Started By
Message
re: Alabama AD: Cutting Sports Might Be Only Way to Pay Athletes
Posted on 5/30/24 at 1:21 pm to AtlantaLSUfan
Posted on 5/30/24 at 1:21 pm to AtlantaLSUfan
quote:
What people don’t recognize is if no bribes were allowed we would cheer on our schools even if it were walk-ons vs walk-ons
Bingo. Athletes don't realize we pull for the school on the front of the jersey. Not the individual's name on the back of the jersey. Most people would be fine if they let kids try and jump straight to the NFL and less talented kids played college football that actually WANTED to be at the Universities. Like it used to be.
2
Posted on 5/30/24 at 1:23 pm to Darth_Vader
I promise we wont miss wbb
Posted on 5/30/24 at 1:28 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
Cutting Sports
I like me some cutting sports
Posted on 5/30/24 at 1:29 pm to gamecockman12
Another flustercuck brought to you by the year 2020.
Posted on 5/30/24 at 1:34 pm to jangalang
Title IX needs to go away completely or be reformulated for the times we are in today. It was instituted in 1972? Or thereabouts. I don’t think they envisioned at that point that the schools/ NCAA would have caved and started letting the inmates run the asylum. Some of the athletes competing in the smaller Men’s sports need to band together with some attorneys and make some noise or their sports are going bye-bye. They need to learn from the men in wrestling, gymnastics, etc that got screwed over in the 8os so a bunch of butches can run round like zombies waving a field hockey stick.
Posted on 5/30/24 at 1:37 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
What I don’t know is how will they get around Title IX…
Quite easily. The football and basketball players (for the most part) will soon be considered employees of the school. The football and basketball programs will basically be considered separate businesses enterprises sponsored by the university. The school will rent their facilities out to these programs. The school will be very specific to their association with these sports and the bulk of their expenses and, most importantly, revenues will be surgically removed from the athletic program.
Posted on 5/30/24 at 3:29 pm to Darth_Vader
They will do the cuts the same way that Alabama High Schools complied with Title IX when it was introduced - by cutting more men's teams that women's teams. My former HS axed wrestling, track, tennis and golf for the boys, while adding no girls teams IIRC.
Posted on 5/30/24 at 3:31 pm to Darth_Vader
They can just jack up prices for fans. Everyone has an endless supply of money, right?
Posted on 5/30/24 at 3:32 pm to TideCPA
quote:Pro Golf is doing its best without the colleges with the divide between the PGA and LIV ...
I think what Byrne is getting at is the knock-on effects. It's easy to cut college golf programs. But if every school does that, it's going to make the sport's talent pool shrink. With less talent, you get less interest in the sport, which means the professional game (and courses, shops, etc. across the country) suffer.
Posted on 5/30/24 at 3:57 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
I'm not that familiar with non-pro golf, but if it's anything like Tennis, most of the top pros start in their teens.
Yep.
Ironically, the league that will be hurt the most by all of this is also the league who's most responsible for the whole issue.
The NFL.
Posted on 5/30/24 at 4:14 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
At some point, football has to be exempt from Title IX because there is no female equivalent.
Never going to happen.
if you offer a mens only sport, you have to offer womens only sports that equal the scholarship numbers (assuming your student body is 50-50... UGA in fact has to offer MORE female scholarships since we're more like 55% female to 45% male with our student body).
Title 9 is pretty clear cut. You have two options.
1 - Offer mens and womens scholarships at an equal percentage to your student body's male/female ratio.
2 - Offer full scholarship numbers for all sports that your student body has an interest in competing in (This is basically just Stanford, who is so rich they just offer full scholarship numbers for EVERY scholarship sport).
Posted on 5/30/24 at 4:41 pm to DawginSC
quote:
Title 9 is pretty clear cut.
Under the Biden Administration's Title IX changes, the entire football team can just identify as women. Problem solved!
Posted on 5/31/24 at 1:57 am to DawginSC
quote:
Never going to happen.
if you offer a mens only sport, you have to offer womens only sports that equal the scholarship numbers (assuming your student body is 50-50... UGA in fact has to offer MORE female scholarships since we're more like 55% female to 45% male with our student body).
Title 9 is pretty clear cut. You have two options.
1 - Offer mens and womens scholarships at an equal percentage to your student body's male/female ratio.
2 - Offer full scholarship numbers for all sports that your student body has an interest in competing in (This is basically just Stanford, who is so rich they just offer full scholarship numbers for EVERY scholarship sport).
As long as there's a minimum requirememt of six or seven men's sports, eventually there will come a time for some schools where the only cuts that can be made are on the women's side. The most vulnerable are at the G5 level and below.
Example, out on the west coast San Diego State had to cut women's rowing in 2021 (44 roster spots) because they were proportionally out of Title IX compliance. Too many women's athletes vis a vis the rest of the overall student population.
UTEP only has five men's teams. There's nothing left to cut.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 2:32 am to Darth_Vader
Posted about this when Texas A&M did layoffs and looks like the AD knew wtf was going on after all.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 5:53 am to ColoradoElkHerd
The idea that college sports is now close to DEFCON 1 is getting clearer. The NCAA can't hold on much longer with its, "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil" approach to problem-solving. Sankey sounds like he's about fed up watching these tits-on-bulls continue to sleep at the wheel. Especially as we all watch the NCAA go through the House settlement that will cost schools billions of dollars.
Greg Sankey told the NCAA "that sometimes you just have to be a jerk" to get things done. At this point, that sounds like a nice change of pace.
Greg Sankey told the NCAA "that sometimes you just have to be a jerk" to get things done. At this point, that sounds like a nice change of pace.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 6:19 am to DawginSC
quote:
Title IX says you must..... offer womens only sports that equal...
Just to be clear. *Equal* is not a requirement, the people who drafted Title IX already understood that such a thing would be impossible in many situations and ridiculous in others. Hence they used the more practical term *similar*, and relatively reflective of the student body demographics.
This doesn't really change the issues at hand, but it does give some more leeway than perhaps many imagine.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 6:41 am to gamecockman12
quote:
Bingo. Athletes don't realize we pull for the school on the front of the jersey. Not the individual's name on the back of the jersey.
Yeah, but you need talented individuals to win. There’s not a lot cheering when you’re getting your arse kicked.
quote:
Most people would be fine if they let kids try and jump straight to the NFL and less talented kids played college football that actually WANTED to be at the Universities. Like it used to be.
When was this? The difference makers in college football have been fixated on at least the NFL for a long time. College coaches make the big bucks mostly for their ability to convince recruits that they will have a better future at whatever program. All those #1 classes Saban signed sure as shite wouldn’t have been there with Shula.
No one cares as much about a school as they do their own self-interests. And fans do not care as much about players as they do winning. If rising senior Tommy Tuscaloosa is a mediocre QB and Bama can replace him with a better transfer from Nebraska, they will.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 7:48 am to Globetrotter747
quote:
Yeah, but you need talented individuals to win. There’s not a lot cheering when you’re getting your arse kicked.
I'm saying if the overall talent across the board in college football dropped as a result of kids going straight to the NFL, then there wouldn't be a huge drop in popularity of the sport because of people's love for their schools, not their love of talented individual players.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 8:17 am to Darth_Vader
Is LSU the only department that actually sustains itself in Baseball revenue
Posted on 5/31/24 at 8:42 am to gamecockman12
quote:
I'm saying if the overall talent across the board in college football dropped as a result of kids going straight to the NFL, then there wouldn't be a huge drop in popularity of the sport because of people's love for their schools, not their love of talented individual players.
So why should individual players have all this love and loyalty for schools if you only cheer for them because of the uniform they’re wearing? And why should a school like Bama, Georgia, or Tennessee sign a bunch of out of state kids and expect a lot of passion for the program? Why should some inner city kid from Los Angeles really give a frick about Alabama beyond a stepping stone to the NFL?
Fans might would sacrifice the talent level of the sport (across the board) for some more “loyalty,” but they absolutely will not sacrifice winning for it. That’s why NIL and the portal persist. The fans and schools may not like it, but they will play it rather than lose because of it. It isn’t enough to have a good team with a bunch of in-state good ole boys. You must have a great team with the best players you can find - even if they are from the other side of the country, mediocre academically, and have questionable character.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News