I read the other day (article about House v NCAA) that NLI are now gone. It said the schools were still âsigningâ recruits, but I donât know what they are signing.
Unless the Dartmouth basketball players become employees, then theyâll get paid. And would they get benefits as employees, like free/reduced tuition?
I wasnât sure where to put this, but congratulations to the Harvard athlete who just won his second consecutive NCAA D1 cross country championship.
âClemson has not yet itemized where the extra scholarships will go. The department is expected to fund the maximum allowable limit in most sports, like 20 additional for football and two or three more for menâs and womenâs basketball.â
Interesting article about Clemson. The red flag for me is that they will fully fund MOST sports, not all sports. And of course, the athletic landscape at Clemson is much different than at an Ivy.
College sports are irreparably broken. There is absolutely no need for colleges to subsidize professional sports by providing a minor league system for them. Let them provide their own minor league systems. Club sports today are truly what intercollegiate sports once were.
Sponsoring football in particular is disgraceful. The mission and purpose of higher education is to develop the brain. With all that we now know about brain injury in football, playing this sport is clearly incompatible with the mission of any college or university. And there is no way to fix this problem in football. There is no equipment which can protect players from brain injury in this sport.
I would be in favor of anything which deemphasizes sports at institutions of higher learning. So, move the Ivies to D3? Yep, Iâm all for it.
Is D3 football safe?
Nope. 
-
Iâm curious what problems you think exist in Ivy League athletics (not at Alabama Football or Kentucky basketball) that would be solved by a switch to a lower division?
-
In the sports you likely have in mindâfootball and menâs basketballâcolleges arenât subsidizing any professional sports. Those sports are positive revenue generators for P4 schools and pay for the other sports.
-
Iâd be interested to know what you think college sports âonce wereâ that they now arenât. From my perspective college athletes have never been in a better situation in terms of coaching, safety protocols, training, mental health support, etc.
-
If college is only about brain development why does MIT have a swimming test?
-
Folks can disagree about football and safety but thereâs no question that the Ivy League and a few schools in it like Dartmouth have been leaders in developing safer practice protocols and game rules related to reducing risks of brain injury. Just an example: How the Ivy League is tackling concussions in football
-
As far as âdeemphasizingâ athletics, I donât know that there is any less emphasis on athletics at D3 schools, and particularly in the lives of their athletes, than at Ivy League schools. For the vast majority of D3 schools, athletic programs exist because they boost enrollment and the schools couldnât exist without them. That isnât the case at the Ivy League, regardless of division.
Thank you for your thoughtful analysis of the situation.
If you look back at what I wrote, I said that deemphasizing sports would be a step in the right direction. Thatâs all. A step. By itself it wonât solve anything.
Take the time to watch the linked video and then we can talk further:
Womenâs soccer has one of the higher rates of concussion in college athletics. How would deemphasizing athletics protect the brains of these females?
It wouldnât.
I recall the Frontline episode. I happened to be on a working group focused on brain injury prevention in youth sports at the time. That episode was helpful in raising awareness.
But when it came to meetings with school and YSO administrators to discuss actual policy changes, nothing helped as much as being able to point to a D1 football program at Dartmouth that had shifted to no-tackle, low contact practices a few years earlier.
Iâm certainly not minimizing concussion risks in football or any other sport. Itâs just surprising to me that youâd raise it in the context of a conference that is a leader in developing best practices to minimize those risks.
I guess I still donât see what any of this has to do with division of play so maybe weâre just talking past each other, or Iâm just missing something.
Iâm trying to understand how deemphasizing sports at the college level would decrease concussions. My soccer son got a concussion in U16 soccer.
Everyone knows NESCAC stands for New England Small College Athletic Conference. Does anyone think theyâll deemphasize athletics?
Deemphasizing sports at the college level wonât solve the concussion problem wonât solve the concussion problem. Eliminating them will.
The bigger problem in football is CTE.
Brain injury is just one of the many, many problems with college sports.
This is off topic to the thread. Maybe start a new thread if youâd like to discuss the problem with college athletics as a whole.
Well, this will never happen at the overwhelming majority of colleges and universities.
âDivision III is the largest NCAA division, with 425 active schools and over 200,000 student-athletes.â
Our Division III Members - NCAA.org.
D3 athletes, as an average, are 31% of the total enrollment across all D3 schools.
Get rid of preschool, it is merely the minor, minor leagues for a Goldman Sachs job.
Silly argument. Letâs get back on a non-â â â â â discussion
His decision comes after Harvard recently faced concerns regarding player retention as other schools begin to offer better NIL deals than the College can and will provide. While other schools rely on donor NIL collectives and revenue sharing for their athletes, Harvard athletes must find deals independently.
