@Ster posted:I also think that this program is all about making sure that Title IX Standards are being implemented. Look, the NCAA and College Administrators are not pragmatic and practical people. They don't understand free market enterprise, and they live in a bubble of their left leaning friends that do nothing but reinforce their positions. These people believe that there is a utopian society out there and we need to strive to get there.
Their biggest concern is equality, and they are angry that College football DT's are getting hundreds of Thousands of dollars through NIL collectives, and yet the women's soccer goalie hasn't received a nickel. The goal of this proposal is to create a trust that colleges can made a line item on their Athletic budget. Their hope is that the alumni and boosters who are funding these NIL collectives will stop using collectives and will donate those funds to the Athletic department instead. The Athletic department then deposits the money into this trust and the money get distributed fairly and equally among all athletes so that the greedy good for nothing football running back won't get $250,000 and the women's golf team not get the priveledge of getting anything.
This proposal is all about getting money redistributed from male athletes to female athletes. It's all about Title IX.
No. Not even close.
The NCAA's business model is in danger. And they are trying to stay relevant in a rapidly changing environment.
Baker's proposal to pay athletes by creating a new D1 subdivision is a way to protect against further financial losses (in addition to NIL dollars flowing directly to athletes, the P5/P4 schools are again threatening to break away from the NCAA) and legal jeopardy (there are 3 major lawsuits against the NCAA making their way through the courts, including one which seeks to invalidate the NCAA completely). Remember, it was a Supreme Court ruling that allowed NIL. And Justice Kavanaugh pulled no punches in his criticism of the NCAA.
Baker wants to keep the NCAA relevant as athletes gain more and more control over the financial rewards of their talent. Making the case that female athletes will get paid is an attempt to make his proposal more enticing to the universities. Title IX is not driving this, the courts and public opinion are. ESPN’s actions are not helping.