Full Cost Scholarships Approved
The NCAA has passed a measure to allow scholarships to include cost of living for all student athletes. Not a surprise given the heat the NCAA has been under recently. I still think that players shouldbe provided the ability to earn more. Why create an artificial cap on endorsement money and other secondary forms of income?
Anyway, the measure will allow for schools to pay between $2000-5000 extra per year. That's not a ton of money now, but when I was in college, that would have been huge. Small step, but it is in the right direction. It passed 79-1. The lone dissenter was Boston College.
Maybe Gordon Gee was right about doing business with the Catholics? Shrewd lot they've got there at BC. (I'm teasing, Catholics. Relax.)
Saw this on twitter as an ESPN article, but screw ESPN. Here is a CBS link:
January 18th, 2015 at 10:04 AM ^
January 18th, 2015 at 10:22 AM ^
January 18th, 2015 at 10:36 AM ^
http://www.bcinterruption.com/boston_college_athletics/2015/1/18/766565…
January 18th, 2015 at 10:14 AM ^
I haven't seen much of any commentary on another measure that was passed, one that was opposed by the Big 12 and the SEC -- that athletic scholarships can't be "reduced or canceled" for athletic reasons.
I'd like to see the fine print on that one. How does it work? Is that only for four-year scholarships? Could an SEC program cut a player and give him a different scholarship?
See OP's orginal link for a mention of this, but no real explanation.
January 18th, 2015 at 10:17 AM ^
January 18th, 2015 at 10:31 AM ^
An artificial cap doesn't level the playing field at all, for two reasons. First, between Kent State and Michigan, 99.9% of high school athletes choose Michigan. That might be lowballing it. Second, teams that allow boosters close to the athletes are given a distinct advantage anyway.
The NCAA may very well die trying to maintain an image that nobody believes and one that they themselves don't even uphold.
January 18th, 2015 at 10:34 AM ^
January 18th, 2015 at 10:42 AM ^
There are actually more schools in the NCAA than Michigan and Kent State, so your example is a red herring.
I believe that the universities (who ARE the NCAA) want to maintain athletic programs that are not professional, and that don't get wrapped around the axle of phony "endorsement" deals that are transparently bagman ops. The universities may very well die, as you argue, trying to maintain this image, but I think that the odds of that are very small.
January 18th, 2015 at 10:42 AM ^
I thought I had read somewhere that the Athletic Dept remits the full tuition to the U for each scholarship. I assumed that meant over $40K for an out-of-state student. Can anyone remember or verify that?
January 18th, 2015 at 10:55 AM ^
"Brandon noted that the department pays full tuition for athletes, and that 74% of UM athletes are recruited from out of state – meaning that the tuition paid by the department for those students is at the higher, non-resident rate. - See more at: http://annarborchronicle.com/2011/06/19/um-tuition-budget-increases-cau…"
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 18th, 2015 at 11:05 AM ^
This is a big plus for the competitive position of Michigan athletics.
These decisions, four years and a stipend, are in Michigan's favor. Since we already honor four year scholarships, and presumably arent's distributing money under the table, this sets a higher standard for the schools we compete against on a national level. Even if other school's boosters are providing "incentives", the value of that is reduced relative to the expense money which the athletes will now receive legitimetly.
This is a significant improvement to level the playing field.
January 18th, 2015 at 11:12 AM ^
January 18th, 2015 at 12:01 PM ^
If a booster currently provides $500 a month, that kind of money can fly under the radar. Now you tack on another $416, and the kid starts getting a little loose with the "crazy money" (from a 19 year old's perspective). It would be more likely to attract attention.
January 18th, 2015 at 11:18 AM ^
This is a tough situation. Currently the student athletes are getting their school, room, & board paid for. The time commitment required for these athletes to compete & be competitive is a lot. Leaves no time for them to get a job to pay for the extras. I think that there is even some ncaa restriction on scholarship athletes and working. But the rules could create competitive disadvantage in recruiting. Well have to see how this all plays out.
January 18th, 2015 at 11:34 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 18th, 2015 at 12:47 PM ^
Is this football only? Because giving it to the golf team would be a joke, and I played on the golf team.
January 18th, 2015 at 1:40 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad