Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I would be mildly surprised if revenue sharing actually starts next year.  A lot of legal questions need to be answered between now and then.  It isn’t just Title X.  Will they be considered employees?How can you legally enforce eligibility limits when it comes to people being able to participate in payments?  Will direct payments make athletes eligible for things like work comp and disability programs?

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
17 minutes ago, brianstl said:

I would be mildly surprised if revenue sharing actually starts next year.  A lot of legal questions need to be answered between now and then.  It isn’t just Title X.  Will they be considered employees?How can you legally enforce eligibility limits when it comes to people being able to participate in payments?  Will direct payments make athletes eligible for things like work comp and disability programs?

You forgot, if they are considered employees, don’t federal laws mean they are eligible for overtime? How many overtime hours are they going to be paid? Not just games, but practice too. Also, if you require an employee to attend training, under federal guidelines you are required to pay them. So do you have to pay them to attend classes? study time? Being a full-time student is a requirement to be on the team after all. Tons of issues.

Posted
24 minutes ago, Lord Elrond said:

You forgot, if they are considered employees, don’t federal laws mean they are eligible for overtime? How many overtime hours are they going to be paid? Not just games, but practice too. Also, if you require an employee to attend training, under federal guidelines you are required to pay them. So do you have to pay them to attend classes? study time? Being a full-time student is a requirement to be on the team after all. Tons of issues.

Any path you start to go down comes with so many complexities and issues which I assume is why the NCAA punted on this all of those years. Unfortunately, it just doesn't make any sense at this point. I think most folks fully support college athletes being paid if there is a market for them to be, but now college athletes seem to have more "rights" than any professional athlete. We need to come to some middle ground that makes sense for the players and the sport. Instead, any time any sort of rule is attempted to be put into place, a player files a lawsuit against it and wins. I assume we will continue to kick the can down the road while more and more coaches move on due to the workload being unsustainable and the environment not being conducive to building any sort of program. I am somewhat tired of watching guys who have been in college 5+ years playing for 3+ schools playing college football or basketball, that is what professional sports are for. Something needs to give, but I am not sure what the solution is. College football is as popular as ever, so maybe the motivation isn't there to embark on trying to solve these really difficult issues. A lot of writing to say I agree, tons of issues. I suppose this summer is the next opportunity for there to be some changes discussed? Some form of revenue sharing seems too obvious as does some form of CBA, but that requires the players unionizing, so why knows, but some rules need to be in place and enforceable.

Posted
1 hour ago, Bay Area Billiken said:

SLU’s NET improves 14 slots to 125. 

So we’ve moved up 23 spots in 2 days with the boost from the six noncon opponents who played those days and all winning.

This weekend 8 of our non cons play, with Gonzaga at LMU the one to watch.

Also, shoutout to Chicago State for securing their first win of the season last night. Who cares about 0-15 in the noncon. The Cougars are 1-0 NEC and tied for first!!

Posted

A quick update after last night's win...We went into the game as a B-  and came out with a B- but better numbers...Going in as a 129 coming out as a 116 on my system.  Right now a move up to around 109 and the computer will give us a B which is where it thinks we belong at this point of the season...B = able to compete for a top 4 spot in the A10...B+ = a chance to compete in post season.

Posted
1 hour ago, Billikenbooster said:

KenPom 115

Are we a Quad2 team right now?

Do we need to get to a KenPom of roughly 80 or better to be a Quad1?

It was a Q2 NET Loss for St. Joe.  It was  Q3 NET win for the Bills.

Bills overall standing is 0-1 Q1, 0-3 Q2, 3-1 Q3, and 4-1 Q4.

Posted
1/4/25 NET: 52 St. Bona, 54 Dayton (dropped 10), 58 VCU, 80 Mason, 82 URI, 101 St. Joe’s, 109 Davidson, 123 GW, 125 SLU, 154 La Salle, 161 Loyola (dropped 24), 185 Duquesne, 251 Fordham, 258 Richmond, 266 UMass.
 
Conference NET: 1 SEC, 2 B1G, 3 XII, 4 BE, 5 ACC, 6 MW, 7 A10, 8 WCC, 9 CUSA, 10 MVC, 11 AAC, 12 BW, 13 IVY, 14 SoCon, 15 WAC, 16 CAA, 17 Summit, 18 Big South, 19 Horizon, 20 Big Sky, 21 Southland, 22 Sun Belt, 23 MAC, 23 ASUN, 25 AE, 26 MAAC, 27 Patriot, 28 OVC, 29 MEAC, 30 NEC, 31 SWAC.
Posted
NCAA NET through 1/5/25: 51 St. Bona, 54 Dayton, 60 VCU, 79 Mason, 80 URI, 101 St. Joe’s, 110 Davidson, 123 GW, 125 SLU, 155 La Salle, 161 Loyola, 186 Duquesne, 251 Fordham, 256 Richmond, 266 UMass.
 
Conference NET: 1 SEC, 2 B1G, 3 XII, 4 BE, 5 ACC, 6 MW, 7 A10, 8 WCC, 9 CUSA, 10 MVC, 11 AAC, 12 Big West, 13 IVY, 14 SoCon, 15 WAC, 16 CAA, 17 Summit, 18 Big South, 19 Horizon, 20 Southland, 21 Big Sky, 22 Sun Belt, 23 MAC, 24 ASUN, 25 AE, 26 MAAC, 27 Patriot, 28 OVC, 29 MEAC, 30 NEC, 31 SWAC.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...