NCAA vote is bad, bad news for the MVC

[Wufan]

I'm currently concerned about Bradley and SIU. If I understand correctly, they have overspent athletics earnings recently.

You can extend that to the entire state of Illinois.

I don't think ISUr is much better off, if at all.

Loyola has funding. Do they have interest?

[DoubleJayAlum]

I think the mistake here is believing that "full cost of attendance" will be the only change.

I'd look for school paid health insurance coverage (as opposed to catastrophic coverage currently provided by the NCAA). I'd also expect 24 hour unlimited meals, money for parents to travel to see their kids and various other perks which the big schools already can afford.

Could be off base, but it seems unlikely that schools that didn't want to spend much before this rule change suddenly will want to spend a lot. I'd think that schools will generally continue to take the same general mindset that they already had - they will either spend freely or continue to not want to spend much at all. I'd guess the MVC votes to allow schools to do whatever the Big 5 do just to avoid departures, but I am not convinced that all of the schools will undertake the additional spending.

[unipanther99]

Some in this thread, particularly some of those with ties to Omaha have been predicting impending doom for the MVC for the better part of a decade on this board and it's predecessor.

I think the sun will come up tomorrow for the MVC and it will continue to do so for a very long time.

[MoValley John]

Some in this thread, particularly some of those with ties to Omaha have been predicting impending doom for the MVC for the better part of a decade on this board and it's predecessor.

I think the sun will come up tomorrow for the MVC and it will continue to do so for a very long time.

I didn't know that Red, the originator of this thread, and that of the title of this thread, had any ties to Omaha. There are several other posters without ties to Omaha expressing concerns as well. So if you want to comfort yourself with that, fine, but it really is just sticking your head in the sand. The fact of the matter is this, the power 5 want UNI, SIU, Drake, Evansville and others out of the game. They will ramp up spending. The power 5 isn't doing this to help out their poor, hungry athletes. They are doing this to give them an unfair advantage over all other schools. They used the threat of leaving the NCAA as leverage to get all voting members on board. They will start by paying athletes full cost of attendance. They will then add scholarships. Increased insurance benefits, and not in the too distant future, these athletes will get raises. Do you not think that eventually the argument will be the need to compensate athletes at least to the current poverty level? I mean, how do you expect these kids to live, study and perform if they are forced to live below poverty? For those keeping score at home, poverty level is $11,670 for a single person. The power 5 are already talking about raising the scholarship limit to 15, so start doing the math. Or don't they do math outside of Omaha? By the way, I have a niece that plays for Illinois State, have a nephew that plays for North Dakota State and have another nephew that just finished playing for Drake. The Valley is more than an Omaha thing for me.

[ptownbraves]

I'm not sure how many MVC players were recruited by a top 5 school, but this will definitely be one more selling point if the smaller schools don't get on board. For example, if you are a Josh Cunningham trying to decide between Bradley and Indiana, and you might not get a ton of playing time your first couple years at Indiana, you can at least take comfort in knowing you have these additional benefits. That takes away good talent from smaller revenue conferences. The big money schools are forcing the smaller ones to keep up or get left in the dust.

[MoValley John]

I'm not sure how many MVC players were recruited by a top 5 school, but this will definitely be one more selling point if the smaller schools don't get on board. For example, if you are a Josh Cunningham trying to decide between Bradley and Indiana, and you might not get a ton of playing time your first couple years at Indiana, you can at least take comfort in knowing you have these additional benefits. That takes away good talent from smaller revenue conferences. The big money schools are forcing the smaller ones to keep up or get left in the dust.

Yep. And the rule that will allow transfers without penalty will make it easy for a power 5 school to pick up on just about any kid they overlooked. If a kid shines as a UMKC, suddenly, he gets a paycheck, full health insurance, other spiffs, plus he no longer needs to sit out. The Missouri Tigers gain is The Kangaroos loss. Iowa and Iowa State would never do that to UNI, though. No worries here!!!

[Wufan]

While I agree with John, this could help schools obtain a better standing with recruits. If, for instance, UNI decided to pay players a premium, they could also "outbid" schools like Ball State for instance.

[MoValley John]

While I agree with John, this could help schools obtain a better standing with recruits. If, for instance, UNI decided to pay players a premium, they could also "outbid" schools like Ball State for instance.

True. But can the kid UNI steals from Ball State replace the guy Iowa stole from UNI? The key to this whole thing is being able to keep up with the pay scale that the power 5 will eventually adopt. As far as football goes, the gap between the power five and everybody else is now a canyon that even Evel Knievel can't jump.

[Aargh]

There's another little kicker in the whole equation. Don't forget the judicial ruling that football players can form unions. That strikes terror in the hearts of the NCAA and the P5 conferences. They see it as critical that student-athletes remain classified as amateur student-athletes. If athletes are re-classified as employees, EVERYTHING changes, and not in a good way for the NCAA and athletic departments.

I think every new "rule" adopted will be crafted in a way that an argument can be maintained that student-athletes are students first, as opposed to hired and paid for athletes.

As far as insurance goes, I was surprised when insurance was in the discussion. How can athletic departments possibly not have insurance coverage for athletes? I can't imagine forcing an inner-city family to cover the deductibles and co-pays on an athletic injury. I also don't want college athletes included in the basis for determining my insurance rates. Let the schools cover the cost of athletic injuries. You KNOW they're going to happen - and they're not cheap when they happen.

[MoValley John]

There's another little kicker in the whole equation. Don't forget the judicial ruling that football players can form unions. That strikes terror in the hearts of the NCAA and the P5 conferences. They see it as critical that student-athletes remain classified as amateur student-athletes. If athletes are re-classified as employees, EVERYTHING changes, and not in a good way for the NCAA and athletic departments.

I think every new "rule" adopted will be crafted in a way that an argument can be maintained that student-athletes are students first, as opposed to hired and paid for athletes.

As far as insurance goes, I was surprised when insurance was in the discussion. How can athletic departments possibly not have insurance coverage for athletes? I can't imagine forcing an inner-city family to cover the deductibles and co-pays on an athletic injury. I also don't want college athletes included in the basis for determining my insurance rates. Let the schools cover the cost of athletic injuries. You KNOW they're going to happen - and they're not cheap when they happen.

Schools cover some, but far from all insurance. Part of the Power 5 movement will be to cover 100%. That may seem like something all schools should be doing now, but that isn't the case. Can the UNI'S of the world afford to cover all expenses up to the NCAA catastrophic threshold?
http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2012/02/college_athletes_rights_ncaa_r.html