SEC's Slive proposes major NCAA changes

[Inky_Wretch]

He proposed full-cost scholarships (which tiptoes up to giving stipends, I think), multi-year scholarships instead of the current yearly ones, increasing GPA for incoming players from 2.0 to 2.5, the return of partial qualifiers and allowing the use of social media in recruiting.

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/07/20/slive-lays-out-secs-national-agenda-for-change/

 

[LongTimeListener]

A bit like the CEO of Goldman Sachs leading the re-engineering of the U.S. banking system.

 

[Armchair_QB]

I wouldn't shoot the messenger on this. A lot of that makes sense.

 

[LongTimeListener]

I wouldn't shoot the messenger on this. A lot of that makes sense.

Multiyear scholarships should be a moral imperative. (Slive just became Nick Saban's least favorite person in the world.)

Full-cost scholarships are not practical for much/most of Division I. Full-cost football scholarships means full-cost women's swimming scholarships.

Also the SEC might as well demand GPAs of 4.0 for all returning players, because nobody is getting a true education anyway so they should just make the myth as rosy as possible and send everybody to the same Recreation classes Jeremiah Masoli is taking.

 

[JayFarrar]

Full-cost scholarships are not practical for much/most of Division I. Full-cost football scholarships means full-cost women's swimming scholarships.

Not really. As previously noted here and elsewhere, it would mean full cost scholarships for those athletes on full rides. That number, at even the biggest schools, is in the low hundreds.

And, at most schools that are also research institutions, they are sending out more money to the braniacs than the jocks.

 

[LongTimeListener]

Full-cost scholarships are not practical for much/most of Division I. Full-cost football scholarships means full-cost women's swimming scholarships.

Not really. As previously noted here and elsewhere, it would mean full cost scholarships for those athletes on full rides. That number, at even the biggest schools, is in the low hundreds.

And, at most schools that are also research institutions, they are sending out more money to the braniacs than the jocks.

Women's swimming gets more full scholarships than men's basketball. In fact most of the women's sports get more scholarships in order to balance out football -- for instance in women's soccer the scholarship max 14, but in men's soccer it is 9.9.

If the scholarships add $3,000 to the bill for each athlete, that would cost as much as $1 million more per athletic department. At some schools -- in big cities on the coasts where cost of living is higher -- the full cost would be much more than an extra $3,000. The added expense is fine for the SEC schools, but across the country more schools than not are running budget deficits in the athletic department, and some are borrowing from the university. They would have to eliminate sports to find that extra funding.

Yeah, schools are sending out money to the "brainiacs," but A) most of that money is sponsored either by alumni endowment or corporate grant; and B) the "brainiacs" are kinda sorta the reason the school exists.

 

[qtlaw]

Full-cost scholarships are not practical for much/most of Division I. Full-cost football scholarships means full-cost women's swimming scholarships.

Not really. As previously noted here and elsewhere, it would mean full cost scholarships for those athletes on full rides. That number, at even the biggest schools, is in the low hundreds.

And, at most schools that are also research institutions, they are sending out more money to the braniacs than the jocks.

Yeah, schools are sending out money to the "brainiacs," but A) most of that money is sponsored either by alumni endowment or corporate grant; and B) the "brainiacs" are kinda sorta the reason the school exists.

This. Why is this even an issue? By definition, its an "institute of higher learning" not "institute of athletics" right?

 

[Inky_Wretch]

Full-cost scholarships are not practical for much/most of Division I. Full-cost football scholarships means full-cost women's swimming scholarships.

Not really. As previously noted here and elsewhere, it would mean full cost scholarships for those athletes on full rides. That number, at even the biggest schools, is in the low hundreds.

And, at most schools that are also research institutions, they are sending out more money to the braniacs than the jocks.

Women's swimming gets more full scholarships than men's basketball. In fact most of the women's sports get more scholarships in order to balance out football -- for instance in women's soccer the scholarship max 14, but in men's soccer it is 9.9.

If the scholarships add $3,000 to the bill for each athlete, that would cost as much as $1 million more per athletic department. At some schools -- in big cities on the coasts where cost of living is higher -- the full cost would be much more than an extra $3,000. The added expense is fine for the SEC schools, but across the country more schools than not are running budget deficits in the athletic department, and some are borrowing from the university. They would have to eliminate sports to find that extra funding.

Yeah, schools are sending out money to the "brainiacs," but A) most of that money is sponsored either by alumni endowment or corporate grant; and B) the "brainiacs" are kinda sorta the reason the school exists.

But how many of those scholarships are given in full? Don't most non-revenue sports give partials? For instance, women's soccer might get 14 scholarships but the coach divides them among 20 players.

 

[printdust]

He proposed full-cost scholarships (which tiptoes up to giving stipends, I think), multi-year scholarships instead of the current yearly ones, increasing GPA for incoming players from 2.0 to 2.5, the return of partial qualifiers and allowing the use of social media in recruiting.

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/07/20/slive-lays-out-secs-national-agenda-for-change/

2.5 GPA just means that in the SEC, the kids doing the work for the athletes will have to work a little harder.

 

[albert77]

If this was coming from anyone else, I'd think, "mmm, not a bad idea." Coming from Mike Slime, my first impulse is to check to make sure I still have my wallet.

 

[LongTimeListener]

Full-cost scholarships are not practical for much/most of Division I. Full-cost football scholarships means full-cost women's swimming scholarships.

Not really. As previously noted here and elsewhere, it would mean full cost scholarships for those athletes on full rides. That number, at even the biggest schools, is in the low hundreds.

And, at most schools that are also research institutions, they are sending out more money to the braniacs than the jocks.

Women's swimming gets more full scholarships than men's basketball. In fact most of the women's sports get more scholarships in order to balance out football -- for instance in women's soccer the scholarship max 14, but in men's soccer it is 9.9.

If the scholarships add $3,000 to the bill for each athlete, that would cost as much as $1 million more per athletic department. At some schools -- in big cities on the coasts where cost of living is higher -- the full cost would be much more than an extra $3,000. The added expense is fine for the SEC schools, but across the country more schools than not are running budget deficits in the athletic department, and some are borrowing from the university. They would have to eliminate sports to find that extra funding.

Yeah, schools are sending out money to the "brainiacs," but A) most of that money is sponsored either by alumni endowment or corporate grant; and B) the "brainiacs" are kinda sorta the reason the school exists.

But how many of those scholarships are given in full? Don't most non-revenue sports give partials? For instance, women's soccer might get 14 scholarships but the coach divides them among 20 players.

I suppose they could try to get around it that way, but I don't see how that could survive Title IX when there are 120 men (football and basketball) and only 12 women (basketball) getting this benefit. I read it to mean the "full cost" calculation would extend to the partials as well.

 

[John]

I miss the old Live from SEC Media Days threads.

 

[DanOregon]

I heard an interesting idea from Josh Luchs, disgraced former agent. Allow athletes to designate an "agent" or advisor before they enter school. They can be responsible for helping them out if a financial need arises and provide advice as to whether to stay in school or not in addition to representing them in any NCAA inquiry.
Preferably, athletes would seek out someone qualified and who would have something to lose - like their right to practice law - if things went bad.
It's not like there aren't these types of people involved already. Getting it documented might be a step in the right direction.

 

[MileHigh]

I miss the old Live from SEC Media Days threads.

Waiting for the Pac-12 skywriters thread.

 

[Baron Scicluna]

These schools can well afford it. Just cut the salaries they're paying to football and men's basketball coaches.

Looking at USA Today's 2010 football salary list, at least 60 of the 130 schools listed have a head coach making over $1 million. To coach football, not discover a cure for cancer. This list also doesn't include a few coaches whose salaries were N/A, but that it's safe to assume that they were making over $1 million (Kiffin, Brian Kelly, Randy Shannon, plus some others).

Cut those millon-dollar salaries in half, and there's half the extra expense right there

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/2010-coaches-contracts-table.htm

33 of 60 men's basketball coaches in the 2010 NCAA tournament (5 N/As) made over $1 million. Cut their salaries in half as well.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/mensbasketball/2010-coaches-salary-database.htm

I know, I know, it's Socilism! And the poor coaches work hard too.

And those coaches are allowed to skip out on their contracts for a better deal, without sitting out a year, too. And they're allowed to negotiate their deals. Athletes are not.

And I'm fully in favor of scholarships lasting more than one year. The athletes are supposed to be there to get an education. They shouldn't have the rug ripped out from under them financially because some million-dollar coach found someone who can play their position better than them.

.

 

[steveu]

I will argue something has to be done. A system that makes billions and billions of dollars, yet penalizes a team because someone bought a player a ****ing slice of pizza, makes NO sense.

If you give the athletes a little something so they can afford a few things away from the field, maybe you won't have the cheating going on. I know, I can dream.

 

[Ben_Hecht]

Full-cost scholarships are not practical for much/most of Division I. Full-cost football scholarships means full-cost women's swimming scholarships.

Not really. As previously noted here and elsewhere, it would mean full cost scholarships for those athletes on full rides. That number, at even the biggest schools, is in the low hundreds.

And, at most schools that are also research institutions, they are sending out more money to the braniacs than the jocks.

Yeah, schools are sending out money to the "brainiacs," but A) most of that money is sponsored either by alumni endowment or corporate grant; and B) the "brainiacs" are kinda sorta the reason the school exists.

This. Why is this even an issue? By definition, its an "institute of higher learning" not "institute of athletics" right?

Not at Ohio State.

 

[Baron Scicluna]

From the ESPN story, Spurrier puts his foot in his mouth, again.

""No, that's a terrible idea, commissioner," he said. "You sportswriters have a two-year contract? Everybody has to earn their way in life ... Luckily, coaches have 4- or 5-year contracts."

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/6787539/mike-slive-sec-proposes-reforms-college-sports

So .... student-athletes are comparable to employees after all? Hmmmm.

 

[Big Circus]

Forget who said it, but saw a great tweet yesterday about the 2.5 GPA idea: "Sun Belt schools are going to have some STRONG defensive lines in a few years."