NCAA set to Vote Power 5 Conferences More Autonomy

O

otis

Moderator
Staff member
2022 $upporter Moderator
See the below article by Hoops Weiss regarding a vote set for tomorrow (Thursday 9/7/2014) that would provide greater autonomy for the schools in the B10, ACC, PAC10, SEC, and the Big12 to pay student athletes.

The results of this vote could begin the move to a new formal Division within NCAA D1 athletics. Unfortunately the Big East and other athletic conferences not included in the Power 5 could be the big losers as a result of the vote.

LINK
http://www.bluestarmedia.org/index....vote-on-allowing-power-5-conferences-autonomy
 
Do they have editors at Blue Star Media? That piece seems like it was written by a high school freshman... However, I agree that it wouldn't bode well for all the other conferences.
 
Doesn't CBS have the contract for the NCAA Tournament in it's current format through 2022 or something like that??? I'm not sure but wouldn't that affect the basketball side of things?
 
As I, and others, have posted before, college athletics as we know them will be gone in a relatively short time. The big 5 see no reason to share revenues with anyone and are going to form an entity of their own, it is only a question of when the full break comes. It remains to be seen how this will affect the rest of the college sports world and non-football playing schools especially. That's why the outrage at schools jumping conferences was so much nonsense; none of the jumpers cared about rivalries or history or anything but the $$$$$$.
 
As I, and others, have posted before, college athletics as we know them will be gone in a relatively short time. The big 5 see no reason to share revenues with anyone and are going to form an entity of their own, it is only a question of when the full break comes. It remains to be seen how this will affect the rest of the college sports world and non-football playing schools especially. That's why the outrage at schools jumping conferences was so much nonsense; none of the jumpers cared about rivalries or history or anything but the $$$$$$.
Click to expand...

I understand that Logen and you are right in that regard. My point is that CBS agreed to an 11 Billion dollar contract for the NCAA Tournament. The agreement is for 14 years and it was signed in 2010. That agreement was for a 68 team tournament until the year 2024. I don't think the power conferences could or would want to just pull out of that with that much money on the table for them. What would they have to pay in order to get out of the agreement anyway? So, my original question is, how much will this really affect the basketball side of things between now and 2024?
 
So, my original question is, how much will this really affect the basketball side of things between now and 2024?
Click to expand...

Mean,
1. If the NCAA Tourney survives as you suggest then the gap between the schools that "pay" their athletes will increase over those that do not. If VaTeck gives compensation and the Big East schools do not then VaTeck would likely attract better recruits. My hope is that the Big East steps up and provides the same compensation and benefits as the "Power 5".

2. Whether or not the NCAA's contract with CBS provides an early termination clause is something neither one of us did. Note that many of the conference media contracts do provide for termination or reduction in compensation if certain events occur.
 
So, my original question is, how much will this really affect the basketball side of things between now and 2024?
Click to expand...

I imagine it is the NCAA that is liable for the contract with CBS. Not the member schools.
Corporate veil and all that..

But I agree that the economics on the basketball side are slightly different because of the big money brought in by the tournament. Still, you can't have two classes of players, those being paid and those not.
And its not like CBS will fight to televise a tournament with just the BE, AAC, A-10, and Ivy league. If the big conferences do break away, the tv networks will follow them.

The college athletics model is broken. This was never going to end well.
 
So, my original question is, how much will this really affect the basketball side of things between now and 2024?
Click to expand...

I imagine it is the NCAA that is liable for the contract with CBS. Not the member schools.
Corporate veil and all that..

But I agree that the economics on the basketball side are slightly different because of the big money brought in by the tournament. Still, you can't have two classes of players, those being paid and those not.
And its not like CBS will fight to televise a tournament with just the BE, AAC, A-10, and Ivy league. If the big conferences do break away, the tv networks will follow them.

The college athletics model is broken. This was never going to end well.
Click to expand...

I believe CBS will use the current contract as leverage to televise whatever replaces the current NCAA format, if it is replaced. I can guarantee one way the tournament model will change; if the power conferences don't just conduct their own tournament and leave the format basically as it is, the distribution of monies will become slanted to favor the power conferences. And as Otis posts, the better players are going to go to those power conferences. Sports are always a reflection of society and greed rules uber alles; just the world we live in. It should surprise no one.
 
So, my original question is, how much will this really affect the basketball side of things between now and 2024?
Click to expand...

Mean,
1. If the NCAA Tourney survives as you suggest then the gap between the schools that "pay" their athletes will increase over those that do not. If VaTeck gives compensation and the Big East schools do not then VaTeck would likely attract better recruits. My hope is that the Big East steps up and provides the same compensation and benefits as the "Power 5".

2. Whether or not the NCAA's contract with CBS provides an early termination clause is something neither one of us did. Note that many of the conference media contracts do provide for termination or reduction in compensation if certain events occur.
Click to expand...

I think that the last sentence in point 1 is important. If schools can follow suit under NCAA rules then we'll see which conference truly want to be big time. The largest outlay is obviously for football teams and the schools that have them. Conference and schools that don't will have to look at the ROI of keeping up with the Jones' but at many they won't have to worry about the football side of the equation reducing the hit to the balance sheet substantially.

But can schools be selective on who get access to preferred benefits packages? Can it be just certain sports? Can it be top players in certain sports? Are their Title IX implications that will require schools to offer one package to a female for every male that gets one? Lots of questions that I have but don't have the time to look into, or maybe they are not answered as of yet.
 
So, my original question is, how much will this really affect the basketball side of things between now and 2024?
Click to expand...

I imagine it is the NCAA that is liable for the contract with CBS. Not the member schools.
Corporate veil and all that..

But I agree that the economics on the basketball side are slightly different because of the big money brought in by the tournament. Still, you can't have two classes of players, those being paid and those not.
And its not like CBS will fight to televise a tournament with just the BE, AAC, A-10, and Ivy league. If the big conferences do break away, the tv networks will follow them.

The college athletics model is broken. This was never going to end well.
Click to expand...

I believe CBS will use the current contract as leverage to televise whatever replaces the current NCAA format, if it is replaced. I can guarantee one way the tournament model will change; if the power conferences don't just conduct their own tournament and leave the format basically as it is, the distribution of monies will become slanted to favor the power conferences. And as Otis posts, the better players are going to go to those power conferences. Sports are always a reflection of society and greed rules uber alles; just the world we live in. It should surprise no one.
Click to expand...

It was explained to me a while back by someone in the know that these conferences are contractually locked into the NCAA tournament for a good number of years (can't recall the exact number), so things are "safe" for a while. However, once that contract runs out, I have no doubt the super conferences will come up with their own post-season tournament, which, in turn, will make signing elite recruits all the more difficult (if not impossible) for everyone else. I'll probably be dead or demented by then, but it still pisses me off.
 
As a grad of over 50 yrs ago I hate to say it but this action will only speed up the process of SJU becoming a high mid major, hopefully like Gonzaga.
Only MSG and Lavin's ability to get involved with top recruits will keep us at that level.
Now we know why Buzz Williams left and why Jay Wright and any other Big East coach who has the opportunity will seriously look to leave for the big leagues.
 
Why don't they just separate football from the other sports and have different governing standards and alignments for them. A team like Northwestern should not be competing with Ohio State anyway.
 
It is imperative that the Big East schools use their $4M per year FoxSports money to provide like benefits to its student athletes as paid by the Power 5 schools.
 
I don't see how the NCAA could rule that only those five conferences can provide extra benefits. It should be allowable as to all schools and the conferences should have the final say of whether or not they will participate. The Big East can match those top five in basketball benefits.
 
....The Big East can match those top five in basketball benefits.
Click to expand...

I agree that the ability to provide added benefits will likely extend to all D1 schools. I also believe that the benefits will be required to be provided equally to women athletes.

IMO this rule may hurt the schools with FBC football programs in 2d tier conferences (see: AAC, Mountain West, and others). For example, Yukon & Temple may be required to provide benefits to over 200 student athletes but lack the big TV revenue to cover the added costs. The Big East schools, on the other hand will be spared 170 pay outs (85 football x 2).
 
So does this mean that schools in the SEC will pay their student athletes $5k a year in place of the $100k and more that they pay them today?
 
Been saying that for several years ( re:Stipend )
Click to expand...

I'm president of that club. It was a huge advantage and something we could still offer players due to the % of commuters v. on-campus residents. Several articles have indicated that paying players is stricly off the table. It seems that there will be extra beneifts being offered, and we can certainly offer that without breaking a sweat. Heck, some non-FBS football schools might be better off than most FBS football schools by not having to offer benefits to dozens of football players.

How will this affect the schools that are already losing money? It will just put them further into the red. Football is ruining college athletics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top