Maybe someone can help me but from what I gathered from a round table discussion that a local radio station in Raleigh, NC had with the AD's of the triangle schools is that......even if the G5 school has the abilty for the "pay for play" that they still will not be able do so. it will be limited to the P5.

Did any one else in the Triangle area hear this as well?

If that is the case, then it appears that the P5 just made it that much easier for the AAC to sue for inclusion into the "power" structure if we are willing to pay.

I'm in the triangle but havent heard it. Was it on 99 The Fan? And if Yow was involved I would've turned it off anyway. That woman is mind numbing and largely clueless.

"It's for the benefit of the athlete."

I think we have some lawyers who might make some money off of this

Link to discussion http://www.wralsportsfan.com/rs/video/13812714/

(07-17-2014 12:58 PM)Pirate25 Wrote:  Maybe someone can help me but from what I gathered from a round table discussion that a local radio station in Raleigh, NC had with the AD's of the triangle schools is that......even if the G5 school has the abilty for the "pay for play" that they still will not be able do so. it will be limited to the P5.

Did any one else in the Triangle area hear this as well?

He/she is flat out wrong, end of story, drop the mic.

Not wanting to sit through the whole link, I wonder if it possibly that the P5 could start right away but the rest of the NCAA would have to vote on it. It is part of that weird Permissive vs. actionable legislation. I am not sure, but I thought the paying for tuition may have been part of actionable. http://www.sbnation.com/college-football...on-kessler

No. They can't stop us from paying. They can set limits that wre impossible for G5's to match but they can't actually prevent us from our futile attempts to keep up.

I listened to the round table. The AD's from DUKE, UNC, NC. STATE AND NORTH CAROLINA CENTRAL were represented.
No where did I hear any of them make a division between G5 and P5 being able to pay so called full cost of attendance fees.

The AD from NCCU said it would be difficult for her institution to pay any new cost of attendance fees but said that some FCS schools would be able to pay the cost of attendance if the offer was extended to all of Division 1. She was completely speculating about much of the new proposed changes to the NCAA. Honestly, I think most of us know more about the proposed changes than she did.

It was interesting to me to hear the trio from Duke, Nc State and UNC all expresses reservations about the NCAA granting their institutions full and complete autonomy. The Duke AD, Kevin White, was especially concerned about the NCAA making such a sharp divide between the have and have nots and compared college athletics to the bar scene in Star Wars. A scene, with all of the different characters represented, that he did not want to go away. He also stated that even among the so called P5 there is little similarity in programs and that he liked having a mix of all schools staying together in the NCAA. I came away very impressed with Dr. White.

Even the UNC and NC State AD's, ( Bubba Cunningham and Debbie Yow) expressed great trepidation about turning College Athletics into a Semi Pro league. There was also much discussion about title 9 issues and any new cost of attendance fees.They also discussed the complex relationship between the Federal Govs. Pell Grant program and how any new cost of attendance fees would affect those Grants.

In short, Yow, Cunningham and White all seemed a bit wary of any of the new changes and each expressed how there is no document in place at the moment that has the final details of any new NCAA plan for the P5. Everything they said, is still very much a work in progress. My overall sense is, from listening to them, that unless you are an Alabama or Oregon with unlimited financial resources, that more school autonomy equals more headaches for college athletic departments, especially for the AD's. I don't think any of them want to be managing what could amount to professional athletes with all of the baggage and demands that come with this proposition.

(07-17-2014 02:32 PM)baruna falls Wrote:  I listened to the round table. The AD's from DUKE, UNC, NC. STATE AND NORTH CAROLINA CENTRAL were represented.
No where did I hear any of them make a division between G5 and P5 being able to pay so called full cost of attendance fees.

The AD from NCCU said it would be difficult for her institution to pay any new cost of attendance fees but said that some FCS schools would be able to pay the cost of attendance if the offer was extended to all of Division 1. She was completely speculating about much of the new proposed changes to the NCAA. Honestly, I think most of us know more about the proposed changes than she did.

It was interesting to me to hear the trio from Duke, Nc State and UNC all expresses reservations about the NCAA granting their institutions full and complete autonomy. The Duke AD, Kevin White, was especially concerned about the NCAA making such a sharp divide between the have and have nots and compared college athletics to the bar scene in Star Wars. A scene, with all of the different characters represented, that he did not want to go away. He also stated that even among the so called P5 there is little similarity in programs and that he liked having a mix of all schools staying together in the NCAA. I came away very impressed with Dr. White.

Even the UNC and NC State AD's, ( Bubba Cunningham and Debbie Yow) expressed great trepidation about turning College Athletics into a Semi Pro leagues. There was also much discussion about title 9 issues and any new cost of attendance fees.They also discussed the complex relationship between the Federal Govs. Pell Grant program and how any new cost of attendance fees would affect those Grants.

In short, Yow, Cunningham and White all seemed a bit wary of any of the new changes and each expressed how there is no document in place at the moment that has the final details of any new NCAA plan for the P5. Everything they said, is still very much a work in progress. My overall sense is, from listening to them, that unless you are an Alabama or Oregon with unlimited financial resources, that more school autonomy equals more headaches for college athletic departments, especially for the AD's. I don't think any of them want to be managing what could amount to professional athletes with all of the baggage and demands that come with this proposition.

Thanks +1

(07-17-2014 01:58 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  No. They can't stop us from paying. They can set limits that wre impossible for G5's to match but they can't actually prevent us from our futile attempts to keep up.

If the summary is accurate, I would assume it is not a case of the P5 attempting to limit the ability of the G5 to pay. It's the autonomy allowing them to implement the rule immediately, but with G5 teams, still under the NCAA eyes, they'd have to have it voted in by the general population of schools.

(07-17-2014 02:32 PM)baruna falls Wrote:  I listened to the round table. The AD's from DUKE, UNC, NC. STATE AND NORTH CAROLINA CENTRAL were represented.
No where did I hear any of them make a division between G5 and P5 being able to pay so called full cost of attendance fees.

The AD from NCCU said it would be difficult for her institution to pay any new cost of attendance fees but said that some FCS schools would be able to pay the cost of attendance if the offer was extended to all of Division 1. She was completely speculating about much of the new proposed changes to the NCAA. Honestly, I think most of us know more about the proposed changes than she did.

It was interesting to me to hear the trio from Duke, Nc State and UNC all expresses reservations about the NCAA granting their institutions full and complete autonomy. The Duke AD, Kevin White, was especially concerned about the NCAA making such a sharp divide between the have and have nots and compared college athletics to the bar scene in Star Wars. A scene, with all of the different characters represented, that he did not want to go away. He also stated that even among the so called P5 there is little similarity in programs and that he liked having a mix of all schools staying together in the NCAA. I came away very impressed with Dr. White.

Even the UNC and NC State AD's, ( Bubba Cunningham and Debbie Yow) expressed great trepidation about turning College Athletics into a Semi Pro league. There was also much discussion about title 9 issues and any new cost of attendance fees.They also discussed the complex relationship between the Federal Govs. Pell Grant program and how any new cost of attendance fees would affect those Grants.

In short, Yow, Cunningham and White all seemed a bit wary of any of the new changes and each expressed how there is no document in place at the moment that has the final details of any new NCAA plan for the P5. Everything they said, is still very much a work in progress. My overall sense is, from listening to them, that unless you are an Alabama or Oregon with unlimited financial resources, that more school autonomy equals more headaches for college athletic departments, especially for the AD's. I don't think any of them want to be managing what could amount to professional athletes with all of the baggage and demands that come with this proposition.

Thanks for summarizing. Somewhat refreshing to read despite all the doom and gloom that is out there.

I missed it but got to where I can't stomach Adam and Joe so seldom listen to 99.9 anymore.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(07-17-2014 02:32 PM)baruna falls Wrote:  I listened to the round table. The AD's from DUKE, UNC, NC. STATE AND NORTH CAROLINA CENTRAL were represented.
No where did I hear any of them make a division between G5 and P5 being able to pay so called full cost of attendance fees.

The AD from NCCU said it would be difficult for her institution to pay any new cost of attendance fees but said that some FCS schools would be able to pay the cost of attendance if the offer was extended to all of Division 1. She was completely speculating about much of the new proposed changes to the NCAA. Honestly, I think most of us know more about the proposed changes than she did.

It was interesting to me to hear the trio from Duke, Nc State and UNC all expresses reservations about the NCAA granting their institutions full and complete autonomy. The Duke AD, Kevin White, was especially concerned about the NCAA making such a sharp divide between the have and have nots and compared college athletics to the bar scene in Star Wars. A scene, with all of the different characters represented, that he did not want to go away. He also stated that even among the so called P5 there is little similarity in programs and that he liked having a mix of all schools staying together in the NCAA. I came away very impressed with Dr. White.

Even the UNC and NC State AD's, ( Bubba Cunningham and Debbie Yow) expressed great trepidation about turning College Athletics into a Semi Pro league. There was also much discussion about title 9 issues and any new cost of attendance fees.They also discussed the complex relationship between the Federal Govs. Pell Grant program and how any new cost of attendance fees would affect those Grants.

In short, Yow, Cunningham and White all seemed a bit wary of any of the new changes and each expressed how there is no document in place at the moment that has the final details of any new NCAA plan for the P5. Everything they said, is still very much a work in progress. My overall sense is, from listening to them, that unless you are an Alabama or Oregon with unlimited financial resources, that more school autonomy equals more headaches for college athletic departments, especially for the AD's. I don't think any of them want to be managing what could amount to professional athletes with all of the baggage and demands that come with this proposition.

FYI--the original NCAA autonomy proposal had 2 classes of rules. Permissable rules were new P5 rules the rest of D1 could utilize without any further NCAA action being taken. Any other rules would require a vote of all of D1 in order to allow D1 schools to match. This version of the proposal was discussed a this springs meetings and the comments were used to modify the proposal.

The second version of the NCAA autonomy proposal made all autonomous rules passed by the P5 "permissible". Unless that's suddenly been changed, the G5 can match any P5 autonomous rule (at least to the extent that their finances allow). In other words, no NCAA restrictions---the only limitations will be our own financial restraints. That said, it is possible that conferences might shackle individual schools with more restrictive rules.

(07-17-2014 03:07 PM)knightalum74 Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 02:32 PM)baruna falls Wrote:  I listened to the round table. The AD's from DUKE, UNC, NC. STATE AND NORTH CAROLINA CENTRAL were represented.
No where did I hear any of them make a division between G5 and P5 being able to pay so called full cost of attendance fees.

The AD from NCCU said it would be difficult for her institution to pay any new cost of attendance fees but said that some FCS schools would be able to pay the cost of attendance if the offer was extended to all of Division 1. She was completely speculating about much of the new proposed changes to the NCAA. Honestly, I think most of us know more about the proposed changes than she did.

It was interesting to me to hear the trio from Duke, Nc State and UNC all expresses reservations about the NCAA granting their institutions full and complete autonomy. The Duke AD, Kevin White, was especially concerned about the NCAA making such a sharp divide between the have and have nots and compared college athletics to the bar scene in Star Wars. A scene, with all of the different characters represented, that he did not want to go away. He also stated that even among the so called P5 there is little similarity in programs and that he liked having a mix of all schools staying together in the NCAA. I came away very impressed with Dr. White.

Even the UNC and NC State AD's, ( Bubba Cunningham and Debbie Yow) expressed great trepidation about turning College Athletics into a Semi Pro league. There was also much discussion about title 9 issues and any new cost of attendance fees.They also discussed the complex relationship between the Federal Govs. Pell Grant program and how any new cost of attendance fees would affect those Grants.

In short, Yow, Cunningham and White all seemed a bit wary of any of the new changes and each expressed how there is no document in place at the moment that has the final details of any new NCAA plan for the P5. Everything they said, is still very much a work in progress. My overall sense is, from listening to them, that unless you are an Alabama or Oregon with unlimited financial resources, that more school autonomy equals more headaches for college athletic departments, especially for the AD's. I don't think any of them want to be managing what could amount to professional athletes with all of the baggage and demands that come with this proposition.

Thanks for summarizing. Somewhat refreshing to read despite all the doom and gloom that is out there.

Well, this is a doom and gloom board. I don't get why, but it is. The only non-doom and gloom posts are related to one's own conference.

(07-17-2014 01:10 PM)ncbeta Wrote:  "It's for the benefit of the athlete."

Right, so what justification or right does another conference or group of conferences have to limit the benefit of the athlete, regardless of where he or she plays? Like to see that question answered in the courts.

(07-17-2014 02:58 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 01:58 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  No. They can't stop us from paying. They can set limits that wre impossible for G5's to match but they can't actually prevent us from our futile attempts to keep up.

If the summary is accurate, I would assume it is not a case of the P5 attempting to limit the ability of the G5 to pay. It's the autonomy allowing them to implement the rule immediately, but with G5 teams, still under the NCAA eyes, they'd have to have it voted in by the general population of schools.

That is still a huge problem that cannot withstand legal scrutiny. You have established two tiers with no wherewithal for schools to move in between tiers.

It's illegal.

(07-17-2014 01:58 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  No. They can't stop us from paying. They can set limits that wre impossible for G5's to match but they can't actually prevent us from our futile attempts to keep up.

You are correct; however, I don't think it would be futile - I believe all our schools could afford the fees. If the richest universities tried to set the bar too high, some of the schools in their own conferences would have to leave.

They can only set the criteria, not exclude - that would trigger anti-trust lawsuits - and they don't want that.

(07-17-2014 07:42 PM)upstater1 Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 02:58 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 01:58 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  No. They can't stop us from paying. They can set limits that wre impossible for G5's to match but they can't actually prevent us from our futile attempts to keep up.

If the summary is accurate, I would assume it is not a case of the P5 attempting to limit the ability of the G5 to pay. It's the autonomy allowing them to implement the rule immediately, but with G5 teams, still under the NCAA eyes, they'd have to have it voted in by the general population of schools.

That is still a huge problem that cannot withstand legal scrutiny. You have established two tiers with no wherewithal for schools to move in between tiers.

It's illegal.

This