|
|
Post by bulkey on May 23, 2024 22:52:25 GMT -5
The story is breaking now. Because UConn is not in a major football conference, but its basketball teams have revenue streams similar to basketball teams in major football conferences, it's not immediately clear (to me at least) what UConn's obligation will be. Clearly, if WCBB teams in the P-4 (former P-5) can and must pay their players directly, it will be a huge disadvantage unless UConn chooses to do the same. But non-major conferences, like the Big East, will be under huge stress because they will be covering part of the initial class-action suit. Geno just put out a direct call for fans to support the UConn WCBB NIL with a goal of $500k, and we can see why: www.spotfund.com/story/ed599e3a-f955-411c-aee1-748fcdce6e71NY Times might be behind a paywall. Heavily edited. Since its founding, the N.C.A.A. has operated with a business model that defined the college athlete as an amateur.
....
But the N.C.A.A.’s $2.8 billion settlement on Thursday night in a class-action antitrust lawsuit represents the heaviest blow — and perhaps a decisive one — to that system.
If approved by a U.S. district judge in California, the settlement would allow for the creation of the first revenue-sharing plan for college athletics, a landmark shift in which schools would directly pay their athletes for playing.
....
“The settlement, though undesirable in many respects and promising only temporary stability, is necessary to avoid what would be the bankruptcy of college athletics,” the Rev. John I. Jenkins, president of Notre Dame, said in a statement. He called on Congress to pre-empt a patchwork of state laws, to establish that athletes are not employees and, with an antitrust exemption, to allow schools a freer hand to make rules.
But the uncertainty of antitrust protection was underscored on Thursday when a judge in Colorado denied the N.C.A.A.’s request to move another antitrust case, Fontenot v. N.C.A.A., to the same court as the one that will decide on the Thursday settlement.
That decision leaves open the possibility that athletes who are part of the settlement class in the House case — any Division I athlete going back to 2016 — could opt out if they believe that the Fontenot case might deliver more money to them.
....
The settlement has two components: back pay from name, image and licensing revenue that were denied to players before the rule change three years ago, including revenue from football broadcast rights; and a framework for paying athletes for those rights going forward.
What is unclear is who will get paid and how much.
The $2.8 billion in damages is tied to revenue generated almost exclusively by major conference football and men’s basketball, whose athletes represent one class of plaintiffs. Another class is women’s basketball players in the major conferences. And the final class is everyone else.
Going forward, the settlement means that schools could set aside about $20 million each to pay their athletes as soon as the 2025 football season.
Now, though, the settlement is being largely subsidized by the schools that do not participate in big-time football. The 27 Division I conferences that are not named in the lawsuit are being required to pay $990 million of the settlement through N.C.A.A. distributions from the men’s basketball tournament that will be withheld over a 10-year period.
....
“It feels like the N.C.A.A. is bailing out the biggest spenders, and conferences like ours are paying for the majority of the settlement,” Robin Harris, the executive director of the Ivy League, said. “The Ivy League isn’t under attack in these suits, and we’re bearing the costs from the majority who are, so it’s frustrating.”
.... Billy Witz www.nytimes.com/2024/05/23/us/ncaa-athletes-payments.html |
|
|
|
Post by grrrrr on May 24, 2024 7:43:02 GMT -5
Read the whole thing in the Times and other sites, sounds like it's far from being settled. Figures the little guys would get stuck with the majority of the bill, right?
|
|
|
|
Post by bulkey on May 24, 2024 7:46:49 GMT -5
ESPN finally decided that the story is almost as important as an NBA score: www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/40206364/ncaa-power-conferences-agree-allow-schools-pay-playersWhat seems clear: 1. All college conferences will pay retroactively $2.7B to its former players. 2. The P-4 schools going forward will be able to pay athletes from a pool of $20M/school to its athletes. That number will assuredly rise as the SEC and B1G are vested in outstripping the other 2 conferences and will be willing to break their own budgets to get top players. $20M is really not a large number for the athletes themselves: top high school QBs are getting >1M/year already, and we can expect that number to increase dramatically. So $20M at schools with multiple sports competing at the highest level will still need private donors and NIL collectives. Non-P-4 schools are somewhat in limbo: liable for part of the $2.7B, but not required (or even able) to pay $20M/year going forward. UConn is a prime example--maybe the prime example--of an institution caught in the middle. Geno's appeal for $500k (www.spotfund.com/story/ed599e3a-f955-411c-aee1-748fcdce6e71), an appeal that so far has fetched $200 in pledges, is already well behind the curve of what will be needed. |
|
|
|
Post by bulkey on May 24, 2024 7:56:13 GMT -5
Read the whole thing in the Times and other sites, sounds like it's far from being settled. Figures the little guys would get stuck with the majority of the bill, right? Yes, the retroactive bill of $2.7B, which will be difficult for most (say) Big East schools to cover their part of. But once that's paid, going forward, it will be a controlled bidding war among the P-4, starting at $20M/year. It's hard to imagine that, given UConn's deep AD deficits already, it will be able to compete financially in both men's and women's basketball with the P-4. Maybe one of those teams, but maybe only one. It may well be that some schools convert most or even all of their D-1 sports into club sports. The ramifications for the identity and meaning of colleges--one of America's greatest remaining resources--are potentially profound. |
|
|
|
Post by swash on May 24, 2024 8:46:17 GMT -5
The story is breaking now. Because UConn is not in a major football conference, but its basketball teams have revenue streams similar to basketball teams in major football conferences, it's not immediately clear (to me at least) what UConn's obligation will be. Clearly, if WCBB teams in the P-4 (former P-5) can and must pay their players directly, it will be a huge disadvantage unless UConn chooses to do the same. But non-major conferences, like the Big East, will be under huge stress because they will be covering part of the initial class-action suit. Geno just put out a direct call for fans to support the UConn WCBB NIL with a goal of $500k, and we can see why: www.spotfund.com/story/ed599e3a-f955-411c-aee1-748fcdce6e71NY Times might be behind a paywall. Heavily edited. Since its founding, the N.C.A.A. has operated with a business model that defined the college athlete as an amateur.
....
But the N.C.A.A.’s $2.8 billion settlement on Thursday night in a class-action antitrust lawsuit represents the heaviest blow — and perhaps a decisive one — to that system.
If approved by a U.S. district judge in California, the settlement would allow for the creation of the first revenue-sharing plan for college athletics, a landmark shift in which schools would directly pay their athletes for playing.
....
“The settlement, though undesirable in many respects and promising only temporary stability, is necessary to avoid what would be the bankruptcy of college athletics,” the Rev. John I. Jenkins, president of Notre Dame, said in a statement. He called on Congress to pre-empt a patchwork of state laws, to establish that athletes are not employees and, with an antitrust exemption, to allow schools a freer hand to make rules.
But the uncertainty of antitrust protection was underscored on Thursday when a judge in Colorado denied the N.C.A.A.’s request to move another antitrust case, Fontenot v. N.C.A.A., to the same court as the one that will decide on the Thursday settlement.
That decision leaves open the possibility that athletes who are part of the settlement class in the House case — any Division I athlete going back to 2016 — could opt out if they believe that the Fontenot case might deliver more money to them.
....
The settlement has two components: back pay from name, image and licensing revenue that were denied to players before the rule change three years ago, including revenue from football broadcast rights; and a framework for paying athletes for those rights going forward.
What is unclear is who will get paid and how much.
The $2.8 billion in damages is tied to revenue generated almost exclusively by major conference football and men’s basketball, whose athletes represent one class of plaintiffs. Another class is women’s basketball players in the major conferences. And the final class is everyone else.
Going forward, the settlement means that schools could set aside about $20 million each to pay their athletes as soon as the 2025 football season.
Now, though, the settlement is being largely subsidized by the schools that do not participate in big-time football. The 27 Division I conferences that are not named in the lawsuit are being required to pay $990 million of the settlement through N.C.A.A. distributions from the men’s basketball tournament that will be withheld over a 10-year period.
....
“It feels like the N.C.A.A. is bailing out the biggest spenders, and conferences like ours are paying for the majority of the settlement,” Robin Harris, the executive director of the Ivy League, said. “The Ivy League isn’t under attack in these suits, and we’re bearing the costs from the majority who are, so it’s frustrating.”
.... Billy Witz www.nytimes.com/2024/05/23/us/ncaa-athletes-payments.htmlThe vast majority of the settlement is for Football players at around 30 top programs. The funding will come from "all" D1 schools with athletics programs. The Big East commissioner, Val Ackerman, and the smaller conferences are pointing out that the 600k/year for the settlement is a much bigger percent of her schools' budgets than it is for the programs for the programs where the majority of the expense will be spent. This argument seems to be falling on deaf ears. Further, schools will need to set aside between $20-25million per year for player payments going forward. The BCS football players should This is not NIL ... that is separate. So, a top player will receive a full-ride scholarship, a "salary" from the athletics department, a payment from a collective, and still negotiate one or more NIL sponsorship deals. I suspect there will be a parade of schools who will eliminate some sports, drop from D1, or even eliminate all sports. There is also a ginormous question about Title 9, too. The settlement only covers Football, Men's basketball, and leaves open the possibility for a handful of Olympic athletes. |
|
|
|
Post by huskyharper on May 24, 2024 17:05:20 GMT -5
Once upon a time, in a land far, far away, getting a scholarship, any scholarship was reason to rejoice. A Free bachelor's degree!
How the game is changing... And not for the good.
|
|
|
|
Post by mulliganspa on May 24, 2024 18:13:18 GMT -5
When we get to the point where a long time college coach like Geno has to go out and hawk for money to pay his players, where High School recruits are charging colleges who want to pitch to them, where agents are putting there athletes up to the highest bidder, where stars of mid-level teams head to the portal destroying the program, you begin to wonder ….. where is the closest T-ball game so I can watch amateur athletes.
|
|
|
|
Post by bulkey on May 24, 2024 18:52:34 GMT -5
When we get to the point where a long time college coach like Geno has to go out and hawk for money to pay his players, where High School recruits are charging colleges who want to pitch to them, where agents are putting there athletes up to the highest bidder, where stars of mid-level teams head to the portal destroying the program, you begin to wonder ….. where is the closest T-ball game so I can watch amateur athletes. I am beginning to move in that direction....I worry that the game is being managed for national TV with super highly paid "amateur" athletes. It's just the unending need for more sports content. Like ESPN8 which is invented as tongue-in-cheek in Dodgeball, but now really exists. |
|
|
|
Post by linkster on May 24, 2024 19:07:11 GMT -5
I like to speculate and I see a step by step dismemberment of the NCAA. Either the P-4 will secede or the NCAA will declare bankruptcy. My guess is that this has been intended from the start. By whom?
|
|
|
|
Post by linkster on May 24, 2024 19:12:11 GMT -5
When we get to the point where a long time college coach like Geno has to go out and hawk for money to pay his players, where High School recruits are charging colleges who want to pitch to them, where agents are putting there athletes up to the highest bidder, where stars of mid-level teams head to the portal destroying the program, you begin to wonder ….. where is the closest T-ball game so I can watch amateur athletes. I am beginning to move in that direction....I worry that the game is being managed for national TV with super highly paid "amateur" athletes. It's just the unending need for more sports content. Like ESPN8 which is invented as tongue-in-cheek in Dodgeball, but now really exists. How long before the media decides that they can't afford to let athleticism and performance decide the results of seasons? With billions in advertising at stake? |
|
|
|
Post by bulkey on May 25, 2024 7:32:07 GMT -5
Lots in the papers today. Despite the portal and NIL of the past few years, the decision to pay athletes directly will be the "before and after" of college sports. It will make very big winners and very big losers. Many universities simply don't have the funds--or the desire to redirect what funds they have--to compete with the P4, especially the Big P2, which is the Mason-Dixon divide of the SEC and B1G. Here's a snippet: "Smaller conferences, such as the Big East — which includes Georgetown, Villanova and the University of Connecticut — have voiced “strong objections” to the settlement, worried about shouldering an unfair burden of costs involved in revenue sharing. They said schools that have higher-profile sports teams and are part of bigger conferences, which often have TV contracts and much higher revenues, should be responsible for covering more of the costs."By David W. Chen, Jacey Fortin and Anna Betts www.nytimes.com/2024/05/24/us/ncaa-payments-athletes-reaction.htmlAnother article: But another bedrock principle remains intact, and maintaining it is likely to be a priority for the N.C.A.A.: that players who are paid by the universities are not employed by them, and therefore do not have the right to collectively bargain....It is the N.C.A.A.’s attempt to salvage the last vestiges of its amateur model, which for decades barred college athletes from being paid by schools or anyone else without risking their eligibility. That stance came under greater legal and political scrutiny in recent years, leading to the settlement, which still requires approval by a judge.....At the same time, college sports have become an increasingly national enterprise. Regional rivalries and traditions have been tossed aside as schools have switched conference allegiances in pursuit of TV money. Individual conferences can now stretch from Palo Alto, Calif., to Chestnut Hill, Mass., meaning many athletes in a variety of sports are spending more time traveling to games and less time on campus.“I don’t know how you wouldn’t call them employees at this point,” said Adam Hoffer, director of Excise Tax Policy at the Tax Foundation and a former professor of economics at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse. “The N.C.A.A. is going to look more and more like a professional league than it ever has before.”By Santul Nerkar www.nytimes.com/2024/05/25/business/ncaa-paying-athletes-unionizing.html |
|
|
|
Post by bulkey on May 25, 2024 7:40:26 GMT -5
I like to speculate and I see a step by step dismemberment of the NCAA. Either the P-4 will secede or the NCAA will declare bankruptcy. My guess is that this has been intended from the start. By whom? I very much doubt it was Charlie Baker's. Just really bad timing on his part (like an Ivy League president new in office  ). But if it was intentional, the culprits are pretty easy to spot: working together, big TV and the conference directors of the SEC and B1G. These guys, whom we used to think of as dweebs, make mega-bucks. The head of the not very Big 12 was paid $17M last year. The (very strong) argument is: athletes have a short period of earning (say from 16-36) and it can end in a flash with an injury. Of course they should maximize their earning potential. But for team sports, especially, it means that the very wealthiest institutions or schools in conferences with big TV contracts will be the real winners. UConn, I very much fear, might not be one of them. |
|
|
|
Post by grrrrr on May 25, 2024 8:16:17 GMT -5
Once upon a time, in a land far, far away, getting a scholarship, any scholarship was reason to rejoice. A Free bachelor's degree! How the game is changing... And not for the good. "You mean I get to go to college for free AND play sports? How lucky am I?" And then the CFB coaches started to make more money, and the more they made the more they (or their agents) wanted. Pretty soon, the basketball coaches did the same. So, they began making millions, and millions. Rightfully, the players said, "Wait, the cost of a Scholarship doesn't seem like much now compared to the millions some coaches make. We do the physical work, take all the injury risk, what about us?" So her we are. Kirby Smart, the Georgia football coach, just got a new contract. For $13 million. A YEAR. Coaches, cry me a river. |
|
|
|
Post by linkster on May 25, 2024 12:45:23 GMT -5
I like to speculate and I see a step by step dismemberment of the NCAA. Either the P-4 will secede or the NCAA will declare bankruptcy. My guess is that this has been intended from the start. By whom? I very much doubt it was Charlie Baker's. Just really bad timing on his part (like an Ivy League president new in office ). But if it was intentional, the culprits are pretty easy to spot: working together, big TV and the conference directors of the SEC and B1G. These guys, whom we used to think of as dweebs, make mega-bucks. The head of the not very Big 12 was paid $17M last year. The (very strong) argument is: athletes have a short period of earning (say from 16-36) and it can end in a flash with an injury. Of course they should maximize their earning potential. But for team sports, especially, it means that the very wealthiest institutions or schools in conferences with big TV contracts will be the real winners. UConn, I very much fear, might not be one of them. My hope is that the TV people will want UConn basketball on TV. The northeast corridor may not be the hotbed of college football but it is still a top market for advertisers selling beer, car insurance etc. and right now it is poorly represented by it's sole P-4 school, Boston College. I really don't think the TV networks will leave UConn out in the cold. |
|
|
|
Post by bulkey on May 25, 2024 15:41:24 GMT -5
I very much doubt it was Charlie Baker's. Just really bad timing on his part (like an Ivy League president new in office ). But if it was intentional, the culprits are pretty easy to spot: working together, big TV and the conference directors of the SEC and B1G. These guys, whom we used to think of as dweebs, make mega-bucks. The head of the not very Big 12 was paid $17M last year. The (very strong) argument is: athletes have a short period of earning (say from 16-36) and it can end in a flash with an injury. Of course they should maximize their earning potential. But for team sports, especially, it means that the very wealthiest institutions or schools in conferences with big TV contracts will be the real winners. UConn, I very much fear, might not be one of them. My hope is that the TV people will want UConn basketball on TV. The northeast corridor may not be the hotbed of college football but it is still a top market for advertisers selling beer, car insurance etc. and right now it is poorly represented by it's sole P-4 school, Boston College. I really don't think the TV networks will leave UConn out in the cold. I’m sure you’re right that both UConn teams will get lots of tv looks with their OOC schedule. But they won’t get the big TV contacts that the two super conferences are guaranteed and likely won’t be able to pay their athletes as much. I think that’s the essential distinction. |
|
|
|
Post by linkster on May 25, 2024 17:01:07 GMT -5
My hope is that the TV people will want UConn basketball on TV. The northeast corridor may not be the hotbed of college football but it is still a top market for advertisers selling beer, car insurance etc. and right now it is poorly represented by it's sole P-4 school, Boston College. I really don't think the TV networks will leave UConn out in the cold. I’m sure you’re right that both UConn teams will get lots of tv looks with their OOC schedule. But they won’t get the big TV contacts that the two super conferences are guaranteed and likely won’t be able to pay their athletes as much. I think that’s the essential distinction. I don't think I was very clear. I think the networks/sponsors will "suggest" adding UConn to either the ACC, the B1G or some new conference. And if the NCAA does dissolve then we could see new conferences that are sport specific. Hockey is already run like that to a degree. We are already seeing FSU suing the ACC. |
|
|
|
Post by bulkey on May 25, 2024 17:20:17 GMT -5
I’m sure you’re right that both UConn teams will get lots of tv looks with their OOC schedule. But they won’t get the big TV contacts that the two super conferences are guaranteed and likely won’t be able to pay their athletes as much. I think that’s the essential distinction. I don't think I was very clear. I think the networks/sponsors will "suggest" adding UConn to either the ACC, the B1G or some new conference. And if the NCAA does dissolve then we could see new conferences that are sport specific. Hockey is already run like that to a degree. We are already seeing FSU suing the ACC. +1. Makes a lot of sense that TV helps negotiate conference membership/alignment. My hope is that FSU can bolt to the SEC and UConn moves to the ACC, which would be a terrific fit. |
|
|
|
Post by swash on May 26, 2024 5:50:49 GMT -5
I don't think I was very clear. I think the networks/sponsors will "suggest" adding UConn to either the ACC, the B1G or some new conference. And if the NCAA does dissolve then we could see new conferences that are sport specific. Hockey is already run like that to a degree. We are already seeing FSU suing the ACC. +1. Makes a lot of sense that TV helps negotiate conference membership/alignment. My hope is that FSU can bolt to the SEC and UConn moves to the ACC, which would be a terrific fit. The ACC is even more precarious than the Big East. Most of their schools are flirting with the ejection handle. That move would be like investing in the PAC12 three years back |
|
|
|
Post by bulkey on May 27, 2024 7:47:47 GMT -5
Bloomberg has a terrifying major article on this by the very fine writer, Adam Minter. If we thought ESPN was bad, wait until college athletics is being managed by Wall Street. On Thursday, the NCAA and its power conference schools approved a legal settlement that will pay past, current and future Division I college athletes more than $15 billion over a decade.
Some of that money is back damages for what the NCAA’s amateurism rules denied players dating back to 2016. The rest will be paid out in a revenue-sharing model that gives athletes a cut of media rights and other earnings the NCAA has long denied them.
That’s a just outcome for athletes. But it’s causing heartburn for Division I athletic directors. At the largest public universities, those multi-million-dollar obligations could average 40-45% of an athletic department’s budget.
To help foot the bill, schools should seek new media rights from sports that the NCAA has long overlooked and undervalued. The good news is they have a natural partner to help them: private equity funds with sports-investing experience.
....
Since last year, at least, sports private equity funds have explored opportunities in college sports. The end of amateurism and the advent of revenue sharing are prompting them to move. This week, a new fund, Collegiate Athletic Solutions, announced that it’s ready to help as many as 10 athletic departments with up to $200 million each. Media rights are among the areas in which the fund believes it can aid athletic departments.
One promising way to do that is by organizing and selling tournaments outside of the NCAA’s championships. For example, a private equity fund invested in Nebraska [Yeah, Chappy!] and other volleyball schools could organize an invitational in Las Vegas and sell the rights to a broadcaster. The revenues would flow back to the schools and the athletes they’re obligated to pay, as well as to the fund.
www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2024-05-27/the-ncaa-has-a-15-billion-problem-private-equity-can-help?srnd=homepage-americas&sref=UGneIVZ3 |
|
|
|
Post by mulliganspa on May 27, 2024 10:46:32 GMT -5
Private Equity gets involved to make a profit. When they buy a company not only do they try to grow it, they also profit by drastically cutting costs. If they are taking an interest in college sports, be prepared to see ….highly paid coaches fired. One locker room for men and women. Support staff, trainers etc gone. One jock strap per player per season. False eyelashes prices soar. It’ll get ugly folks. Very ugly.
|
|
|
|
Post by RoyDodger on May 28, 2024 7:37:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by bulkey on May 28, 2024 8:38:18 GMT -5
Thanks, Roy!!!
Lots of good stuff in it. Confirms that Saban retired at least somewhat because of portal and NIL and that there is currently a huge amount of cash being thrown around.
This is probably the most important paragraph about the future:
Well, one piece that is likely to change that is the settlement that is expected to come out in the House v. N.C.A.A. litigation. At this point, we don’t know the details about what’s in the settlement. But there’s widespread speculation that it will include some components of revenue sharing. That may prove to be an impetus for Congress to act and potentially to codify some aspects of that settlement. We’ll have to see the details of the settlement before making an assessment of it, whether that’s a good idea or not. But I think we want to have an outcome where the N.C.A.A. has the authority to set basic rules that protect student athletes, that protect NIL rights, but that also protect what is great about college athletics.
|
|
|
|
Post by bulkey on May 29, 2024 9:32:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by bulkey on Jun 2, 2024 16:18:18 GMT -5
This is not irrelevant: It is part of the complete and open manipulation of "amateur sports." Of course, there has been cheating even in the ancient Greek Olympics, so it's not a new thing. What is new is the extraordinary spread of it...its normalization. In different ways, it is spreading to all amateur sports, because there are far more ways to cheat than there are ways and people to catch the cheaters. It's not personal. It's business. Adam Minter in Bloomberg: Heavily redacted. Toyota, the world’s top automaker, has had enough of the Olympics, the world’s top sporting event. Last week, the company announced that it plans to end its record-breaking sponsorship of the games following the conclusion of Paris 2024 in August. According to Kyodo News, individuals at the company are unhappy with how Olympic sponsor money is spent. They’d prefer more to go to athletes and sports. .... Now it’s Paris 2024’s turn. It’s stuck in its own fiasco. Last June, French financial investigators raided the headquarters of the Olympic organizing committee; the investigation will not be complete before the games start in July. ..... Toyota’s very public breakup with the Olympics is a cutting criticism, especially for a company that weathered Tokyo 2020, and it should worry the IOC. According to Sports Business Journal, four of the 15 TOP sponsors — Atos, Bridgestone, Intel and Panasonic — are also mulling whether to renew. Among other factors, they must weigh just how badly their image could be damaged by associating with an organization increasingly defined by scandal and financial mismanagement. Based on Toyota’s experience at Tokyo 2020 and the looming problems at Paris 2024, they may decide that having their brand’s name next to the Olympic rings is no longer a gold medal strategy. www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2024-06-02/toyota-and-olympics-sponsorship-breakup-won-t-be-the-last?srnd=homepage-americas&sref=UGneIVZ3 |
|
).
