If universities cut Varsity sports and go Club for most offerings, what should CU offer as Varsity with scholarships and NIL?

[Buffnik]

If there was a way to support volleyball away from NIL, I would consider that.

I know about car stereos etc have been going on forever. But I don't think players have been getting millions in cash forever. I know stuff gets bought for players in DIII.

The pitcher from Texas Tech got an extra million for the College Softball World Series championship series of 3 games. They lost and fans aren't happy with that. They thought they paid her to win the national championship.

That's what I don't like. $$$ going to players puts big expectations and targets on their backs. I did not like RG's letter. Cutting roster sizes in Olympic sports is going to hurt. Walk on's won't get many opportunities and some kids turned those in to scholarships for a year or two.

We already are seeing it with track and field with eliminating everything except cross country and distance running. The field part of track and field matters. Those kids got told they don't matter to Colorado. The Malones got told they don't matter to CU. This is wrong and has RG's blessing.

I am not upset at RG or his letter. It's not like the AD budget was running on a surplus and he just got notified of a legal settlement that $20.5M of his budget has been reallocated to a new expense. Of course that's going to result in cuts. If anything, I guess I could criticize the letter for being too political instead of telling it like it is: there's not enough money to continue business as usual while also fulfilling the new requirement.

 

[MtnBuff]

If there was a way to support volleyball away from NIL, I would consider that.

I know about car stereos etc have been going on forever. But I don't think players have been getting millions in cash forever. I know stuff gets bought for players in DIII.

The pitcher from Texas Tech got an extra million for the College Softball World Series championship series of 3 games. They lost and fans aren't happy with that. They thought they paid her to win the national championship.

That's what I don't like. $$$ going to players puts big expectations and targets on their backs. I did not like RG's letter. Cutting roster sizes in Olympic sports is going to hurt. Walk on's won't get many opportunities and some kids turned those in to scholarships for a year or two.

We already are seeing it with track and field with eliminating everything except cross country and distance running. The field part of track and field matters. Those kids got told they don't matter to Colorado. The Malones got told they don't matter to CU. This is wrong and has RG's blessing.

You are right in this.

It's hard to say this because I am a big time fan and would love to see Colorado win another NCi in football and in other sports but the concept of college sports is getting completely perverted.

I don't like the idea of college athletes getting millions of dollars, I don't like the idea that for many of the the college experience now is nothing more than what they can get from athletics, and the academics and connections and experiences aren't a part of that.

I see the argument about college athletes "making millions of dollars for their schools" but the huge majority of athletes aren't doing that. I can see in addition to their schooling cost providing athletes enough money to have a comparable experience to what typical students from upper middle class families enjoy but driving exotic cars, buying expensive jewelry, etc. aren't a part of that.

In both baseball and hockey the best young athletes go directly into a minor league system and skip the pretense of an academic experience, maybe we need to do the same with football and basketball. The NBA already has the G-league and the WNBA is growing in popularity enough that a W G-league might make sense.

So much is unknown right now but we knew before all the re-alignment and NIL stuff hit that most college programs weren't making money for their schools. Now if they are paying $20.5 million directly to athletes plus decreasing donations by the amount that some major donors divert to direct NIL payments it's hard to imagine trying to maintain an athletic program outside of the power conferences makes any sense and even for a lot in the power conferences it won't.

And this is before we address the issues presented in the future by Ttile IX suits and by athletes suing their schools directly for long term health issues due to participation which become an issue when athletes are now being paid.
fly true Division I wrestling program in the state is at the Air Force Academy, something which is not an option for most of these athletes. Northern Colorado has a program (which competes in the Big XII) but few Colorado kids grow up dreaming of going to school in Greeley.

Will we soon see the same thing for our Track and Field athletes, how about Volleyball, Tennis, etc.

I know this won't be popular, especially with those who are making money off the system but maybe we end up with some federal legislation that allows most of the colleges to turn the clock back to a system that doesn't make some elite athletes rich but that does offer more opportunity for a lot more athletes and makes financial sense for the schools.

Yes this "isn't fair" to the star athletes but everything has trade-offs. The huge majority of college athletes never have and never will make money from being a college athlete but most benefit greatly from the experience, the connections made, the doors opened by being a college athlete. The direction we are going is throwing a lot of that out so a few can collect a bag.

I love college sports but I can see myself in the future losing a lot of interest and/or refocusing my attention on D2 sports, etc.

 

[AeroBuff99]

Actually the house settlement will be a positive in the long run. There isn't going to be a $1M softball pitcher as her NIL package would have to be reviewed and would likely be determined to not be a legitimate deal (after all what business is able to justify that kind of scratch on a soft a pitcher). The football and bball players will be getting compensated for the value they bring. The NCAA has long run over player's rights to earn a living. Their stupidity led to to this. The sad part is the roster caps and schools now having to cut $20M from their operating budgets for the non-rev sports

 

[WBBBuffs]

Definitely did not feel the same joy for the women's basketball team as I have in previously seasons. Last year, I watched but was not invested. I attended the very first game of the program when I was a student at CU. They have been my team for over 50 years.

Now, I really don't care. It makes me sad.

If D2 or D3 sports were televisied, I would prefer watching those.

 

[Corey Trevorson]

Football and basketball, everything else is taking away from the sports people care about and tht ones that deliver an ROI to the school

 

[BlackNGold]

My own belief is this is going to undergo several iterations over the next 10 years as there are too many competing interest. I think you may have a few more lawsuits.

Title IX - The intent of Title IX was good but the implementation was poor. Title IX seems to be at cross purposes with the House Settlement. Title IX lawsuits are expected. Court outcome will impact this settlement.

Revenue sharing and NIL. These are actually different buckets of money and in the NCAA the administration of NIL is absurd. NIL contracts over $600 will be reviewed to be sure they are not pay for play which is prohibited under NCAA rules. Digest that for a second, of course it is pay for play, look at what is happening with schools competing in the transfer portal.

Non-revenue sports - at most schools Football pays for everything and Men's basketball may break even. I am waiting for a football player lawsuit claiming their money is being illegally diverted to other sports that are not carrying their weight.

The IVY league won their case when some athletes sued over their non athletic scholarship policy. They have opted out of the settlement. I wonder if more schools will follow that path. A school like UNC has no business spending a fortune on football.

As the OP premises is there is not enough money to go around.

There are actually going to be less opportunities for athletes in the future. I am not sure we are going to recognize college athletics in the future.

 

[MtnBuff]

My own belief is this is going to undergo several iterations over the next 10 years as there are too many competing interest. I think you may have a few more lawsuits.

Title IX - The intent of Title IX was good but the implementation was poor. Title IX seems to be at cross purposes with the House Settlement. Title IX lawsuits are expected. Court outcome will impact this settlement.

Revenue sharing and NIL. These are actually different buckets of money and in the NCAA the administration of NIL is absurd. NIL contracts over $600 will be reviewed to be sure they are not pay for play which is prohibited under NCAA rules. Digest that for a second, of course it is pay for play, look at what is happening with schools competing in the transfer portal.

Non-revenue sports - at most schools Football pays for everything and Men's basketball may break even. I am waiting for a football player lawsuit claiming their money is being illegally diverted to other sports that are not carrying their weight.

The IVY league won their case when some athletes sued over their non athletic scholarship policy. They have opted out of the settlement. I wonder if more schools will follow that path. A school like UNC has no business spending a fortune on football.

As the OP premises is there is not enough money to go around.

There are actually going to be less opportunities for athletes in the future. I am not sure we are going to recognize college athletics in the future.

The idea of reviewing NIL contracts to avoid pay for play is ridiculous. If they want to do it legally it is super simple.

Every major program has multiple boosters who own public facing businesses. Last year Phil Long Ford had multiple commercials with Buffs players. The most prominent ones had Travis which makes a ton of sense. To get past any scrutiny though under this rule though simply do a commercial like they did with what was set up as 15-20 players in a meeting.

Past that though there is simply no way that the NCAA can make "value judgements" on the value of endorsements that are outside of the school limit. What does it require, the athlete goes to the business and visits with some employees and customers, an athlete does a meet and greet with an important customer maybe even facetime.

The NCAA has been beaten court so often they buy their lawyers with knee pads. Like everything else the NCAA does there is no enforceability here. The free for all now on, has been since NIL became legal.

 

[Buffnik]

Most NIL is pay for play, or at least "pay for being on this school's roster instead of someone else's".

Very few athletes who are getting NIL compensation are getting it because of their advertising value to an organization.

The question becomes, "What happens if the NCAA gets strict with the NIL clearinghouse and starts to deny all these wink-wink-nudge-nudge-saynomore-saynomore endorsement deals?" I suspect that it would just put things under the table again with shadow boosters delivering bags.

 

[AeroBuff99]

My understanding is that the review board will basically consist of marketing professionals that have expertise in endorsement valuation. They will look at several factors including the businesses revenue, the nature of the deal (required appearances, commercials, etc..) and local market conditions and ad spend. If those are out of line, aka "no way billy bobs lawn service can spend $100k for NIL endorsements when they cut 2 lawns" the deal won't be approved.

 

[leftybuff]

Money Ruins Everything.

I knew the lawsuit was pending, but I did not really pay any attention until the dust settled. College sports were already getting fast tracked to a sort of pro sports lite and this takes it the rest of the way there.

With the NIL and free for all transfer rules, the concept of a team being identified with a school is over. Now, players come and go yearly, en masse.

I don't even bother with current HS recruiting in FB, because there is probably a less that one in three chance any given player hangs around long enough to do anything. They will bolt to greener pastures at the drop of a hat. Current roster? Heck if I know, 40 % are newcomer transfers, most of which end up being one year rentals.

Ticket prices, coaches salaries, and now player compensation are all of professional level. College sports are now that in name only, and kind of a sad joke.

My interest level is now pretty low.

 

[Mick Ronson]

I remember when Barry Switzer suggested players get some stipend for the money they bring the universities, networks etc. he was treated like the devil.

College Football may have always been a hypocrisy, and I don't like being nostalgic for hypocrisy.......still, I'm among those losing interest.

weren't for CP, I dunno. Always shoulder to shoulder....but still.

two of my best friends, one from Dallas and the other Santa Barbara.....BOTH their daughters are coming to CU after acceptance to Berkeley and UT-Austin.....because CU is whatever the kids call "hip" today.

 

[Buffnik]

I remember when Barry Switzer suggested players get some stipend for the money they bring the universities. he was treated like the devil.

College Football may have always been a hypocrisy, and I don't like being nostalgic for hypocrisy.......I'm among those losing interest.

weren't for CP, I dunno. Always shoulder to shoulder....but still.

two of my best friends, one from Dallas and the other Santa Barbara.....BOTH their daughters are coming to CU after acceptance to Berkeley and UT-Austin.....because CU is whatever the kids call "hip" today.

I've heard coaches make statements for decades that what they see as "right" or "fair" or their duty as a the young athlete's mentor was in direct conflict with NCAA rules. Especially the Christian coaches would voice complaints. In short, "This young man who I am responsible for and who is making millions for this university can't afford a winter coat, his mom's struggling to make rent, and he doesn't have the money to take a girl out to dinner. That's wrong and I would be wrong to allow this situation for the young man and his family." That is at least fixed without having to break rules and risk your program and career to do the right thing. I hope no one who is complaining about some of the current problems thinks the old way was better when it comes to stuff like this.

 

[Buffs35]

The pitcher from Texas Tech got an extra million for the College Softball World Series championship series of 3 games. They lost and fans aren't happy with that. They thought they paid her to win the national championship

Anyone that's upset at her can kiss her ass. She more than earned her money.

 

[4BienemyTDs]

My understanding is that the review board will basically consist of marketing professionals that have expertise in endorsement valuation. They will look at several factors including the businesses revenue, the nature of the deal (required appearances, commercials, etc..) and local market conditions and ad spend. If those are out of line, aka "no way billy bobs lawn service can spend $100k for NIL endorsements when they cut 2 lawns" the deal won't be approved.

This is exactly what it is, and it is a fair way to do it.
All these greedy bastards that want to just buy championships are not at all what will make CFB great
Competition has to have a fair basis (Socialism), otherwise it will lose a lot of the joy of knowing what your teams chances are
Can all these asshats just back off and accept a level playing field for the good of all, or is the new world order just screw everyone over with zero shyts given

College Sports should consider looking at the European Club models for guidance and inspiration, because revenue and non-revenue matters if you do not have a master plan for all the sports departments to budget funds intentionally for the betterment of everyone, like the old days tried.

 

[Boulder]

Beyond football and basketball, you keep what CU excels at. In that case it is cross country and skiing. Both capitalize on where the university is located and where the Buffs are a top contender.

 

[4BienemyTDs]

Beyond football and basketball, you keep what CU excels at. In that case it is cross country and skiing. Both capitalize on where the university is located and where the Buffs are a top contender.

What organization/league operates Skiing?

Track and Field might have to consolidate

 

[skibum]

There isn't going to be a $1M softball pitcher as her NIL package would have to be reviewed and would likely be determined to not be a legitimate deal (after all what business is able to justify that kind of scratch on a soft a pitcher).

I actually disagree.


Having seen a bit of real life litigation that hinged upon the determination of "fair market value," it is extraordinarily difficult within our country's jurisprudence to prove that ANY transaction with an unrelated willing buyer and a willing seller did not occur at a fair market value.

It can be done, but the deck is heavily stacked against you.

I mean, sure, some ncaa committee may try and "rule" that it's not "legitimate," but last I checked the ncaa has a pretty shîtty record once their "rulings" get challenged in a real court of law.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

Money Ruins Everything.

Bingo. Welcome to America.

Amateurism really gave us something to root for. Kids playing at the highest level they were capable of for the love of sport. Rental players and mercenaries just doesnt quite have the same feel.

My interest level is now pretty low.

I'm among those losing interest.

Now, I really don't care. It makes me sad.

This is where I am at. It’s not playing for the love of school and sport anymore. I chose CU because I fell in love with it.

Their biggest fear, the RGs and TV folks, is that we all stop watching. If they lose the audience the money will be gone.

Soon Coach Prime will step away. We all know it. And if ticket sales drop and the booster money will evaporate pretty much immediately. Then what? General fund subsidies? For how long?

 

[WBBBuffs]

In yesterday's mail, I received a thank you for supporting us this past season from WBB. Fine. It did not ask for money.

In today's mail, I am to receive a mailing from the Buff Club. I am sure that it will be asking for money.

The University of Iowa announced a "non-profit" yesterday called the Flight Fund. $$$ count towards priority points but not towards parking locations or seat tax.

More grifting.

 

[leftybuff]

Bingo. Welcome to America.

Amateurism really gave us something to root for. Kids playing at the highest level they were capable of for the love of sport. Rental players and mercenaries just doesnt quite have the same feel.

This is where I am at. It’s not playing for the love of school and sport anymore. I chose CU because I fell in love with it.

Their biggest fear, the RGs and TV folks, is that we all stop watching. If they lose the audience the money will be gone.

Soon Coach Prime will step away. We all know it. And if ticket sales drop and the booster money will evaporate pretty much immediately. Then what? General fund subsidies? For how long?

The bold above nails it.

Everybody is now just chasing a dollar. I will probably still tune in on the tube, still catch a game, but more to meet up with friends etc. I won't be getting season tickets, and I won't be there if they aren't winning/competitive. I went to a lot of games during the DII Danny years and Karl Dorrell reign of terror. I did that because I identified with the team as a function of the University. Now that it is a bunch of semi-pros, I am not as interested, and there is no way I am investing time and money if they don't win.

 

[BuffBronco]

Female Athletes Appeal House v. NCAA Settlement Approval

In the appeal, athletes argue that the terms violate Title IX, the statute governing gender equity in sports.

frontofficesports.com

 

[J.R. Ewing]

Female Athletes Appeal House v. NCAA Settlement Approval

In the appeal, athletes argue that the terms violate Title IX, the statute governing gender equity in sports.

frontofficesports.com

As expected. I sympathize for them, but I suspect they will likely lose. Universities can simply sit back and point to the massive discrepancy their respective sports bring in. As long as access to the sport s opportunities remain the same.

 

[Buffnik]

As expected. I sympathize for them, but I suspect they will likely lose. Universities can simply sit back and point to the massive discrepancy their respective sports bring in. As long as access to the sport s opportunities remain the same.

I don't think it's as simple as that.

I think your argument is what justifies the MBB HC making more money than the WBB HC.

But the Title IX stuff means that the WBB players are afforded the same benefits as a scholar athlete as the MBB players. What's the difference between paying MBB players more money vs giving MBB players a larger meal allowance (which we know a school can't do)?

 

[30Something]

I don't think it's as simple as that.

I think your argument is what justifies the MBB HC making more money than the WBB HC.

But the Title IX stuff means that the WBB players are afforded the same benefits as a scholar athlete as the MBB players. What's the difference between paying MBB players more money vs giving MBB players a larger meal allowance (which we know a school can't do)?

I suppose that they would draw the distinction between the meal allowance being an AD benefit afforded to the student athlete, and the monetary payments being earned by the athletes based on revenue brought in?

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

I don't think it's as simple as that.

I think your argument is what justifies the MBB HC making more money than the WBB HC.

But the Title IX stuff means that the WBB players are afforded the same benefits as a scholar athlete as the MBB players. What's the difference between paying MBB players more money vs giving MBB players a larger meal allowance (which we know a school can't do)?

Football players will get paid more than MBB players. What’s the difference between paying football players more money vs giving football players a larger meal allowance?

 

[Buffnik]

Football players will get paid more than MBB players. What’s the difference between paying football players more money vs giving football players a larger meal allowance?

I agree. But Title IX DGAF if there's inequity between different men's sports

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

I agree. But Title IX DGAF if there's inequity between different men's sports

Is there anything in Title IX that suggests women should be paid the same as male counterparts even though their sports drive net negative revenue?

 

[Buffnik]

Is there anything in Title IX that suggests women should be paid the same as male counterparts even though their sports drive net negative revenue?

As far as I know, Title IX does not get into the weeds with specifics to the level you are asking for. It basically says that if your institution receives federal funds, you cannot have any policies that discriminate against women or provide unequal athletic opportunities for women. I would assume that the basis for the lawsuits will be a claim that if there's inequity between revenue sharing from the university to its athletes, for example 75% to football ($15M of $20.5M) which is going to men and then of the $5.5M remaining that the majority goes to MBB, then this represents unequal opportunity for women.

 

[Buffnik]

The first filing against the House Settlement is coming out of Boulder. It addresses the back pay which was agreed upon.

It is the back pay portion of the settlement that is under appeal, as potentially 90% of that $2.8 million is expected to go to football and men’s basketball players, as those are the two sports that generate the vast majority of the revenue in college athletics.

Boulder law firm files appeal of House v. NCAA settlement

A law firm in Boulder representing a group of female athletes filed an appeal of the House v. NCAA settlement on Wednesday.

www.dailycamera.com

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

As far as I know, Title IX does not get into the weeds with specifics to the level you are asking for. It basically says that if your institution receives federal funds, you cannot have any policies that discriminate against women or provide unequal athletic opportunities for women. I would assume that the basis for the lawsuits will be a claim that if there's inequity between revenue sharing from the university to its athletes, for example 75% to football ($15M of $20.5M) which is going to men and then of the $5.5M remaining that the majority goes to MBB, then this represents unequal opportunity for women.

This is going to be a FAFO situation. If non revenue generating women’s sports are eventually required to have equal rev sharing as football and MBB, ADs will start dropping non revenue generating sports entirely or the football programs will officially break away so they aren’t subject to that.

Nobody actually believes women’s soccer or tennis players should be paid the same as football players.