kshoe Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Looks like they got what they wanted: http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/11321551/ncaa-board-votes-allow-autonomy-five-power-conferences I continue to think we'll be just fine in this new world but I know plenty others on this board believe this is the beginning of the end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JettFlight5 Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 The only thing that matters to us is if the basketball tournament stays in its present form. The "full cost of attendance" stipend will be part of the A-10 as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sludevil Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Will be very interesting to see where this goes next. On its face, this looks like it'll be great for the kids (and great for Power 5 recruiting). But count me in the camp that believes this is merely the first step in what will be a substantial power-grab/separation by the major conferences. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sludevil Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Edit: Double post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 I believe the A10 has stated they will follow suit, and, honestly, $5,000 per player doesn't seem unreasonable as it adds only $65k to the annual budget. Still, I think, in regards to hoops, this is the power 5's first move to change the landscape of the tournament. March Madness is big money, and these greedy SOBs want the bulk of it, if not the whole enchilada. They have it in FB, and it's a matter of when they go after the second biggest revenue producer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Looks like they got what they wanted: http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/11321551/ncaa-board-votes-allow-autonomy-five-power-conferences I continue to think we'll be just fine in this new world but I know plenty others on this board believe this is the beginning of the end. I hope you are right. I don't know the intricacies of some of these issues and even if there aren't any policy advantages the Top 5 will gain in basketball (which is all I care about) I'm concerned that this will just further advance the perception that being at a BCS school is automatically better. We all know that is BS, but in the minds of many recruits and throughout much of the general public, that is already a common view. I would hate to see the landscape of college basketball change to a point where non-BCS programs (Butler, Wichita State, Xavier, SLU, etc.) would have an increasingly difficult time being better than a LOT of BCS programs. Currently, the non-BCS schools still have the opportunity to outwork and outsmart the BCS programs. In recent years, there have been numerous examples of the little guy being able to make their mark in the rankings and on the national stage. I would hate to lose that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saluki762 Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 I believe the A10 has stated they will follow suit, and, honestly, $5,000 per player doesn't seem unreasonable as it adds only $65k to the annual budget. Still, I think, in regards to hoops, this is the power 5's first move to change the landscape of the tournament. March Madness is big money, and these greedy SOBs want the bulk of it, if not the whole enchilada. They have it in FB, and it's a matter of when they go after the second biggest revenue producer. Have to at least double that 65K number. If the men get the money, so does the women's team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Have to at least double that 65K number. If the men get the money, so does the women's team. I forgot about the ladies. But I have a question, would the stipend go to all student athletes on a D1 scholie, ie soccer, baseball, softball? Not sure how many scholar athletes we have, but that could get expensive for schools like SLU. Whereas, the power 5 has FB which makes their athletic programs profitable in most cases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
someoneelse Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 The athletic departments are profitable and subsidized. Maybe the subsidy is moot, as they get it, but it is still worth noting that most athletic can't stand on their own. http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2013/05/07/ncaa-finances-subsidies/2142443/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.