Big Ten Presidents Promote Guaranteed Four-Year Scholarships, Insurance, Cost of Attendance Measures

By 11W Staff on June 24, 2014 at 5:20p
48 Comments

Amid a climate that's imposing pressure on the NCAA's existing model, the Big Ten released a statement from presidents and chancellors of member institutions calling upon the NCAA to explore guaranteed four-year scholarships, “improved, consistent medical insurance” and true cost of attendance scholarships for student athletes.

The statement comes on the heels of league commissioner Jim Delany's testimony in the O'Bannon trial last week – testimony that some feel hurt the NCAA's case because Delany advocated for more student in the student-athlete equation, even saying his view was likely in the minority among his peers.

The Big Ten is also calling for athletic scholarships to be honored when an athlete that leaves early for a pro career has finished playing, but the league stopped short of endorsing pay for football and basketball athletes, saying the practice would come at the expense of teams in non-revenue sports.

The full text of the statement from university presidents and chancellors:

STATEMENT BY BIG TEN PRESIDENTS AND CHANCELLORS

ROSEMONT, Ill. – While testifying last week in the O'Bannon trial in Oakland, Calif., Big Ten Commissioner James E. Delany spoke to the importance of the inextricable link between academics and athletics as part of the collegiate model, and to the value of establishing a 21st century system to meet the educational needs of current and future student-athletes. During his testimony, Delany conveyed sentiments long supported by the conference and its member institutions. Today, the presidents and chancellors of the Big Ten schools issue the following statement signed by the leaders of each institution:

As another NCAA season concludes with baseball and softball championships, college athletics is under fire. While football players at Northwestern fight for collective bargaining, former athletes are suing to be compensated for the use of their images.

Football and men’s basketball are at issue. Compensating the student-athletes who compete in these sports will skew the overall academic endeavor – for all students, not just those wearing a school’s colors.

The best solutions rest not with the courts, but with us – presidents of the very universities that promote and respect the values of intercollegiate competition. Writing on behalf of all presidents of the Big Ten Conference, we must address the conflicts that have led us to a moment where the conversation about college sports is about compensation rather than academics.

The tradition and spirit of intercollegiate athletics is unique to our nation. Students play as part of their overall academic experience, not for a paycheck or end-of-season bonus. Many also compete in hopes of a professional career, just as our biology majors serve internships and musical theater students perform in summer stock. These opportunities – sports, marching band, campus newspaper, and more – are facets of the larger college experience and prepare students for life. And that, in its purest form, is the mission of higher education. 

The reality of intercollegiate athletics is that only a miniscule number of students go on to professional sports careers. In the sports that generate the greatest revenue and attention, football sees 13 percent of Big Ten players drafted by the NFL and basketball sees 6 percent from our conference drafted for NBA play.

For those student-athletes who are drafted, their professional careers average fewer than five years. They still have several decades and, potentially, several careers ahead of them in which to succeed. And their college experience – their overall academic experience – should be what carries them forward.

This is why we propose working within the NCAA to provide greater academic security and success for our student-athletes:

  • We must guarantee the four-year scholarships that we offer. If a student-athlete is no longer able to compete, for whatever reason, there should be zero impact on our commitment as universities to deliver an undergraduate education. We want our students to graduate.
  • If a student-athlete leaves for a pro career before graduating, the guarantee of a scholarship remains firm. Whether a professional career materializes, and regardless of its length, we will honor a student’s scholarship when his or her playing days are over. Again, we want students to graduate.
  • We must review our rules and provide improved, consistent medical insurance for student-athletes. We have an obligation to protect their health and well-being in return for the physical demands placed upon them.
  • We must do whatever it takes to ensure that student-athlete scholarships cover the full cost of a college education, as defined by the federal government. That definition is intended to cover what it actually costs to attend college. 

Across the Big Ten, and in every major athletic conference, football and men’s basketball are the principal revenue sports. That money supports the men and women competing in all other sports. No one is demanding paychecks for our gymnasts or wrestlers. And yet it is those athletes – in swimming, track, lacrosse, and other so-called Olympic sports – who will suffer the most under a pay-to-play system.

The revenue creates more opportunities for more students to attend college and all that provides, and to improve the athletic experiences through improved facilities, coaching, training and support.

If universities are mandated to instead use those dollars to pay football and basketball players, it will be at the expense of all other teams. We would be forced to eliminate or reduce those programs. Paying only some athletes will create inequities that are intolerable and potentially illegal in the face of Title IX.

The amateur model is not broken, but it does require adjusting for the 21st century. Whether we pay student-athletes is not the true issue here. Rather, it is how we as universities provide a safe, rewarding and equitable environment for our student-athletes as they pursue their education.

We believe that the intercollegiate athletics experience and the educational mission are inextricably linked. Professionalizing specific sports or specific participants will bring about intended as well as likely unintended consequences in undermining the educational foundation of these programs, on Big Ten campuses and others throughout the country

Higher education provides young people with options in life to thrive in the future. For a tiny minority, that future will be a professional sports career and all of its rewards. For all graduates – athletes and non-athletes – it is the overall academic experience that is a lifetime source of compensation in the form of a well-rounded education.

48 Comments

Comments

Tater_Schroeder's picture

We must guarantee the four-year scholarships that we offer. If a student-athlete is no longer able to compete, for whatever reason, there should be zero impact on our commitment as universities to deliver an undergraduate education. We want our students to graduate.

I don't necessarily like the term "for whatever reason".  If a player is kicked off the team for breaking team rules, is he/she still eligible for having their college paid for?

How Firm Thy Friendship

+5 HS
FitzBuck's picture

Yes because it means the university is committed to each athlete and it eliminates the possibility of kicking off a kid for performance and saying it was something else.  "Violation of team rules" can be almost anything.    

Fitzbuck | Toledo - Ohio's right armpit | "A troll by any other name is still a troll".

+1 HS
Tater_Schroeder's picture

I don't disagree that it leaves the door open for schools to exploit the "Violation of team rules", but if a kid get arrested for fighting at a bar for the third time, the school shouldn't be required to honor his scholarship anymore.

How Firm Thy Friendship

-1 HS
NuttyBuckeye's picture

I would agree that if an athlete sustains an injury that ends his/her career, the scholarship SHOULD BE HONORED, and I believe this is the case at most universities.  But, for an athlete to be kicked off the team or leave for another school, the scholarship should be null and void.

I also think it is NOT an option to honor the four-year scholarship if a student athlete decides to go pro early, and expect to have the scholarship waiting for them once their professional career is over.  This was THEIR DECISION to leave, therefore making the scholarship null and void.

Besides, if the young student athlete goes pro early, they will have some money to fall back on.  Let them pay their own way.  The scholarship is for four years, but is to be used all at once, not one or two years now, then the remainder some years down the road.

Marc Pocock (a.k.a NuttyBuckeye)

What's round on the ends and high in the middle? Tell me if you know!

swainpm's picture

Gotta say the statement was well thought out in my opinion. I have been on the fence about 'pay for play' for quite a while and this has made me think that it is not the solution. The small pool of athletes talented enough to make it to the next level may miss out on a lot of $, but the larger mass of players who do not move will benefit from the chance to earn a degree. The statement issued points this out directly.

I believe that if kids were paid to play they would take their education less seriously, and put more efforts into football or bball. In the long run, I think this would lead to a lower graduation rate and lower GPAs. Given that few move on to the next level, a college scholarship seems like the better option (to pay for play). If the current model changed to a semi-pro environment I would venture to guess many would never attain degrees or move on to the pro level. If that was the case, would you rather your son go to a semipro route and then have to pay for college, or stick to the usual? Just an opinion.

+6 HS
M Man's picture

These are modest and reasonable principles set forth by the presidents and chancellors of the Conference's respective institutions.

Here's my question; If you are all going to get together and make a big statement, why not take it further and agree that you will all begin to control athletic department spending?  And call specifically on every other FBS conference to agree to the same terms, with a deadline for such an agreement?

 

1967Buck's picture

A well thought out statement. Maybe this will give hope to many, to look to the future. Peace.

+2 HS
Killer nuts's picture

Allow me to summarize: B1G > SEC

+11 HS
Catch 5's picture

I get your sentiment but how is this any different from what Slive proposed a month or so ago? This sounds a lot like what the SEC commish called for when he threatened to form a new division.

Make their asses quit! - Nick Saban

+1 HS
lwitters's picture

What I don't understand about these proposals is what's stopping them?  Whose approval do these presidents and chancellors need to make these proposals  working policies?  Isn't this something that all schools could enact of their own volition, or am I missing something?

+4 HS
ibuck's picture

At first glance, I like the B1G proposal, and I hope any changes regarding student-athletes follows this direction.

It would be awful if gymnast, wrestlers, tennis players, etc lost their schollies because the money had to be spent on football and men's basketball players' "salaries."

Our honor defend, we will fight to the end !

+1 HS
chemicalwaste's picture

In the case of ohio state, they make money off of these kids. Not just $20k or anything. Millions.
Nobody would lose their scholarships unless the university wanted to try to villainize the students that pay their bills.

In a place like northwestern, probably not the same scenario.

Buckeye in Illini country's picture

I believe it would be the NCAA standing in its own way.  I don't think the B1G can do this without violating current NCAA rules.

Columbus to Pasadena: 35 hours.  We're on a road trip through the desert looking for strippers and cocaine... and Rose Bowl wins!

OSUStu's picture

How so? Didn't USC just announce they intend to do the same thing?

If you always put limits on everything you do, physical or anything else, it will spread into your work and into your life. There are no limits. There are only plateaus, and you must not stay there, you must go beyond them.  ~ Bruce Lee

+1 HS
Buckeye in Illini country's picture

I was thinking more so the insurance and "complete full cost of attendance" parts of it as being "pay for play".  Scholarships for four years can be fully guaranteed already.  I don't know what USC has done.

Columbus to Pasadena: 35 hours.  We're on a road trip through the desert looking for strippers and cocaine... and Rose Bowl wins!

swainpm's picture

I believe USC just offered 4 year schollies to its athletes (football for certain). tOSU, UM, ND, & most of the BIG have been doing that since 2012. If you google that info you'll find an ESPN story confirming this. I searched yesterday when the ESPN article kissing up to USC made headlines. Buckeyeinillini's logic above is the difference and why the BIG can't just enact the position.

BuckeyePoetLaureate's picture

The statement says:

The tradition and spirit of intercollegiate athletics is unique to our nation. Students play as part of their overall academic experience, not for a paycheck or end-of-season bonus. Many also compete in hopes of a professional career, just as our biology majors serve internships and musical theater students perform in summer stock. These opportunities – sports, marching band, campus newspaper, and more – are facets of the larger college experience and prepare students for life. And that, in its purest form, is the mission of higher education. 

There's a HUGE difference between college football athletes and bio and musical theater majors.  The latter often don't receive scholarships at all.  They definitely don't receive health care.  Or early registering for classes.  Or the kind of tutoring that student-athletes receive.  They don't receive clothing and usually don't receive free room and board.  Those who edit and write the campus newspaper don't receive special gen ed classes offered ONLY to newspaper writers.  These people don't receive travel funds to and from home.  They don't receive free Gatorade and trips around the country and the kind of academic support that DI student-athletes receive.  They don't get housing allowances or valuable trophies or bowl gifts.  Non-athletes graduate with, on average, tens of thousands of dollars of student loan debt, something that isn't a necessity for student-athletes who play football or basketball and receive a scholarship.

Proud alumnus of the Ohio State Creative Writing MFA Program.  Creator of the writing craft site Great Writers Steal.

+8 HS
Shangheyed's picture

Math Schollie students can work for any wage the market can bare without restrictions to Hrs. or rate. 

Math Schollie students can sell their own private property, student athletes are not permitte to sell their own private property.  Every American has the right to sell private property it is protected in the constitution and through supreme court cases.

Math Schollie students do NOT have a chance to receive perminant injury while proving a formula, they don't risk a life time of pain solving for X.

Math Schollie students do NOT make the school 10s of millions of dollars to support other sports that make NO money for the University.

Math Schollie student's likeness are NOT used to make money for the university, nor are they used in promotion PR events for the school...

Student Athletes are OWNED for 4-5 yrs, and fundamental rights given to all Americans like the right to pursue happiness(Make a living) are taken away held for the ransom of a tuition fee....

There needs to be a change, what is going on right now is collusion, and repression of individual fundamental rights so women can play water polo(takeaway other's rights so a small minority can enjoy so called more equal rights?  Individuals have fought and die to preserve these fundamental rights and the NCAA arrogantly thinks it has more standing than the US Constitution)...

There has got to be a better way and it is sad that the NCAA has not done this on their own... everyone likes there cheap labor.

 

BuckNKY's picture

Both points above are valid arguments for their respective side.  The problem I have is Shangheyed's points are well documented throughout sports and general media, while the other points are not (that I know of).  Athletes get tremendous opportunity and benefits above and beyond the general student population, even those with academic full ride scholarships.  And with the cost of higher education skyrocketing, the value of those benefits rise as well.  Again, a point that I feel is lost in the argument.

Now - I do like what the B1G had to say - guaranteed four year scholarships covering the full cost of that education, plus the health insurance would be a great improvement.  I am just afraid that it is too late for this, especially given the latest media deals to come out of 'Bama and UK.

+1 HS
BuckeyePoetLaureate's picture

I agree; while I certainly understand Shangheyed's points, I respectfully disagree with most of them.

First, it's important to point out that the majority of math majors receive no scholarships or very small ones. 

Math majors are indeed free to get jobs, but I'm guessing that a math major would rather receive a full ride than take out massive loans and work for 8 dollars an hour at Cane's.  (It's not as though math majors are splitting their time between classes and serving as CEO for a multinational corporation.  Further, student-athletes are permitted to get jobs within the NCAA guidelines.

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/AMA/compliance_forms/DI/DI%20Summary%20of%20NCAA...

Not that I'm an expert, but it's my current understanding that SAs are allowed to sell their "personal property."  What they are not allowed to do is sell the property of the athletics department.  They're also not allowed to sell things on the basis of their SA status.  I could be wrong, but an SA can sell their futon on craigslist, so long as they don't try to do so on the basis of their status.

As for the risk of injury, SAs are more than welcome to stay out of school and work out until they can try to enter the league by other means.  Math majors certainly suffer the occasional health problem, but do not receive the kind of medical care SAs receive, and certainly not at so good a price.

All but a handful of ADs run in the black; the school subsidizes these programs.  For the vast majority of schools, athletics are a loss leader.

Math majors may not often be used to promote a college.  Then again, math majors don't receive full-ride scholarships as a matter of course.

SAs are not "owned."  They can leave the team or the school any time they like.  "Ransom" implies a kidnapping.  Again, this is not the case; an SA chooses his school and can choose to leave.  Further, it seems odd to imply that giving an 18-22-year-old hundreds of thousands of dollars of education, food, housing and more is unfair.  How many 18-22-year-olds make hundreds of thousands of dollars over the course of those four years of their lives?

I do like the idea of guaranteeing more scholarships, and not only because it would restore some competitive balance.

Proud alumnus of the Ohio State Creative Writing MFA Program.  Creator of the writing craft site Great Writers Steal.

Shangheyed's picture

It was really just an analogy as an academic schollie vs athletic.... not meaning to belittle the awesomeness of the Math Schollie Folks!! 

Sorry didn't mean to offend Math Schollie peeps... you guys are tough too...

Keep up the hard work for tOSU we see you guys out at 6 am every morning for general algebra workouts, and on TV for 5 months of the year, making millions for the school, always availible for PR events as well... the sacrificed you make are indeed appreciated.

I even have your jersey so don't say I am not a fan!  :-P

 

 

BuckeyePoetLaureate's picture

If you read my signature, you'll see that my degree is "worthless" compared to a math degree.

Many math majors DO start studying at 6 am and don't stop until midnight.

The fact that we don't have more educational television (and that it's not as popular as other forms) is indeed a pity.

As I pointed out, all but a handful of athletics departments are in the red.  The school subsidizes them.  While the NCAA is indeed cleaning up, the schools are not.  Math majors usually don't receive scholarships, so they are taking out loans.  That money is going to subsidize athletics at all but a handful of schools.

I am sure that most math majors would gladly play football in exchange for the hundreds of thousands of dollars of value that college football players receive between the ages of 18 and 22.

Proud alumnus of the Ohio State Creative Writing MFA Program.  Creator of the writing craft site Great Writers Steal.

brunstar's picture

NCAA mandated 4-year scholarships would be huge.  It would be a major blow to oversigning, the SEC's favorite competitive advantage.

+9 HS
Catch 5's picture

How so? Bama and most of the SEC already offer 4 year scholarships.

Make their asses quit! - Nick Saban

exnwohiobuckfan's picture

Then maybe the NCAA should limit the number of medical hardship scholarships that a school can have at any time before they start going against the 85 allowed.

+1 HS
Catch 5's picture

What would that do?  Since Urban Meyer arrived at OSU, he has used medicals 7 times.  Same time period for Bama and Saban?  2 times.

Make their asses quit! - Nick Saban

-1 HS
BucksFan2000's picture

Article on SEC site today seems to suggest it's hard to prove that, and that Bama voted against it anyway.

http://mrsec.com/2014/06/schools-conferences-lining-offer-4-year-scholarships/

+1 HS
Catch 5's picture

Yes, Bama voted against the measure, but soon after it passed, Saban came out saying that he would be offering them.  Source:  http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2012/02/report_saban_to_offer_4-year_s.html 

There have been several players that have confirmed this, and one recruit posted his offer letter, which stated as much.  I would post it here, but the I can't get the picture editor to work for me today.

Make their asses quit! - Nick Saban

-2 HS
741's picture
+1 HS
Buckeye in Illini country's picture

I'm pretty sure I agree with most of this. Sounds reasonable to me.  

Plus, NFL and NBA should create their own minor league systems just like MLB.  The problem isn't necessarily with college sports, but with these entities using college as a de facto minor league.

Columbus to Pasadena: 35 hours.  We're on a road trip through the desert looking for strippers and cocaine... and Rose Bowl wins!

+5 HS
SilverBullet-98's picture

I agree, here.

Let the Players who wish to form Unions, get paid, be considered employees leave the NCAA and College football and join or form a NFL Minor League System.

Either way you will still have College Football the way it is suppost to be.

Let the young Student Athelets using football to better themselves, continue playing football in College and matbe NFL.

This way there is a choice for the young men to make, and they won't feel they are being slighted or taken advantage of by the NCAA and Universities.

I'm am for a guaranteed 4 yr scholarship, IF..., the whole NCAA does it.I also believe that ALL medical bills and disabilities should be covered by the NCAA and Universities.Public or Private. And lastly a  slightly better Stipend (or dependent on family Gross Inc.) plus a 1 year past the guaranteed 4 yr is set up for classes the caused you to be left behind due to football. Like Medical, Business, Engineering, Pharmacy, Veterinarian classes you couldn't take in certain semesters etc....

The NCAA should do this and if it's thats is not enough, go D-IIII and let someone start a semi-pro league that will take care of them soooo much better.

 

"The Past Builds the Future"

Patriot4098's picture

I just want to keep enjoying college sports. I don't think I will if we see college players getting paid.

"Evil shenanigans!"     - Mac

+4 HS
M Man's picture

+1.  I can think of few public statements more powerful in collegiate football, than to have a union of Michigan and Ohio State alums/boosters/season ticket holders all agreeing on this.

 

+1 HS
BigZ's picture

I agree with, and fully support, the steps the B1G is looking to make moving forward to bring college athletics into the modern area. Although I am totally against pay for play, I do believe that they need to allow these athletes to profit off of themselves. I do understand that this is a very slippery slope, but it can be "regulated" just like things are today.

-1 HS
TheTeam16's picture

The SEC will never adopt the 4 year policy, and will further the gap between themselves and all other conferences r/t the fact they can dump players that are not living up to expectations. I agree this needs to be a staple in the B1G, but I fear how much more it will widen the gap.

-1 HS
swainpm's picture

You don't think it might narrow the gap? I would personally much rather have a guaranteed 4 year schollie. At the very least it would make southern athletes travel north to campuses for visits. What parent wouldn't want their kid to consider/visit a guaranteed 4 year high academic program vs. 1?

+1 HS
chemicalwaste's picture

Despite what some people may think, not all parents have their kid's best interest in mind. Some see dollar bills. The, "how much will you 'donate' to my church if my son plays football at Auburn?" type.

Buckeye in Illini country's picture

I think that's the exception more than the rule, even for the best recruits. 

Columbus to Pasadena: 35 hours.  We're on a road trip through the desert looking for strippers and cocaine... and Rose Bowl wins!

+1 HS
chemicalwaste's picture

Yet again, I can't, for the life of me, figure out why there isn't a program teaching these guys what it takes to be a professional athlete. To deal with the money, the contracts, the personal relationships, the public, tv interviews, basic nutrition, fitness expectations, leadership, insert options at will... The excuse of, "not everyone becomes a professional athlete," is garbage too. They still have the psychology major. Nobody becomes a shrink with a psychology degree.

Give them aan education that they're interested in. If pro football or basketball doesn't work out they will have plenty of skills to go into another type of business and be successful at it. They talk about the education and athletic experience being intertwined, and in this scenario it couldn't be more true.

Scarlet_Lutefisk's picture

List of Buckeye football player majors in 2012 (source is MGOB so no scarlet colored lenses here):

Exploring 18
Undeclared 11
Communication 9
Sport and Leisure Studies 7
Family Resource Management 7
Business 6
Criminology 5
Mechanical Engineering 5
Exercise Science  5
Management and Industry 4
Biology 4
Marketing  3
Political Science 2
Accounting 1
African-American Studies 1
Civil Engineering 1
Computer Science 1
Construction Systems Management 1
English 1
Finance 1
Fisheries and Wildlife Management 1
Health Professions 1
History 1
Human Development 1
Humanities 1
Middle Childhood Education 1
Operations Management 1
Pre-Med 1
Real Estate and Urban Analysis 1
Sociology 1

So a single soc major but no psych degrees.

 

chemicalwaste's picture

I meant the university in general, not the team.

d5k's picture

They just had a job fair, including things like resume building etc.  I'm sure the pro athlete side is covered a bit as well during their time at OSU.  It may not be a formal class, like pro athlete home economics, but there are plenty of opportunities given to prepare including interactions with pro athlete alumni.

+1 HS
swainpm's picture

Chemicalwaste I can't say I agree here. What will teaching kids skills needed to live life as a pro athlete do for the vast majority of kids who don't move to the next level? The skills you speak of have little carry over to other fields. Are we teaching 'contract law' or how to be a lawyer? Money management courses? Then get a degree in Finance, not one course. Whereas I know plenty of psych majors (which is a great degree program) using the foundations of psych and MS degrees in psych for ...wait for it...psychology, & business and medicine/insert field where working and communicating with people is necessary. What justification is there for offering the 'educational' degree program you propose? The skills you speak of are good for athletes, don't get me wrong, but they aren't a degree.

+1 HS
chemicalwaste's picture

I have a hard time seeing how one of the most successful business models (pro sports) would not apply to other aspects of any other business. I know plenty of people with psych degrees. They don't have jobs in psychology so I have to strongly disagree that it is a great degree program, as far as undergrad degrees go. It's about as useful as a degree in sociology or philosophy. The jobs aren't there. Just because there is a program for it doesn't mean there is a market for it. However, there is obviously a market for this tow of work, not only in sorts, but in other forms of business as well.

I have a hard time imagining a broad set of skills wouldn't be useful and sought after by many companies. I've worked at a couple where it's an easy fit. Plus, it's really what a lot of them want to do, not communications or undecided, so if they can award someone a degree in philosophy that they aren't likely to do much with, other than teach philosophy, why not a major applicable to what they want and hopefully will need and use?

d5k's picture

I noticed there wasn't anything listed about freedom of movement/transferring, or any conditions for release from a letter of intent such as a head coach leaving.  Currently if the school wants you you can usually stay for 4 years, if not then they may not be able to formally force you to leave but they can heavily encourage you to transfer to a school on a restricted list.  I'm sure they don't want open season like what happened after PSU's sanctions where Illini coaches were chilling in the parking lot, but a little more freedom of movement would be good imo and would keep coaches honest (in all leagues).

roamingbuckeye's picture

Bravo to the B1G presidents for taking a logical and well thought-out approach to the whole issue.  But I have the same question as LWitters above - which of their suggestions is specifically restricted by the NCAA? 4-year scholarship guarantees seem to be allowes. I dont know enough about NCAA regulations to know the details of amount of scholarship or health care restrictions. Couldn't they start implementing these things as a conference? I'm also wondering if the presidents and Delany are completely on the  same page here, given his recent testimony.

I think guaranteed scholarships based on true cost of attendence would quiet a lot of the pay-for-play debate, with some sort of logical ruling in the O'Bannon case allowing some personal profit off of personal likenesses solving the rest of it.  There will always be a handful of athletes who think they are worth more than they are getting, even if all these changes are implemented (ditto for all people everywhere, not just student athletes) but that problem is brought on by the NBA/NFL's use of college sports as development leagues and that, honestly, is not the universities' fault nor their responsibility to fix.

"I just cant wait to play football." -UFM

Jpfbuck's picture

the reality that measures like this are viewed as such show stoppers by the smaller programs is the reality of how sports are funded

even at OSU, if you take away donations made by alumni etc, in 2012 they lost money within the athletic department

total revenue was 131.8 million, but contributions was 17.6 million of that, meaning that otherwise OSU sports brought in 114.2 million, well that year they spent 122.3 million,

That's an $8 million dollar loss and that's OSU if you take away contributions, OSU can absorb this as when you add the contributions back in they run a massive profit.

now take UC our neighbor to the south

their total revenue is only 42.7 million or 1/3rd that of OSU,,,take away donations/contributions and there at only 36.9 Millions,

there total expenses were 43.7 million, ie  they lose nearly $7 million a year, and even with the donations added back in they lose about $1 million,,,,so to them, making the schollies more costly, adding in improved health insurance, guaranteed 4 years etc, they would need to find a way to raise that money from donors as they don't currently sell out at current ticket prices to raising them is not a real option and they certainly are not going to get it thru TV money

so to them these kinds of changes are just not affordable

 

 

+1 HS
GlueFingers Lavelli's picture

"The SEC will never adopt the 4 year policy, and will further the gap between themselves and all other conferences r/t the fact they can dump players that are not living up to expectations. I agree this needs to be a staple in the B1G, but I fear how much more it will widen the gap."

Well its become transparent, we must join the SEC!  Road trips to Lexington and Knoxvulll who's coming?!?!

Dustin Fox was our leading tackler as a corner.... because his guy always caught the ball.