....Schools will also have the discretion to expand scholarships, or not, across new roster limits expected to be implemented across all sanctioned sports.
There ya go. Scholarship limits are bye-bye. One question related to our sport is: will a handful of lacrose schools push this massive advantage over other schools who don't have the money to do it?
As we all know, even one or two scholarships can be the difference between a Final Four, and watching it at home.
....Schools will also have the discretion to expand scholarships, or not, across new roster limits expected to be implemented across all sanctioned sports.
There ya go. Scholarship limits are bye-bye. One question related to our sport is: will a handful of lacrose schools push this massive advantage over other schools who don't have the money to do it?
As we all know, even one or two scholarships can be the difference between a Final Four, and watching it at home.
I will wait to see how it is implemented, but I dont think any of this is good for lacrosse in general
....Schools will also have the discretion to expand scholarships, or not, across new roster limits expected to be implemented across all sanctioned sports.
There ya go. Scholarship limits are bye-bye. One question related to our sport is: will a handful of lacrose schools push this massive advantage over other schools who don't have the money to do it?
As we all know, even one or two scholarships can be the difference between a Final Four, and watching it at home.
I will wait to see how it is implemented, but I dont think any of this is good for lacrosse in general
Oh, I agree completely that this is very, very likely to be bad for all sports save Football and Basketball. College sports ruined by a greedy few who can't see past their own pockets.
....Schools will also have the discretion to expand scholarships, or not, across new roster limits expected to be implemented across all sanctioned sports.
There ya go. Scholarship limits are bye-bye. One question related to our sport is: will a handful of lacrose schools push this massive advantage over other schools who don't have the money to do it?
As we all know, even one or two scholarships can be the difference between a Final Four, and watching it at home.
Some may see less. I am hoping we see a rational compensation model. Again, plenty supply of athletes willing to play D1 football for less. If players don’t like what is offered, they don’t have to play football. Fans will show up and watch no matter what. Ask NFL players how “strikes” have worked out for them. Instead of “scabs”, they will be called Student Athletes. Would love to see how many non revenue and Olympic sport athletes hold out so that football and basketball players can make more money. 1 man, 1 woman, 1 vote. I would be doing my coalition building with the have nots…. Why help those guys make even more money when the NFL and NBA is waiting on them with a bag of money ?
....Schools will also have the discretion to expand scholarships, or not, across new roster limits expected to be implemented across all sanctioned sports.
There ya go. Scholarship limits are bye-bye. One question related to our sport is: will a handful of lacrose schools push this massive advantage over other schools who don't have the money to do it?
As we all know, even one or two scholarships can be the difference between a Final Four, and watching it at home.
Some may see less. I am hoping we see a rational compensation model. Again, plenty supply of athletes willing to play D1 football for less. If players don’t like what is offered, they don’t have to play football. Fans will show up and watch no matter what. Ask NFL players how “strikes” have worked out for them. Instead of “scabs”, they will be called Student Athletes. Would love to see how many non revenue and Olympic sport athletes hold out so that football and basketball players can make more money. 1 man, 1 woman, 1 vote. I would be doing my coalition building with the have nots…. Why help those guys make even more money when the NFL and NBA is waiting on them with a bag of money ?
I'd be stunned if this worked out in anything resembling a sensible and/or fair manner. Too much greed mixed in. We'll see, I guess.
....Schools will also have the discretion to expand scholarships, or not, across new roster limits expected to be implemented across all sanctioned sports.
There ya go. Scholarship limits are bye-bye. One question related to our sport is: will a handful of lacrose schools push this massive advantage over other schools who don't have the money to do it?
As we all know, even one or two scholarships can be the difference between a Final Four, and watching it at home.
I will wait to see how it is implemented, but I dont think any of this is good for lacrosse in general
Oh, I agree completely that this is very, very likely to be bad for all sports save Football and Basketball. College sports ruined by a greedy few who can't see past their own pockets.
We don't agree on a lot but this is exactly right. Though I'll add that at the non-P5 football programs there will certainly be some discussions about whether to even offer football.
This is all going to result in less opportunities for everyone.
Maryland will probably give full scholarships and pay the players both men’s and woman’s lax. It’s getting the Big Ten money but can prioritize basketball and lax would be a huge priority. Football they could actually do an economy model compared to the powers until there is a draft/salary cap. Other sports will be negatively effected
Concur with others that I don't see any of this helping lacrosse. I wouldn't bet against Congress being involved before it's all over.
The concept of roster limits always concerns me. It hurts that last 10 or so players that usually don't travel but are full pay and enjoy the esprit de corps of being part of the team.
Curious is it impacts the "one up schools" JHU, Hobart for lacrosse, Union, SLU, Clarkson, RIT etc for hockey.
Last edited by laxpert on Tue Jun 04, 2024 2:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
....Schools will also have the discretion to expand scholarships, or not, across new roster limits expected to be implemented across all sanctioned sports.
There ya go. Scholarship limits are bye-bye. One question related to our sport is: will a handful of lacrose schools push this massive advantage over other schools who don't have the money to do it?
As we all know, even one or two scholarships can be the difference between a Final Four, and watching it at home.
Some may see less. I am hoping we see a rational compensation model. Again, plenty supply of athletes willing to play D1 football for less. If players don’t like what is offered, they don’t have to play football. Fans will show up and watch no matter what. Ask NFL players how “strikes” have worked out for them. Instead of “scabs”, they will be called Student Athletes. Would love to see how many non revenue and Olympic sport athletes hold out so that football and basketball players can make more money. 1 man, 1 woman, 1 vote. I would be doing my coalition building with the have nots…. Why help those guys make even more money when the NFL and NBA is waiting on them with a bag of money ?
I'd be stunned if this worked out in anything resembling a sensible and/or fair manner. Too much greed mixed in. We'll see, I guess.
Whats sensible and/or fair? What does a lacrosse program that likely costs the University money deserve compared to football program that has 50-100mm in revenue?
....Schools will also have the discretion to expand scholarships, or not, across new roster limits expected to be implemented across all sanctioned sports.
There ya go. Scholarship limits are bye-bye. One question related to our sport is: will a handful of lacrose schools push this massive advantage over other schools who don't have the money to do it?
As we all know, even one or two scholarships can be the difference between a Final Four, and watching it at home.
Some may see less. I am hoping we see a rational compensation model. Again, plenty supply of athletes willing to play D1 football for less. If players don’t like what is offered, they don’t have to play football. Fans will show up and watch no matter what. Ask NFL players how “strikes” have worked out for them. Instead of “scabs”, they will be called Student Athletes. Would love to see how many non revenue and Olympic sport athletes hold out so that football and basketball players can make more money. 1 man, 1 woman, 1 vote. I would be doing my coalition building with the have nots…. Why help those guys make even more money when the NFL and NBA is waiting on them with a bag of money ?
I'd be stunned if this worked out in anything resembling a sensible and/or fair manner. Too much greed mixed in. We'll see, I guess.
Whats sensible and/or fair? What does a lacrosse program that likely costs the University money deserve compared to football program that has 50-100mm in revenue?
Haven't the slightest idea what's reasonable or fair!
I just have zero faith in the NCAA and the Big Conference muckety-mucks doing what's fair and best for schools and their students when their cut of the money is involved. I guess I'm just sharing my cynicism.
....Schools will also have the discretion to expand scholarships, or not, across new roster limits expected to be implemented across all sanctioned sports.
There ya go. Scholarship limits are bye-bye. One question related to our sport is: will a handful of lacrose schools push this massive advantage over other schools who don't have the money to do it?
As we all know, even one or two scholarships can be the difference between a Final Four, and watching it at home.
Some may see less. I am hoping we see a rational compensation model. Again, plenty supply of athletes willing to play D1 football for less. If players don’t like what is offered, they don’t have to play football. Fans will show up and watch no matter what. Ask NFL players how “strikes” have worked out for them. Instead of “scabs”, they will be called Student Athletes. Would love to see how many non revenue and Olympic sport athletes hold out so that football and basketball players can make more money. 1 man, 1 woman, 1 vote. I would be doing my coalition building with the have nots…. Why help those guys make even more money when the NFL and NBA is waiting on them with a bag of money ?
I'd be stunned if this worked out in anything resembling a sensible and/or fair manner. Too much greed mixed in. We'll see, I guess.
Whats sensible and/or fair? What does a lacrosse program that likely costs the University money deserve compared to football program that has 50-100mm in revenue?
Haven't the slightest idea what's reasonable or fair!
I just have zero faith in the NCAA and the Big Conference muckety-mucks doing what's fair and best for schools and their students when their cut of the money is involved. I guess I'm just sharing my cynicism.
If I am being cynical, I can see a world where this causes Universities to cut sports in general and especially non-revenue sports.
....Schools will also have the discretion to expand scholarships, or not, across new roster limits expected to be implemented across all sanctioned sports.
There ya go. Scholarship limits are bye-bye. One question related to our sport is: will a handful of lacrose schools push this massive advantage over other schools who don't have the money to do it?
As we all know, even one or two scholarships can be the difference between a Final Four, and watching it at home.
Some may see less. I am hoping we see a rational compensation model. Again, plenty supply of athletes willing to play D1 football for less. If players don’t like what is offered, they don’t have to play football. Fans will show up and watch no matter what. Ask NFL players how “strikes” have worked out for them. Instead of “scabs”, they will be called Student Athletes. Would love to see how many non revenue and Olympic sport athletes hold out so that football and basketball players can make more money. 1 man, 1 woman, 1 vote. I would be doing my coalition building with the have nots…. Why help those guys make even more money when the NFL and NBA is waiting on them with a bag of money ?
I'd be stunned if this worked out in anything resembling a sensible and/or fair manner. Too much greed mixed in. We'll see, I guess.
Whats sensible and/or fair? What does a lacrosse program that likely costs the University money deserve compared to football program that has 50-100mm in revenue?
Haven't the slightest idea what's reasonable or fair!
I just have zero faith in the NCAA and the Big Conference muckety-mucks doing what's fair and best for schools and their students when their cut of the money is involved. I guess I'm just sharing my cynicism.
If I am being cynical, I can see a world where this causes Universities to cut sports in general and especially non-revenue sports.
Oh, I can completely see that happening. I'm worried about the future of lacrosse, for example. And I think it's pretty reasonable to worry.
jhu06 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2024 4:15 pm
From what I have seen the immediate impact for lacrosse could be
-roster limits
-unlimited scholarships
I have a hard time seeing schools adding lacrosse scholarships but the roster limits I think could benefit the competitiveness of d1. Instead of Hopkins and Syracuse hoarding players those last guys are available for other schools.
Pretty obvious to me that the NCAA can't limit scholarships post NCAA v. Alston.
The question is: when do the athletes and/or smart Athletic Directors figure this out?
So every participant for every sport will be on scholarship?
depends on hoo is at the negotiating table. nil is/has been a placeholder. things are moving even faster than i was expecting. when we get to collective bargaining (there will be leaks), we'll have some more defined possible outcomes.
That is what I am waiting for. Something rational will come out of it unless Football, Baseball, Basketball, Hockey etc collectively bargains their own deal. If so, I can see non revenue/olympic sports following a D3 model. Are we also saying D3 schools will have to pay all their athletes also?
Speaking for myself....all you have to do is look at ordinary students. Can the NCAA or some other entity prevent, for example, UVa from cutting a check to an honors kid for $10K? No, right? Apply that to students who plays sports. The Engineering Dept. at UMich can hand out all the scholarshiops they want, right?
It's not about forcing schools to do something. The SCOTUS is telling the NCAA that THEY can't tell students (Americans) what they can and can't earn.
The rest of the stuff? Unions, collective bargaining, revenue v. non-revenue sports? I've got nothing. No clue what will happen.
Pretty sure you can tell people what they can earn. They can go down the street if they don’t like it. Not sure how you force schools to offer scholarships and pay students. I don’t know of a single professional sports league that’s a “free market”.
What I said was: the NCAA can't LIMIT what people earn, per SCOTUS, unanimous decision.
Frankly, since I'm not a lawyer, I don't understand how salary caps are legal for NBA et. al. I'm sure a lawyer around here can explain how that works in US law.
I'm not saying that you can force schools to hand them out. I'm saying nothing is STOPPING.... to keep it to lacrosse.... Syracuse's lacrosse program from handing out 40 full rides if they want to....per SCOTUS.
The NCAA enforcement arm is dead right now. NIL isn’t supposed to be a recruiting inducement but it is because there is no enforcement. What’s keeping Syracuse from offering 40 full rides is economic reality. I am going to see my friend that runs an NIL cooperative in two weeks. I am going to ask him if he expects the University to take the governor off. I would let all the air out of the balloon and I have had this position for years. If kids don’t understand the value of a college scholarship and the network, they can find something else to do.
you are old school. at least the ivies didn't fold post-covid, as expected.
I am. I understand the value of a quality education versus cash in hand. I would not mind seeing some kind of wage scale but I am not making college kids rich. If that’s the case they can pay tuition and room and board out of their salary. Football is the only sport where opportunities to play professionally right out of high school don’t exist. Maybe that new league can be a feeder to the NFL.
The one weakness in the pay the players is the lack of full independent P&L cost accounting. The subsidy to borrower off an IG rating of a university or state vs a dumped independent program for the capex and opex (R&M) for physical infrastructure is not accounted for at all. You’re talking the difference in LTD and debt service of +50-250bps vs +500-1200bps, you’re liturgy talking 11-20% cost of debt (not to mention a roi for equity supporting that supplied by the institution to start the program since the colleges began before the athletics programs this incl)
Pay the kids but then charge a pref return on non debt and make them support the carry for cost of capital and no program or sport is at all profitable such that they can pay the kids. It makes them all insolvent and nullifies the rev sharing concept because it’s a subsidy from the institution.
Imagine 70 odd programs having to borrow independently. But even the biggest FB programs fully cost accounted for wouldn’t be profitable and thus there actually is limited difference between “revenue sports” and “Olympic sports” in higher ed.
The way there’s no shadow or transfer pricing for that is like some UVA people I know who try to claim it’s rally self funded and sufficient like a private school and shouldn’t have as much oversight which I’ve heard from at least half dozen different uva alums. You ask them about who supplied the venture capital for the self sufficient operation to start up and they get quiet or get into gymnastics quick.
Now I love those cowboys, I love their gold
Love my uncle, God rest his soul
Taught me good, Lord, taught me all I know
Taught me so well, that I grabbed that gold
I left his dead ass there by the side of the road, yeah
laxpert wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 1:38 pm
I wouldn't bet against Congress being involved before it's all over.
The concept of roster limits always concerns me.
Congress will eventually get involved at some point. Whether that resolves anything is certainly up for debate but the NCAA's has practically begged Congress to do something in almost every press release after every settlement to help save their bacon.
As for roster limits, if the removal of scholarship caps was done to avoid antitrust issues, I don't see how in the world roster limits aren't also an antitrust violation.
laxpert wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 1:38 pm
I wouldn't bet against Congress being involved before it's all over.
The concept of roster limits always concerns me.
Congress will eventually get involved at some point. Whether that resolves anything is certainly up for debate but the NCAA's has practically begged Congress to do something in almost every press release after every settlement to help save their bacon.
As for roster limits, if the removal of scholarship caps was done to avoid antitrust issues, I don't see how in the world roster limits aren't also an antitrust violation.
Can anyone tell a company how many people they must employ and what they must be paid? aside from minimum wage?
laxpert wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 1:38 pm
I wouldn't bet against Congress being involved before it's all over.
The concept of roster limits always concerns me.
Congress will eventually get involved at some point. Whether that resolves anything is certainly up for debate but the NCAA's has practically begged Congress to do something in almost every press release after every settlement to help save their bacon.
As for roster limits, if the removal of scholarship caps was done to avoid antitrust issues, I don't see how in the world roster limits aren't also an antitrust violation.
Can anyone tell a company how many people they must employ and what they must be paid? aside from minimum wage?
Every sports league has a roster size and a salary cap.
Money talks and bs walks. Football is the only media event that almost everybody watches. It’s the money. Very few schools have the history or market strength to be in the mega bucks club. Almost all are already in the SEC or B1G. Even then Vandy and Purdue are expendable. Northwestern rolling games through Chicago is safe. The only viable schools left are Notre Dame, Florida State and maybe Miami and mountain time zone candidates like Colorado, Arizona or Utah.
laxpert wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 1:38 pm
I wouldn't bet against Congress being involved before it's all over.
The concept of roster limits always concerns me.
Congress will eventually get involved at some point. Whether that resolves anything is certainly up for debate but the NCAA's has practically begged Congress to do something in almost every press release after every settlement to help save their bacon.
As for roster limits, if the removal of scholarship caps was done to avoid antitrust issues, I don't see how in the world roster limits aren't also an antitrust violation.
Can anyone tell a company how many people they must employ and what they must be paid? aside from minimum wage?
Every sports league has a roster size and a salary cap.
Essexfenwick wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 3:51 pm
Money talks and bs walks. Football is the only media event that almost everybody watches. It’s the money. Very few schools have the history or market strength to be in the mega bucks club. Almost all are already in the SEC or B1G. Even then Vandy and Purdue are expendable. Northwestern rolling games through Chicago is safe. The only viable schools left are Notre Dame, Florida State and maybe Miami and mountain time zone candidates like Colorado, Arizona or Utah.
NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament basically funds every other sport outside of football.
?