ADVERTISEMENT

Its Happening? Money Division

TIGER-PAUL

Athletic Director
Jan 14, 2005
15,932
2,640
113

In a move that is both radical and inevitable, the NCAA is planning to propose a new Division I subdivision that would allow schools to directly compensate their athletes.

The proposal appears to avoid categorizing athletes as employees of their school, instead allowing each school to opt in to a new subdivision in which athletes could license their Name, Image and Likeness rights directly to their schools.

“It kick-starts a long-overdue conversation among the membership that focuses on the differences that exist between schools, conferences and divisions and how to create more permissive and flexible rules across the NCAA that put student-athletes first,” NCAA president Charlie Baker wrote in a letter to schools. “Colleges and universities need to be more flexible, and the NCAA needs to be more flexible, too.”

The proposal comes as FBS prepares to launch a 12-team playoff next year in which teams could play up to 17 games a year, stretching from early September to mid-to-late January. The new 12-team bracket could be worth up to $2 billion per year in TV rights alone.

Schools would be required to "invest" at least $30,000 per year to an "enhanced educational trust fund" to at least half of its countable athletes. Title IX rules would still apply, which means at least half of the athletes receiving the $30,000 a year would need to be women.

Those opting in to the new subdivision would not be limited to $30,000 per year; that figure would simply be the starting point.

“The growing financial gap between the highest-resourced colleges and universities and other schools in Division I has created a new series of challenges,” Baker wrote. “The challenges are competitive as well as financial and are complicated further by the intersection of name, image and likeness opportunities for student-athletes and the arrival of the Transfer Portal.”
 
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: Farnox and persp
No disrespect to you. I'm just bloviating. But who cares what the NCAA thinks? They actually think they're in charge! They're a paper lion with no leadership whatsoever. They're an absentee landlord.

TV runs the show. If fans want change, the schools need to go to congress for regulation.
 
No disrespect to you. I'm just bloviating. But who cares what the NCAA thinks? They actually think they're in charge! They're a paper lion with no leadership whatsoever. They're an absentee landlord.

TV runs the show. If fans want change, the schools need to go to congress for regulation.
Yeah I’m sure the clowns in DC will do a great job
 
So schools who want to pay in this new subdivision have to pay their players $30K directly and would have to pay an equivalent number of female athletes. This is fine for Pitt. They'll find the money.
 
Will be so funny when their ratings tank cause all the purists watch the amateur division cause that's what CFB is about. I will never watch a single game of the money division unless Pitt is in it.

I would guess the only teams who dont opt in are the lower G5 schools. Like maybe Akron wont, Old Dominion, UMass, schools like that.

What does Pitt have, 300 scholarship athletes? They can easily afford to pay $9 million/year to them. What this does is basically eliminate fundraising arms like The Panther Club. It would he one and the same.
 
So schools who want to pay in this new subdivision have to pay their players $30K directly and would have to pay an equivalent number of female athletes. This is fine for Pitt. They'll find the money.
$30K minimum but no maximum

I applaud the NCAA for trying to keep a group of schools from breaking away but I don't see schools jumping on this plan because they would damn near have to pay everyone. It would be $6 million just for football, basketball, and the 85 additional women on scholarship to cover football but the problem is that is the bare minimum and you can guarantee that a lot of the programs will not be spending the minimum.
 
This is nothing more than the NCAA admitting they are finished. A last gasp to try and hold onto something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PittAU
$30K minimum but no maximum

I applaud the NCAA for trying to keep a group of schools from breaking away but I don't see schools jumping on this plan because they would damn near have to pay everyone. It would be $6 million just for football, basketball, and the 85 additional women on scholarship to cover football but the problem is that is the bare minimum and you can guarantee that a lot of the programs will not be spending the minimum.

30K x 85 = $2.55 million

Yes, its a minimum and you can pay more but schools like Pitt will find ways to compete. Maybe schools like Pitt will eliminate teams to cut costs. Or greatly reduce recruiting budgets. I am a really big Pitt soccer fan but maybe that's an example of us going back to a D3 budget and going winless for years. Cuts will have to be made places but Pitt will compete. The most drastic place to make cuts is in coaching. There's really no reason that Pitt should pay its coaches comparatively to the Steelers. It can because we dont have a player salary expense. Now we will. The name of the game is talent acquisition so if we hire the IUP coach for 500K/year and position coaches at 100K/year, there is more money to pay the players. Coaching is extremely overrated. I'd take a WPIAL gym teacher coach if you gave me Alabama's talent over Nick Saban coaching Pitt's talent.
 
If they don’t include a ceiling limit schools can pay. Nothing is going to change, I know Tech will never get in the top 40 in spending. I’m fine with that, pay the basketball players and move on
 
30K x 85 = $2.55 million

Yes, its a minimum and you can pay more but schools like Pitt will find ways to compete. Maybe schools like Pitt will eliminate teams to cut costs. Or greatly reduce recruiting budgets. I am a really big Pitt soccer fan but maybe that's an example of us going back to a D3 budget and going winless for years. Cuts will have to be made places but Pitt will compete. The most drastic place to make cuts is in coaching. There's really no reason that Pitt should pay its coaches comparatively to the Steelers. It can because we dont have a player salary expense. Now we will. The name of the game is talent acquisition so if we hire the IUP coach for 500K/year and position coaches at 100K/year, there is more money to pay the players. Coaching is extremely overrated. I'd take a WPIAL gym teacher coach if you gave me Alabama's talent over Nick Saban coaching Pitt's talent.
The problem is it is just not football, if you give the 85 scholarship football players $30K you also need to give $30K to 85 female scholarship athletes, and again that $30K is just the minimum we will see some big numbers being thrown around.
 
It's the minimum number, so Pitt would still get pasted in the NIL market.

Schools like Pitt will find a way to be competitive. Maybe they eliminate teams or cut costs other places. Will we be able to spend like PSU and OSU, no. But I would think we arent going to lose players to Indiana and Purdue solely based on money.
 
The problem is it is just not football, if you give the 85 scholarship football players $30K you also need to give $30K to 85 female scholarship athletes, and again that $30K is just the minimum we will see some big numbers being thrown around.

Right. 300 athletes. $9 million. Dont pay coaches as much. Hypothetically, if we Duz go to Purdue or wherever and hired thr Slippery Rock coach for 300K/year, how much worse would our records have been? That's an extreme example but you get it. Coaches dont need to make as much as they do. D2 coaches can do a fine job if they have the players
 
This is just money being paid by the school. It doesn't eliminate the NIL stuff and the collectives.
 
This would never survive a legal challenge by a player. The court specifically stated that the NCAA has zero right to regulate NIL, but schools and conferences might have that ability. The only result that will end this is congressional intervention or a breakaway league.
 
This is just money being paid by the school. It doesn't eliminate the NIL stuff and the collectives.

No, it allows the collectives to be brought in-house. Alliance 412 can just be called The Panther Club and your season ticket donation can go to paying players instead of new locker rooms
 
This would never survive a legal challenge by a player. The court specifically stated that the NCAA has zero right to regulate NIL, but schools and conferences might have that ability. The only result that will end this is congressional intervention or a breakaway league.
Congress is not solving this problem, there are just too many competing ideas being thrown around and none will get enough support.
 
No, it allows the collectives to be brought in-house. Alliance 412 can just be called The Panther Club and your season ticket donation can go to paying players instead of new locker rooms
And they can still remain outside the university. Which they will, at the big money factories. They aren't letting a university get involved in the way they run their donation system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HailToPitt725
Will be so funny when their ratings tank cause all the purists watch the amateur division cause that's what CFB is about. I will never watch a single game of the money division unless Pitt is in it.
People were saying the same thing about NIL but viewership is up across college football.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThePanthers
We’re finally here. The Big Ten and SEC will be in it. Question is- do the entire ACC and Big 12 conferences join, or does this lead to fracturing within them?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Las Panteras
Schools like Pitt will find a way to be competitive. Maybe they eliminate teams or cut costs other places. Will we be able to spend like PSU and OSU, no. But I would think we arent going to lose players to Indiana and Purdue solely based on money.
I'd rather say F it and join the non-pay division, I'd be just fine watching all those games and never watching a minute of the pay league games, I already don't, I haven't watched a single SEC or B1G game this year and won't watch the playoffs, so it's nothing new to me.
 
I'd rather say F it and join the non-pay division, I'd be just fine watching all those games and never watching a minute of the pay league games, I already don't, I haven't watched a single SEC or B1G game this year and won't watch the playoffs, so it's nothing new to me.
You are in the minority of college fans that the college football decision do not care about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bdur76
I agree with SMF. The value of a coach (and the corresponding salaries) would go down.

Why pay a coach to recruit players when a stack of greenbacks is a much better salesman?

I would think under this scenario a coach's true value is his NFL experience, or at least the perception that he can get you to the NFL.

After being paid, thats the only thing left for the kids.
 
I'd rather say F it and join the non-pay division, I'd be just fine watching all those games and never watching a minute of the pay league games, I already don't, I haven't watched a single SEC or B1G game this year and won't watch the playoffs, so it's nothing new to me.
You certainly have that option.

But the viewership numbers suggest you will have plenty of room in the bleachers.
 
We’re finally here. The Big Ten and SEC will be in it. Question is- do the entire ACC and Big 12 conferences join, or does this lead to fracturing within them?
Answer:


In my opinion, this creates the pathway for football to be a separate entity from the rest of the athletic department. This could lead to schools reverting to regional athletic conferences while making separate decisions for football that aren’t based on a conference entity.
 
Diploma factories like Ped St will be in this new division IF it happens. Pitt will not and I will still follow them none the less!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pitt79
I'd rather say F it and join the non-pay division, I'd be just fine watching all those games and never watching a minute of the pay league games, I already don't, I haven't watched a single SEC or B1G game this year and won't watch the playoffs, so it's nothing new to me.
these games wouldnt be on tv for you to watch.
 
Congress is not solving this problem, there are just too many competing ideas being thrown around and none will get enough support.
It will happen within the next 5 years if the teams don't break away first. College football is too ingrained with political favor for them not to come up with a solution to protect it. Also the fact that most of the universities that will be involved in current and future lawsuits are state funded institutions.

SCOTUS has already signaled that future lawsuits against the NCAA will not result in a favorable outcome for the association, it's just a matter of the time it take for the lawsuits to work their way through the courts.

-The Johnson v. NCAA antitrust suit that is underway in Pennsylvania that is determining if athletes are employees. (in which the NCAA is using the 13th Amendment's slavery loophole for prisoners as a major part of their arguments.)

-Chuba Hubbard filed a class-action antitrust lawsuit in California for every student athlete after 2019 that were denied payments that were granted in the Alston decision. The damages are int he tens of millions. Hubbard v. NCAA.

-There is currently a class-action antitrust lawsuit working it's way up that is challenging television revenue distributions that is seeking $billions. A federal judge in Colorado approved the class status last month. House v. NCAA.

-There is also an antitrust lawsuit filed last month in Illinois challenging the entire amateurism model that is seeking class status in Bewley's v. NCAA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Guyasuta Genac
Well, you got two choices. Let the NCAA buffoons handle this or have congress do it...Besides they're good at spreading the wealth....
Congress isn't going to touch this. The only small portion of Congress that cares are in the South and sporadically in B1G territory. Do you honestly think that Fetterman or Casey give 2 craps about college football?

This is the NCAA stepping away from the football side even more than they have in the past. He's putting more of the onus on the schools and conferences to create the rules. From Baker's letter:

Third, it gives the educational institutions with the most visibility, the most financial resources and the biggest brands an opportunity to choose to operate with a different set of rules that more accurately reflect their scale and their operating model.

• Seventh, it gives the schools most impacted by collectives, the Transfer Portal and NIL the opportunity to create rules, programming and resources that are in the best interests of the vast majority of their student-athletes, instead of just a few.


Also, from Pat Forde:

Baker’s proposal attempts to build an in-house revenue-sharing mechanism that would lessen—if not eliminate—the problematic role of third-party collectives. It also would, in theory, adhere to Title IX—thus opening unprecedented revenue streams to some women athletes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Guyasuta Genac
You are in the minority of college fans that the college football decision do not care about.
Ok. I'm fine with that, I'm a Pitt football fan because of my attachment to Pitt, I don't care at all about watching the "best" teams with some other school's logo on their helmet, so otherwise I watch the Steelers and NFL way more. So, I'll watch only Pitt games every year, like I do now, as long as it lasts.
 
Just need a completely new minor league NFL system.

The NFL has a free minor league system now. And the NFL is so powerful, they can screw with their free minor league system with no repercussions. Thursday night used to feature more marque college matchups, now the NFL decided they want that time slot so screw their minor league. This year they played a game on black Friday, another traditional college football date.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Guyasuta Genac
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT