How much are we willing to pay ?

[Stonewall]

At what cost do we commit to whatever the new “D1” ends up being.And I mean personally. Where will the money come from ? $6,000,000 to pay the athletes? Or whatever the number is annually. If , and I am saying if , these new proposals get approved….it looks like either we raise a lot more money or we go to a new “ 1-AA”. Are we willing to pay twice as much for tickets? Parking ? Cold drinks with no ice?

[AppSt94]

How many athletes do we have on scholarship? x/2 X $30,000

[Bigdaddyg1]

Is our 3rd string kicker going to receive $30k? Do any of the baseball get a full scholarship or are they parsed out? This will not be cut and dried.

[BeauFoster]

Is our 3rd string kicker going to receive $30k? Do any of the baseball get a full scholarship or are they parsed out? This will not be cut and dried.

The schools have to commit $30k per athlete to a trust, not pay each one $30k (as I understand it). So no, a 3rd string kicker may not get $30k. At some places he will, at others, “his” $30k will be distributed elsewhere.

Again, that’s my understanding of the current concept. Could be wrong, though.

[AppSt94]

Is our 3rd string kicker going to receive $30k? Do any of the baseball get a full scholarship or are they parsed out? This will not be cut and dried.

The schools have to commit $30k per athlete to a trust, not pay each one $30k (as I understand it). So no, a 3rd string kicker may not get $30k. At some places he will, at others, “his” $30k will be distributed elsewhere.

Again, that’s my understanding of the current concept. Could be wrong, though.

Correct. You must commit $30k per athlete for half of all athletes. You can distribute however you want but half of the total has to go to female athletes.

[AppSt94]

Is our 3rd string kicker going to receive $30k? Do any of the baseball get a full scholarship or are they parsed out? This will not be cut and dried.

3rd stringer kicker isn’t likely on scholarship so I don’t know if they count.

[MrCraig]

I don’t think it will matter. Even if App had the money, I don’t think they’d let App move with them. They only want the big-money, blue blood power football programs.

[AppSt94]

I don’t think it will matter. Even if App had the money, I don’t think they’d let App move with them. They only want the big-money, blue blood power football programs.

I don’t think that you’re wrong. In fact, I think that your comment would be accurate for some of the current P5 (4) programs. How many would be left out and or opt out?

[MrCraig]

I don’t think it will matter. Even if App had the money, I don’t think they’d let App move with them. They only want the big-money, blue blood power football programs.

I don’t think that your wrong. In fact, I think that your comment would be accurate for some of the current P5 (4) programs. How many would be left out and or opt out?

I’ve wondered the same. I think about Vanderbilt. They’re frankly embarrassing in football, but they are a juggernaut in baseball and usually decent in basketball. Do those sports bring in enough revenue for them to justify moving up? Do they have the booster system to pay for that? And would this new “SEC+” care enough about other sports to allow them to move?

[AppSt94]

I don’t think it will matter. Even if App had the money, I don’t think they’d let App move with them. They only want the big-money, blue blood power football programs.

I don’t think that your wrong. In fact, I think that your comment would be accurate for some of the current P5 (4) programs. How many would be left out and or opt out?

I’ve wondered the same. I think about Vanderbilt. They’re frankly embarrassing in football, but they are a juggernaut in baseball and usually decent in basketball. Do those sports bring in enough revenue for them to justify moving up? Do they have the booster system to pay for that? And would this new “SEC+” care enough about other sports to allow them to move?

Vanderbilt is an example on the obvious end of the spectrum. Let’s look at the schools that live in irrelevance from all the conferences. How many want to be forced to spend more money to remain irrelevant? How many would want to hang on because of an ego? How many of the true blue bloods want hanger-ons to suck up revenue? Like most things that come from think tanks, it seems like a nice idea. But these rarely work out as intended.

[Bigdaddyg1]

My 3rd string kicker question was not meant to be literal but I've always wondered how a pool of money would be equitably distributed. Are the star football and basketball players going to receive bigger chunks of the pie?

[Stonewall]

My point is , we are going to have to foot the bill . The cost is rising. Or go back to some semblance of where we were . Frankly I’m ready to dig deeper if that’s what it takes.

[AppSt94]

My 3rd string kicker question was not meant to be literal but I've always wondered how a pool of money would be equitably distributed. Are the star football and basketball players going to receive bigger chunks of the pie?

It doesn’t have to be equitable other than 50/50 male to female.

[Saint3333]

How many athletes do we have on scholarship? x/2 X $30,000

Pretty much every out of state scholarship.

[Bigdaddyg1]

My brain won't let me understand this entire concept. We have universities set up to educate students and then give out degrees. An extra aspect of universities includes athletics which offers students the opportunity to compete and for most receive a free education and hopefully a degree. For some who are really good they can go on to play professionally and get paid. We have determined that this is either an antiquated system or simply not good enough. We added a cost of attendance stipend (which was probably good) but we also determined that this isn't enough. There have been a handful of great players whose images were used on video games and they didn't get paid so we have added NIL. No problem paying an athlete if truly his name, image or likeness is being used outside the university to help a business profit- pay them! We have determined that this isn't enough so we added collectives which is a fancy word for boosters paying athletes to play for their schools. Now in addition to the scholarship in order to stay at the grown up table some magical number has been dreamed up- the $30kish. Either the school will pony up or get relegated. Do I understand correctly?

[AppSt94]

How many athletes do we have on scholarship? x/2 X $30,000

Pretty much every out of state scholarship.

While true, not relevant to what I am asking. I’m asking how many athletes do we have on scholarship to determine our cost to buy-in.

[Bigdaddyg1]

How many athletes do we have on scholarship? x/2 X $30,000

Pretty much every out of state scholarship.

While true, not relevant to what I am asking. I’m asking how many athletes do we have on scholarship to determine our cost to buy-in.

I also meant to ask. Who came up with this number and how is it relevant across the board? Will this be the same number for every school regardless of size, private or public? How does Appalachian compare to Michigan in terms of the actual number of scholarships per year? It can't be that much different. We both have 85 for football and 15 or so for basketball (men and women), baseball is uniform as far as I know. Michigan for example probably has a couple more sports but overall the sheer number of scholarships has to be close for this situation.

[AppSt94]

How many athletes do we have on scholarship? x/2 X $30,000

Pretty much every out of state scholarship.

While true, not relevant to what I am asking. I’m asking how many athletes do we have on scholarship to determine our cost to buy-in.

I also meant to ask. Who came up with this number and how is it relevant across the board? Will this be the same number for every school regardless of size, private or public? How does Appalachian compare to Michigan in terms of the actual number of scholarships per year? It can't be that much different. We both have 85 for football and 15 or so for basketball (men and women), baseball is uniform as far as I know. Michigan for example probably has a couple more sports but overall the sheer number of scholarships has to be close for this situation.

I believe that the buy in is $30k per scholarship for half of your total # of scholarships that you offer as a school. So if you have 400 scholarships, you need to build a trust of $6 million per year. The other part of that is that you there are no limits on how much you can pay one person from that trust, but half has to be paid to females.

[Saint3333]

How many athletes do we have on scholarship? x/2 X $30,000

Pretty much every out of state scholarship.

While true, not relevant to what I am asking. I’m asking how many athletes do we have on scholarship to determine our cost to buy-in.

I’d start here: https://scholarshipstats.com/ncaalimits

We have roughly 300 with all sports.

Given 19 of 19 2024 commitments are not from NC and thus automatically over that $ threshold seems relevant.

If half of our scholarships across all sports are out of state we’re well on our way to “compliance” already.

[AppSt94]

How many athletes do we have on scholarship? x/2 X $30,000

Pretty much every out of state scholarship.

While true, not relevant to what I am asking. I’m asking how many athletes do we have on scholarship to determine our cost to buy-in.

I’d start here: https://scholarshipstats.com/ncaalimits

We have roughly 300 with all sports.

Given 19 of 19 2024 commitments are not from NC and thus automatically over that $ threshold seems relevant.

If half of our scholarships across all sports are out of state we’re well on our way to “compliance” already.

The $30k per is not part of what we give out in scholarships. It is a separate amount that goes into a Trust that is used for paying athletes for their NIL. The current rules for NIL prohibit athletes from receiving compensation for representing the school directly. The new proposal allows for athletes to be paid for the promotional work that the school does.