away. See this very interesting article about this may eliminate walkons in P4 football. Someone pasted crazy numbers about a roster cap in the low 30s for lax a few weeks ago which seems physically impassible. Also not sure how this is going to trickle over to non-money sports like lax. Even if they complete uncap it, are schools really going to have 45 lax players on full scholarship?

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... t-walk-onS

There is literally no way you can get roster caps in under the current proposals. That is an antitrust violation because it would be considered price-fixing. If IVY league financial aid departments sharing information on merit aid is an antitrust violation this certainly is. The only way it works is if you turn the student-athletes into employees (which is likely coming), have them unionize, and work out the deals of a CBA.

I’m am still not convinced on this. There is literally roster caps on every single organized sport played. The law is not always logical, but this theory flies in the face of logic

No, it doesn't fly in the face of logic.

He's talking about the NCAA forcing the roster caps. The schools themselves can do whatever they want.....but if they are all the same, if it looks like collusion and smells like collusion......

Does your workplace have a employee cap forced on you by some outside entity? No, right? Well....there you go.

We've been used to the NCAA breaking US labor laws for so long that we think up is down, and down is up. Its just that no one sued before....until now.

[AreaLax]

Penn State AD Patrick Kraft provides an overview of how the program will navigate new roster guidelines, revenue sharing and NIL when the House vs. NCAA settlement is completed.

https://x.com/markwogenrich/status/1816 ... EO2hFStaxg

[coda]

Who is asking for roster caps and why?

Schools are asking for roster caps to keep costs down if scholarship limits go away. See this very interesting article about this may eliminate walkons in P4 football. Someone pasted crazy numbers about a roster cap in the low 30s for lax a few weeks ago which seems physically impassible. Also not sure how this is going to trickle over to non-money sports like lax. Even if they complete uncap it, are schools really going to have 45 lax players on full scholarship?

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... t-walk-onS

There is literally no way you can get roster caps in under the current proposals. That is an antitrust violation because it would be considered price-fixing. If IVY league financial aid departments sharing information on merit aid is an antitrust violation this certainly is. The only way it works is if you turn the student-athletes into employees (which is likely coming), have them unionize, and work out the deals of a CBA.

I’m am still not convinced on this. There is literally roster caps on every single organized sport played. The law is not always logical, but this theory flies in the face of logic

No, it doesn't fly in the face of logic.

He's talking about the NCAA forcing the roster caps. The schools themselves can do whatever they want.....but if they are all the same, if it looks like collusion and smells like collusion......

Does your workplace have a employee cap forced on you by some outside entity? No, right? Well....there you go.

We've been used to the NCAA breaking US labor laws for so long that we think up is down, and down is up. Its just that no one sued before....until now.

You are missing the part of sports, where rules are made to ensure fair play and safety. Does it make sense to allow Bama, Georgia, and Texas to have 200 football players and La Tech to have 50? There are differences in how sports and businesses are conducted

[a fan]

You are missing the part of sports, where rules are made to ensure fair play and safety. Does it make sense to allow Bama, Georgia, and Texas to have 200 football players and La Tech to have 50? There are differences in how sports and businesses are conducted

What do all professional sports have that College Sports don't?

Unions, and collective bargaining agreements. Without them, it's ILLEGAL to tell an American how much they can earn, or collude to fix the number of employees that you can have.

If fairness was paramount, and trumps free market principles? The NCAA should have capped how much everyone involved in sports earned. Problem solved. Why do we have NCAA coaches making ten+ times what a tenured professor earns, if the foundational ideas are amateurism, and educating students?

Everyone wanted to get paid, and didn't think on...or care about...the consequences. We are where we are because of greed.

[wgdsr]

am curious about how all this temporary arrangement (whatever it turns out to be) affects divisions 2 and 3. anyone have any idea or heard anything? prior to now, div 3 couldn't offer athletic money.

[wgdsr]

just filed:
https://www.ncaa.org/news/2024/7/26/med ... suits.aspx

[HopFan16]

The roster limit for men's lacrosse is 48, not "32-36" as was rumored.

Many teams are already near that mark. But for the ones in the 60+ range, this could get messy.

[a fan]

The roster limit for men's lacrosse is 48, not "32-36" as was rumored.

Many teams are already near that mark. But for the ones in the 60+ range, this could get messy.

You should be thrilled, my man.

Can't see any program offering more scholarships than Hopkins will offer. This should be a huge advantage for you, congrats.