- Apr 14, 2025
- 2
- 0
Hello everyone.
I thought I would start a thread for discussion of all the recent activity related to NCAA rules affecting player compensation, roster limits, etc. In particular, I'd like to discuss potential impacts to non-revenue sports like Gymnastics, and women's sports in general.
Some background:
An overview of what the House settlement is all about:
apnews.com
Latest news on House settlement (proposed changes to roster limits):
sports.yahoo.com
There is some related discussion in this thread:
My thoughts:
I'm not particularly knowledgeable on the subject, so take this for what it's worth, but I'll share a few thoughts just to start some discussion.
My impression is that in general these changes are negative and will overall be harmful to college athletics, especially to non-revenue sports. The previous "amateur" nature of college sports made sense to me, where players were not allowed to be directly "paid" other than scholarships covering basic expenses. I suspect that the changes will primarily benefit football and basketball players at the expense of athletes and programs in other sports.
Paying athletes directly seems to be fraught with potential problems. It could create different "classes" of students, conflict between athletes and/or coaches based on levels of pay, inequity between "rich" and "poor" schools in their ability to recruit and fund sports programs, and could lead to something like the ever-escalating-to-the-point-of-being-ridiculous sorts of pay and greed that we see in professional sports. Money that is paid directly to athletes is no longer available to fund other sports programs.
In my view, college is first and foremost about education. Playing sports at that level is a privilege for which any student athlete should be grateful, without the need of direct payment. I don't want college sports to become like professional, I appreciate the fact that college sports are different. I think non-revenue sports are important and beneficial.
I know there are others here with deeper understanding of these topics, so please share your thoughts and tell me where I'm wrong. Thanks!
I thought I would start a thread for discussion of all the recent activity related to NCAA rules affecting player compensation, roster limits, etc. In particular, I'd like to discuss potential impacts to non-revenue sports like Gymnastics, and women's sports in general.
Some background:
An overview of what the House settlement is all about:
What is the House settlement involving college sports and why does it matter?
The settlement of a $2.8 billion federal class-action antitrust lawsuit filed by athletes against the NCAA and the largest conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC) was approved by the defendants and plaintiffs in May 2024 and not long afterward by U.S.
apnews.com
Latest news on House settlement (proposed changes to roster limits):
NCAA's House settlement revised in hopes of placating judge; her decision could shake up college sports forever
The NCAA and power conferences are revising rules around roster limits in hopes of appeasing the judge in the critical college sports case.
There is some related discussion in this thread:
My thoughts:
I'm not particularly knowledgeable on the subject, so take this for what it's worth, but I'll share a few thoughts just to start some discussion.
My impression is that in general these changes are negative and will overall be harmful to college athletics, especially to non-revenue sports. The previous "amateur" nature of college sports made sense to me, where players were not allowed to be directly "paid" other than scholarships covering basic expenses. I suspect that the changes will primarily benefit football and basketball players at the expense of athletes and programs in other sports.
Paying athletes directly seems to be fraught with potential problems. It could create different "classes" of students, conflict between athletes and/or coaches based on levels of pay, inequity between "rich" and "poor" schools in their ability to recruit and fund sports programs, and could lead to something like the ever-escalating-to-the-point-of-being-ridiculous sorts of pay and greed that we see in professional sports. Money that is paid directly to athletes is no longer available to fund other sports programs.
In my view, college is first and foremost about education. Playing sports at that level is a privilege for which any student athlete should be grateful, without the need of direct payment. I don't want college sports to become like professional, I appreciate the fact that college sports are different. I think non-revenue sports are important and beneficial.
I know there are others here with deeper understanding of these topics, so please share your thoughts and tell me where I'm wrong. Thanks!
