FCS schools have to pay $$$ to help Power 4

[MooseLodge]

Remember, your D1 athlete gets a scholarship worth $100K minimum per year when one factors in room and board, tuition, counselors, tutors, nutrition, free travel, free gear, etc. If the Dartmouth dudes win, scholarships leave (Dartmouth doesn't get athletic scholarships anyway ... this is what the Dartmouth frat boys don't like). If the student athletes are employed, colleges could set the scale at minimum wage like most work study students. They also must sign contracts, have sick days, vacation days, and yes, be fired immediately, not at the end of the season. Also, being taken out of the paycheck are State and federal taxes. Thirty hours a week at minimum wage? I'd rather have the scholarship ... guess those Ivy guys aren't very bright. I'd guess most student-athletes would make under $20K in their new model.

Schools that are allowed to pay, or perhaps required to pay, can pay or not pay what they want, provided it is within employment law. In California, those laws are very different than Oklahoma, etc. It's all a matter of how competitive they want to be, just like any other business.

[tsull]

Remember, your D1 athlete gets a scholarship worth $100K minimum per year when one factors in room and board, tuition, counselors, tutors, nutrition, free travel, free gear, etc. If the Dartmouth dudes win, scholarships leave (Dartmouth doesn't get athletic scholarships anyway ... this is what the Dartmouth frat boys don't like). If the student athletes are employed, colleges could set the scale at minimum wage like most work study students. They also must sign contracts, have sick days, vacation days, and yes, be fired immediately, not at the end of the season. Also, being taken out of the paycheck are State and federal taxes. Thirty hours a week at minimum wage? I'd rather have the scholarship ... guess those Ivy guys aren't very bright. I'd guess most student-athletes would make under $20K in their new model.

[GorillaTeacher]

Pitt undergrad students pay 184 a semester to just “athletics” so I am sure if they have the money in the athletic department, they use it how they see fit.

[tsull]

I don’t think Missouri does. Kansas does not. Still, the vast majority of athletic funding comes from student fees.

Athletic funding may come from student fees, but not federal funds as stated her. Also, in all of the schools I've been around, student fees do not go towards scholarships, they go towards the sports in general, travel, uniforms, facilities, etc. Athletic scholarships are still funded by boosters and donations. Now, can coaches encourage Pell Grants, loans, etc., yes. In D2 that's probably crucial. But the feds are not funding scholarships and neither are the states.

[GorillaTeacher]

I don’t think Missouri does. Kansas does not. Still, the vast majority of athletic funding comes from student fees.

[ctrabs74]

Yes.

Federal and state funds do not fund athletic scholarships. Can an athlete get a Pell Grant in D2? Yes, but it's not an athletic scholarship. Can a D2 athlete fill out a FAFSA? Yes, but it's not an athletic scholarship. Again, federal funds do not go towards athletic scholarships, to think so is amazingly wrong.

I know federal funds can't be used for athletics scholarships, but I thought a few states did allow state funding for athletic scholarships. I know Pennsylvania doesn't allow for that, but Missouri, for example, does.

[tsull]

No.

Yes.

Federal and state funds do not fund athletic scholarships. Can an athlete get a Pell Grant in D2? Yes, but it's not an athletic scholarship. Can a D2 athlete fill out a FAFSA? Yes, but it's not an athletic scholarship. Again, federal funds do not go towards athletic scholarships, to think so is amazingly wrong.

[GorillaTeacher]

But athletic scholarships are 100% funded by boosters/donors, not federal funds.

No.

[MooseLodge]

Because those pro-sport organizations do not receive any federal $$$$$$ support like both public and private colleges/ universities in the way of funding, grants, including pell grants, etc, to the tune of nearly 100 Billion. So they will be able to call the shots.

Federal and state statutes will call the shots, regardless of who is funding what. The SC isn't going to waive compliance with federal employment law for an entity because they are getting some federal dollars. It doesn't work that way. The SC is ultimately going to decide if athletes are in fact employees. Judging for their recent rulings, I suspect they will.

[Eagle74]

In D2 only a percentage is funded by boosters / donors. What I'm talking about is when the athletes start being paid by the schools as employees. Then all of the EOC / equality rules and regulations start kicking in. This may include employment being influenced by demographics %, be it nationally, local, or of the school (employer). It could potentially be like opening Pandora's box where checking boxes counts more than actual talent.

[tsull]

Because those pro-sport organizations do not receive any federal $$$$$$ support like both public and private colleges/ universities in the way of funding, grants, including pell grants, etc, to the tune of nearly 100 Billion. So they will be able to call the shots.

But athletic scholarships are 100% funded by boosters/donors, not federal funds.

[Eagle74]

After the Dartmouth ruling, I don't see the Supreme Court granting college athletics a waiver of all of these. If they did, why would not the NFL, NHL, MLB, NBA, and MLS be offered the same?
.

Because those pro-sport organizations do not receive any federal $$$$$$ support like both public and private colleges/ universities in the way of funding, grants, including pell grants, etc, to the tune of nearly 100 Billion. So they will be able to call the shots.

[MooseLodge]

I had an interesting conversation about College Sports and the athletes becoming 'paid employees' of the universities and colleges. Several points were brought up, especially as it pertains to the new rules they will face through the government (11246 Order) regulated EOC. Legally to stay within compliance, will the schools as employers (and possibly unions) have to abide to the EOC's mandates of equality be it race, gender, religion, sexual preference, etc? Will these government EOC mandates supersede talent and athleticism in employee selection? If so, a team's potential makeup could drastically change in basically the first year.

Employment law applies to every employer, regardless of the nature of the business or organization. Certainly, any employer can provide reasonable requirements - education, ability to perform certain physical tasks, computer software knowledge, etc. The sticking point will be that, while Federal employment law is the same in all fifty states, state employment law varies widely by state. So a California employer has many mandates that an employer in Texas does not. Yet they would both have to meet Federal requirements - a health plan, OSHA, etc.

After the Dartmouth ruling, I don't see the Supreme Court granting college athletics a waiver of all of these. If they did, why would not the NFL, NHL, MLB, NBA, and MLS be offered the same? It would be an unprecedented move, with a lot of unintended consequences down the road.

I predict we are quickly moving to a club sports/non-scholarship model for the vast majority of schools. Next 2-4 years. The new world order is going to be navigable, but highly complex and very expensive. A non-scholarship model sheds most of these problems, and I think many fans will still support it.

[Eagle74]

I had an interesting conversation about College Sports and the athletes becoming 'paid employees' of the universities and colleges. Several points were brought up, especially as it pertains to the new rules they will face through the government (11246 Order) regulated EOC. Legally to stay within compliance, will the schools as employers (and possibly unions) have to abide to the EOC's mandates of equality be it race, gender, religion, sexual preference, etc? Will these government EOC mandates supersede talent and athleticism in employee selection? If so, a team's potential makeup could drastically change in basically the first year.

[WT&TTECHfan]

Most FCS budgets are in the $12-15 million range. $300K a year would be a 2 to 2.5 percent hit against the budget. That won't cause most to consider a move to D2.

It is unfair, however, that FCS was levied a fairly significant part of the restitution. Thank you P4!

I don’t think most FCS schools are worried about paying the $300k a year.Its the status on the athletes becoming employees is what’s going to affect them.Thats why the NCAA and schools are begging congress to get involved.