NCAA in "Deep Discussion" to Implement Revenue Sharing with Athletes

https://www.ncsasports.org/blog/ncaa-scholarship-roster-limits-2024

I am way late to this conversation.  I have a track athlete at Kent State who may be "cut" next year.  Good news in this?  Non-revenue sports get more scholarships.  Bad news?  Overall there will be less D1 athletes.  There were a ton of FB players who never made it out of the portal last year.  THis year?  WOW!!  There is a super huge rist to going into the portal.  Many kids will probably quit.  

I can't beleive I ignored this stuff.  I had a thread with my former athlete.  I didn't understand what she was saying until now.  I feel bad for her.  She is a walk-on with a huge amount of upside.  Not sure what she will do.

 
Word is the Huskers are planning to spend about $14.5M on football revenue sharing (not counting NIL money from 1890).  Not all players will be getting a share; the remaining would be on an NIL/scholarship plan like most are now.

 
Mavric said:
Word is the Huskers are planning to spend about $14.5M on football revenue sharing (not counting NIL money from 1890).  Not all players will be getting a share; the remaining would be on an NIL/scholarship plan like most are now.
Click to expand...
That's interesting.  I was working under the assumption that the university  $ would be evenly split.  I'm sort of surprised that they can actually do that, to tell the truth...

 
At what point do Title IX-esque lawsuits come into play? Seems like a lot of rule bending is going on and the consequences have not been well thought out.

The whole thing is a racket in my view. Give the kids a scholarship and a small stipend, sure. Giving 18-22 year old kids $200-300k per year on top of free education, room & board, medical care, etc. is just asking for trouble.. especially when those kids graduate and have to take pay cuts with starting annual salaries that are ~20-25% of what they made as 18 year olds. If companies want kids to promote products, let them earn it, but I cannot envision this new dynamic working out well long-term for the vast majority of people who stand to benefit from the financial windfalls coming.

 
Wistrom Disciple said:
At what point do Title IX-esque lawsuits come into play? Seems like a lot of rule bending is going on and the consequences have not been well thought out.

The whole thing is a racket in my view. Give the kids a scholarship and a small stipend, sure. Giving 18-22 year old kids $200-300k per year on top of free education, room & board, medical care, etc. is just asking for trouble.. especially when those kids graduate and have to take pay cuts with starting annual salaries that are ~20-25% of what they made as 18 year olds. If companies want kids to promote products, let them earn it, but I cannot envision this new dynamic working out well long-term for the vast majority of people who stand to benefit from the financial windfalls coming.
Click to expand...




They are making the schools and TV stations millions and millions of dollars. They should make more than just whatever they can get from product advertising deals. And the scholarship money is a drop in the bucket. 

 
Moiraine said:
They are making the schools and TV stations millions and millions of dollars. They should make more than just whatever they can get from product advertising deals. And the scholarship money is a drop in the bucket. 
Click to expand...
It’s not a drop in the bucket for small D1 schools. Plus the back pay for the settlement.  I wonder when we’ll see anti trust lawsuits (maybe not the right word) from smaller schools and conferences. 

 
Moiraine said:
They are making the schools and TV stations millions and millions of dollars. They should make more than just whatever they can get from product advertising deals. And the scholarship money is a drop in the bucket. 
Click to expand...
The programs are the focal point for making money with TV contracts, apparel deals, etc.. More than 99% of the players in college athletics are interchangeable and do not individually create value. The summation of the teams are where the value is created. I do not intend to diminish their contributions, but we also need to be realistic that a large chunk of our 105 man roster will be just along for the ride on any given year. 

The core of my argument stems around how much is reasonable for an average player to earn as "revenue sharing" in addition to the tens of thousands of dollars being invested annually in these players via scholarship, apparel, room & board, etc? Is $140k per football player ($15m/105 players) reasonable? I'd venture to guess that nearly all of them would be making more than their parents, teachers, non-athlete friends at that point. It'll be a real shocking moment the first time these players would join the real world and see their starting salaries 50% below what they were making as 18 year old athletes.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top