• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your WyoNation.com experience today!

Big 5 proposal is out...

ragtimejoe1

Well-known member
http://content.ncaa.org/ncaa-membership_and_outreach/Board_SC_on_Governance_Draft_System_Design_1.9.14_CONVENTION_v_5C.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Legislative Autonomy
•Defined as the ability, within the current NCAA structure, for the SEC, B1G, PAC-12, ACC and Big 12 conferences and their institutions to adopt reforms in a regulatory structure that respects the demands on student-athletes in the 21st century and acknowledges the need for these conferences/institutions to define rules that address their unique challenges.
Proposed Areas for Autonomy
•Define a full grant-in-aid as meeting a student-athlete’s cost of attendance in a manner consistent with the core values of the collegiate model and not to exceed total cost of attendance.
•Lifetime opportunity to fund the undergraduate education of current and former student-athletes. New resources and greater accountability for success of student-athletes.
•Enhanced benefits provided to student-athletes for the purpose of supporting their needs based on available resources.
•Ensure that addressing health and safety needs remain a top priority.
•Creation of “athletics dead periods” for student-athletes to access opportunities outside of intercollegiate athletics.
•Comprehensive support for academically at-risk student-athletes.
•Redefinition of rules governing agents and advisors to assist student-athletes with career planning.
•Personnel limits. (number of non-coaching personnel).
 
My thought is that if we agree to this, we (Gang of 5) also get autonomy for other issues like number of sports required to be offered.
 
•Redefinition of rules governing agents and advisors to assist student-athletes with career planning.
•Personnel limits. (number of non-coaching personnel).


These are huge
 
HR_Poke said:
•Redefinition of rules governing agents and advisors to assist student-athletes with career planning.
•Personnel limits. (number of non-coaching personnel).


These are huge

I also wonder about this one:

•Creation of “athletics dead periods” for student-athletes to access opportunities outside of intercollegiate athletics.

Very vague and could mean a lot of things.
 
ragtimejoe1 said:
HR_Poke said:
•Redefinition of rules governing agents and advisors to assist student-athletes with career planning.
•Personnel limits. (number of non-coaching personnel).


These are huge

I also wonder about this one:

•Creation of “athletics dead periods” for student-athletes to access opportunities outside of intercollegiate athletics.

Very vague and could mean a lot of things.

This is slimy lawyer speak and is set up so they can be interpreted any way they want.
 
Scary. Here is an opportunity in athletics dead period...booster/Texas fan agrees to pay student athlete the sum of $100,000 for providing 10 signatures on various footballs. " Texas fan guarantees this opportunity to all 5 star recruits.

Recruit thinks...hmmm where should I accept a scholarship offer.
 
Tell 'em y'all want to play with equal opportunity fairly in the top level of college football. And if they don't allow it then they are not allowing equal opportunities for minority persons.

Well, ....

I'm pretty fucking sick of these football fuck arounds by these jerks. I getting less interested in football because of it. So I won't be donating money for much longer.
 
On mwc board they talk about the big 5 then everyone else absorb the FCS and 24 team playoff I think it'd be sweet!
 
If Howard Cosell (a lawyer, a sportscaster, and a columnist) were still around, he would be screaming "ANTI TRUST by big time college football".
 
lakesbison said:
On mwc board they talk about the big 5 then everyone else absorb the FCS and 24 team playoff I think it'd be sweet!



uhhh disaster for the other FBS conferences. To even be associated as a peer with small regional universities is a death sentence for many FBS programs. To be lumped with teams that average fewer then 10k fans at home and budgets under 15 million a year. No thanks. Other then about 15 programs the FCS is a wasteland with almost no fan support playing in High School stadiums or worse.
 
billings said:
lakesbison said:
On mwc board they talk about the big 5 then everyone else absorb the FCS and 24 team playoff I think it'd be sweet!



uhhh disaster for the other FBS conferences. To even be associated as a peer with small regional universities is a death sentence for many FBS programs. To be lumped with teams that average fewer then 10k fans at home and budgets under 15 million a year. No thanks. Other then about 15 programs the FCS is a wasteland with almost no fan support playing in High School stadiums or worse.


Take top 10-15 fcs programs that average 15,000-25000 & force the others to D 2?
 
I've stayed pretty quiet in this front, but I don't agree with paying players at all. There is a whole lot more going on on gameday than just the players on the field. Every single student that has anything to do with the program on gameday has to sign a release that reads (I'm paraphrasing) "I give the University of Wyoming permission to use my pictures, likeness, etc... to promote the University and realize that I will not be compensated for it".I had to sign this every year while I was in the marching & pep bands, and I have friends that were trainers, athletes, and cheerleaders that had to do the same thing.

Opening the door to paying the players is going to open a lot of doors that could get schools in trouble. Should I be suing the NCAA because the appearance of a band in the stands in college football and basketball video games used my likeness to help the authenticity of their product, therefore helping them make more money? What about student trainers? Their likeness is shown on the sidelines. What about people that attended football games in that time? There are plenty of people that make up a crowd. Do they get a cut too?

I know that non-athletes aren't the selling point of the games, but you get my point. We all had to put in hard work and long hours as students. If we wanted extra money we all had to work. The perk was that our education was paid for because we were all good at what we did. This includes the athletes, trainers, managers, band members, cheerleaders, and any other student that had a hand in putting a comprehensive product on the field. All of us on full scholarship received $80,000+ worth of tuition. I don't know any other "job" out there that will tell and 18 year old kid that they will earn that amount with a high school diploma or GED.
 
They need to add:

After their eligibilty ends in the Big 5, they are still eligible for 5 more years in the non big-5 BCS or lower division conference.

Then I'm all for it.
 
WYCowboy said:
If Howard Cosell (a lawyer, a sportscaster, and a columnist) were still around, he would be screaming "ANTI TRUST by big time college football".

I sometimes wonder what things would look like right now if Oklahoma had lost its antitrust suit against the NCAA.

I would not get upset if Congress were to grant the NCAA an antitrust exemption.
 
Back
Top