College Sports Discombobulated

Musings

I understand that the structure of college athletics is undergoing some major changes as a result of litigation that is underway and is being negotiated, perhaps in multiple courtrooms, but certainly in one case that goes by the name of House v NCAA. It is hard to understand the breadth of this lawsuit as it seems to have been the combination number of a number of pieces of litigation that were combined on the presumption that would make it easier to sort out the NCAA's problems in one pot. However I am not sure that has turned out to be the case. There seems to be a lot of discussion going on in this lawsuit with an endless number of attorneys all either getting paid to represent the NCAA or waiting to take a huge chunk of the final settlement. There is not much print media reporting on this litigation. Online there are some number of "experts" reporting on the case but they mostly seem to suggest that some potentially major things are moving along but nothing final is known.

The outcome has the potential to affect the athletic programs in all of colleges and universities in the NCAA and therefore in all the states and numerous communities. It is unclear why so much is going on and so little public knowledge exists.

Apparently there are approximately 1200 colleges and universities involved in one level or another of the NCAA's multi-tiered system. Of these institutions, most of which are public and some number are private, apparently only about 20 make money as we understand that phrase in the capitalist world. The Michigan, Ohio State, Texas and Alabamas' apparently make money because they have large stadiums and can make money in multiple sports besides all of the money they get from alumni and supporters. Effectively this means that all of these other schools lose money annually and get by supporting their athletic systems from alumni and supporters' contributions and student fees.

Contemplations

This structure has been questioned for a number of years under the claim that some number of these schools are getting paid a lot of money for promoting their student athletes and the athletes' performances. The protesters suggest that the student athletes should get some of that money. The trouble is that only a small number of athletes at a small number of schools can actually claim significant sums on that basis. This concept falls over into the NIL (name, image, likeness) rules that have been implemented recently and have seriously disrupted many of the sports. NIL payments allow individual athletes supporters to give those athletes payments in appreciation of the athletes. The objection is not to keep money away from students that perform at a significant level it is that as you apply money to a few players and you have a whole list of teammates and other team sports,you need to do something to figure out how you're going to spread the money amongst the teams and with regard to the various sports, and the funds should be spread equally amongst men's and women sports. Nothing was put into place by the NCAA to do that with the

NIL system. No one seemed to be looking at the big picture and long range consequences. Indeed NIL went into play with a so-called "portal" that allowed athletes to move from one school to another almost on their whim to the point where some students were at four different schools in a single year.

All of this silliness came into play in the last few years as the NCAA seemed to become more and more concerned with money and less and less concerned with the well-being of its student athletes. In response to the NCAA failure to act the students started acting and they and their attorneys were able to bring a number of pieces of litigation that are now in court proposing massive settlements to cure the NCAA's failure to act over the last decade. Over that period of time coaches salaries have gotten to be excessive, new programs were implemented to allow alumni to donate massive amounts of money to a school in return for some type of recognition or benefit and the money was then used under some type of supposed charitable program. For example I believe the University of Washington has taken large amounts of contributions and established a fund which pays offensive lineman $50,000 a year beyond their academic scholarship. This is all done in the name of charity. Somehow the IRS has not jumped in to stamp out this effort thus far but I would hope that is about to happen.

With all of this excess money and failure to set standards that recognized and protected the student athletes the door was open for the students and their attorneys to come after the NCAA. There is no sympathy for the NCAA. What is difficult is to understand how there is a settlement brewing in the House litigation which totals almost $3 billion, a large percentage of which will be paid out in the future from the various schools athletic budgets. Further, the NCAA seems to have admitted that, as proposed, this settlement would be the easiest to accept by the schools with large athletic bubgets that could produce larger pots of money and that the heaviest hit would go to the smaller schools with the smaller athletic budgets. This sounds like a typical program straight out of the politics of Washington DC.

The NCAA's program in this regard is headed up by a person by the name of Charlie Baker who used to be the governor of Massachusetts. He obviously is tangled up with a lot of money and his plan for schools that can't afford it to pay, and schools that had little or nothing to do with creating the current excessive system to be part of the settlement is incomprehensible. Maybe he should put out a clear explanation of what is under discussion.

As I look at this quagmire I am very confused. I don't understand how these various issues were combined together in a single lawsuit. I do not understand any of the limited information that has become available on the litigation. None of it seems to really give us a blueprint for long term college athletics in the United States. There is no information of how the system will protect or benefit student athletics. It looks like it is simply a settlement mixed together by two sides that were focused on the money and how the money could be contributed and paid rather than what the end result of the litigation should be for the long term benefit of college athletics.

Thoughts

In my state of great ignorance over this apparently abominable litigation I do not understand why the various smaller schools that cannot produce large sums of money on an annual basis, and that would include all of the division three, division two, and most of the division one schools and their conferences don't withdraw from this litigation and only agree to discuss a settlement they can fit within the bounds of what they might be able to pay without ruining their athletic programs and would be more commensurate with the level at which they may have exploited their student athletes. It is silly to pretend that Ohio University has exploited it's athletes with the purpose of making significant funds for the university at the same level or even in the same thought pattern as the Ohio State University. The obligation to pay should correlate to whatever harm is found at the schools and the system which evolves should be there to enhance, protect and provide for the future of college athletics not just fill a drum of money to be doled out mostly to attorneys with minimalist amounts to a few student athletes.

Silence Dogood

All previous posts of this blog can be seen at: thoughtscm.com