I didn’t think this forum was supposed to be political.
2 Likes
To get back to the OP’s question, with the settlement looming why don’t the Ivies move out of D1? The short answer is, they have been in their own corner of D1 for a long time, and this will only make that more clear. Things are fine the way they are.
The primary reason is - the Ivies already have and many other schools will opt out. The settlement doesn’t fit them at all, it’s designed for the P4/5. Most D1s - those outside the P4/5 - fund athletics with money from the state, the students, or other general funds. See the image attached from the Knight Commission. Look at not just the breakdown of sources, but the amounts (above the bar graphs). Huge differences.
It has been D1 schools with money (football and basketball) and everyone else for a long time. Now there will more clearly be multiple “D1” groups.
Ivies know some top athletes will go to other programs. They are (wisely) focusing on their academic mission. And walking a fine line with alumni donors about college athletic funding and admissions. See the Harvard Crimson article linked below.
Also, Ivies and other D1s that opt out no longer need to worry about lawsuits for athlete compensation. Now that athletes (1) know what they are getting in terms of dollars from the school (which is zero at Ivies) and (2) can transfer at literally any point if they get a better offer, there is no case an athlete can make. (The anti-trust issues were about limits on transfers and loss of eligibility.) If they are good enough to get paid, they can get paid. If they don’t get paid, it’s because they weren’t good enough to get paid, or they made a choice not to get paid at another school.
3 Likes
Actually, it is exactly the opposite. If the Ivy League schools had agreed to the court approved settlement, that would have insulted them from future lawsuits.
The Ivies are fine, they get the benefits of the settlement without committing to paying players. With the new transfer rules it is back on the players. Since they are not impeded from transferring anymore they have no grounds for damages. The Ivy’s can dictate the conditions for attending their schools without concern. They just need to accept that they are not likely to keep (or get) athletes who can earn significant money in the P5.
2 Likes
I disagree. Competitors agreeing to not compete is an antitrust violation (whether per se or under rule of reason). It doesn’t matter that consumers have other options.
Agreeing not to compete? The settlement specifically gives schools the right to opt out of paying their players in return for giving up some revenue sharing. It has nothing to do with competing.
1 Like
This isn’t true. They are still facing the athletes-should-be-employees lawsuits, which are comp related.
1 Like
I took the comment about not competing as a reference to the conference wide agreement not to offer athletic (or other merit) scholarships. This could be considered an anti-competitive practice. I don’t know that opting in while retaining that agreement in the conference would shield schools but ianal.
As for OP’s concern about recruiting, having seen some of the incoming Ivy classes in TFXC there’s no sign yet of a decline in talent. Just the opposite in fact.
Good to know. It’s so complicated because so many moving parts! Fewer slots for TFXC at relatively competitive (athletically speaking) schools is but one complexity, not to mention some schools haven’t even decided if they are opting in to the NCAA agreement.
Ivies still won’t work for those who can’t afford what the Ivies might expect them to pay. We know Ivies are the most generous in offering need based aid, but that doesn’t work for all. Meaning we have always seen some student athletes recruited by Ivies who opt for Colgate or Lafayette or Richmond or [insert school] because they can get athletic aid and/or merit and/or need based aid too, making them less expensive then the Ivies.
This is all a WAG, but here is how I see it. I think the Ivy League will continue to be strong in sports like XC and swimming. I don’t think many schools will be giving a ton of money directly to runners and swimmers. World class athletes in these sports will be able to secure their own funding, whether they are Ivy or elsewhere.
The Ivy League has never tried to play at the top tier for football. There is usually enough room for one Ivy League basketball team to be marginally competitive nationally (maybe pushing top 30 or so), but I don’t see the recent changes shaking these sports up drastically for the Ivy League.
The two men’s sports that the Ivy League really cares about that will be interesting are hockey and lacrosse. The top schools in both sports are a mixture of teams from major football conferences and teams that do not play football seriously. Hockey recruiting is very different from other sports in that many of the top college recruits have already been drafted. I’m not sure how that will affect the decision process. Lacross is similar to hockey in that there are a limited number of schools that care a lot about lacrosse. However, the pro contracts aren’t the same as what hockey gets. My guess is that there is going to be a serious arms race for football recruits, and many schools that play both football and lacrosse will choose to de-emphasize men’s lacrosse in favor of dumping more money into football. If this happens, the Ivy League might be able to keep up.
1 Like
So we were looking at different things. For sports other than M&W basketball, football, and maybe women’s volleyball I think that the new roster caps could result in some better talent moving to the Ivy League.
Yes, but completely different track than the NIL settlement.
Going to be interesting for Syracuse, VA, UNC and maybe a couple of others. Their lacrosse history will make them reluctant to cut but they need to find the money somewhere for ACC football.
1 Like
Those are exactly the three schools that I am most curious about for future lacrosse funding.
this came out a long time ago, but it seems like the Ivy League are going in the opposite direction:
Other schools with decent football and growing men’s lacrosse? Notre Dame, Boston College, Michigan. Some with football and women’s lacrosse? Florida, Northwestern, Boston College, Stanford.
A few schools that have put lacrosse ahead of football? Maryland, Hopkins (D1 only in lacrosse). The service academies have no cost concerns and tend to field competitive teams in both, but few national champs.
Same exercise could be done with hockey. I don’t think money is an issue, although I’m not sure every men’s lacrosse team will be funding 48 full scholarships, which they are now allowed to do.
Quick clarification: I don’t believe Boston College fields a men’s lacrosse team. Could you have meant Boston University?
1 Like
7 posts were split to a new thread: Hockey Recruiting