Schools paying Lax Pros
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
| With the new NCAA ruling, is it possible that kids will get paid to play lacrosse in college? |
Anonymous
| Some already do. However, they make money through endorsements and social media. The new NCAA ruling addresses revenue sharing with players. There is no lacrosse team with profits to share. The same is true for 99% of college teams in all sports. The ruling impacts big time power conferences will not have a huge impact on lacrosse |
Anonymous
| Can't speak broadly to this but the settlement is a recognition that some number of colleges have generated significant revenue (mostly broadcast related) from the name/image/likeness of some subset of their athletes and that those students are entitled to a share of same. If a lacrosse player can demonstrate that they are similarly situated I'm sure they would be able to lodge a similar claim. But bear in mind that lacrosse revenue at even the schools where it is resourced and has a significant fan base - would be a rounding error compared with the revenue generated by football and basketball. I suspect lacrosse players will see their maximum revenue potential in NIL on a player by player basis. |
Anonymous
| I think title IX will play a part and even the money losing lacrosse team will see money |
Anonymous
| They're separate issues. The ruling speaks only to sharing revenue with those who have a legitimate claim to participating in generating it. Title IX is definitely implicated, but only in terms of programs that will get axed because those revenue-generating sports subsidize a host of "cost center" sports right now, and that subsidy is going to be cut significantly to comply with the ruling. Or, they'll just start charging more to cover the costs of complying with the ruling. So while Title IX is implicated here, it's more as a down range consequence of a loss of existing revenue. |
Anonymous
| That could be a major issue. If universities need to send revenue to pay for athletes, low revenue sports like, say, men's lacrosse, may be jettisoned. happened with title IX was implemented. Hope that's not the case but time will tell. |
Anonymous
Already happening on both the men's and women's side. It will become much more widespread but don't think of this as anything more than a stipend paid quarterly unless the player has separate NIL deals. |
Anonymous
| I think NCAA makes a new division … D-Pro. All the non-money making teams stay D1 and big time programs go into the new division. |
Anonymous
This is exactly what is going to happen. |
Anonymous
The obvious read of the math makes this outcome more likely than not. Lacrosse is closer to fencing or softball than football or basketball in terms of revenue. What might spare it is as a source of alumni donations, the sport being popular with the monied set, and that’s a significant factor in any school’s decision process. Barring some development in Congress or a collective realization that the entire collegiate athletic system is looking grim enough to be facing ruin, however, it doesn’t look great for the future of college lacrosse unless they can actually start generating a few dollars for the schools, at least enough to earn their keep. |
Anonymous
| College lacrosse is actually in better shape than most non revenue sports. First schools add teams to attract high net worth parents of students willing to pay full tuition and second many athletes already play with no scholarship or little money offered. There is a reason the Ivy League is a strong lacrosse conference. |