Reply to Too many D1 schools?

Forum Index » Sports General Discussion

Reply to "Too many D1 schools?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote] A few readers of my last post noticed my prediction: Many more schools will eventually drop from Division I to Division III non-scholarship athletics. Yes, I stand by that statement, and a lot of it has to do with the current climate of collegiate athletics.

Before diving into the House settlement, I love to remind athletic directors, student-athletes, fans, and others of a core truth: a collegiate athletics department is not the institution. And the institution is not the athletics department. In fact, your alma mater could cut sports tomorrow and continue operating without a hitch. Not to go too far down the rabbit hole, but one day, college athletics—namely football—might operate entirely outside the traditional university structure. That day isn’t here yet, but it may come.
…
With the proposed House settlement looming, the math behind college athletics is about to get a major rewrite. If Judge Claudia Wilken approves, the agreement will directly allow schools that opt-in to pay student-athletes starting July 1. Each school would be permitted to share up to $20.5 million in revenue with its athletes, with that cap increasing by 4% annually over the 10-year agreement.

The deal also includes $2.8 billion in retroactive payments to athletes who competed between 2016 and 2024 — a staggering yet still under-market value of student-athletes that have provided institutions over the past decade.

But opting in comes with strings, particularly around roster management.

Historically, NCAA sports operated with scholarship limits but no hard roster caps. Sports like men’s volleyball, which is allowed just 4.5 scholarships, could still carry 30 or more athletes—many of them walk-ons. That was a win for aspiring athletes, and even more so for institutions benefiting from full-paying students covering tuition, housing, and meals.

Now, that flexibility may disappear.

Under the settlement, scholarship limits would be replaced by formal roster caps. Schools could offer scholarships to every athlete on the roster—but they aren’t required to. At first glance, this sounds like a positive change: more scholarships for players. But in reality, the cap likely spells the end of the walk-on era.

Future roster construction will look very different, especially in non-revenue or Olympic sports. Some estimates suggest 9,000 to 10,000 roster spots could be eliminated across the NCAA.[/quote]
https://herosports.com/fcs-fbs-cbb-d1-schools-moving-down-house-settlement-ksks/[/quote]

Strangely enough, there is no mention of dramatically reducing coaching $$$s which seems like a simple solution.

Stop giving football coaches $10MM+ salaries (add in the staffs and you get closer to $20MM).  I assume basketball coaches make a decent amount, etc.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics