http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/col.../21921073/

The vote, taken during the NCAA's annual convention, redefines an athletic scholarship so that it can cover not only the traditional tuition, room, board, books and fees, but also the incidental costs of attending college. That means a scholarship will now be able to pay for items including transportation and miscellaneous personal expenses.

*

The single "No" vote on COA was Boston College, according to a record of the electronic voting provided by the NCAA. BC released a statement late Saturday that said, in part, the school "is concerned with continuing to pass legislation that increases expenses when the vast majority of schools are already institutionally subsidized. The consequence of such legislation could ultimately hurt student-athletes if/when programs are cut. This legislation further segregates student-athletes from the general student population by increasing aid without need-based consideration. Legislation already exists for student-athletes in need through Pell grants and the student-assistance fund."

*

Also Saturday, the schools and athlete reps voted to:

--- Allow athletes to borrow against future earnings to purchase so-called loss-of-value insurance – policies that can help athletes if an injury while playing college sports results in an athlete getting less money from a professional contract than they might have otherwise gotten.

-- Approve a resolution under which they pledge to, within the next two years, approve rules changes that would regulate time demands on athletes "to ensure an appropriate balance between athletics participation and the academic obligations and opportunities presented to students generally." Other changes to be addressed include those related to athletes' access to career-related insurance and interaction with agents.

The new rules take effect Aug. 1, 2015, but scholarship agreements for the 2015-16 school year can be executed prior to that date.

In court filings in the Ed O'Bannon antitrust lawsuit, the NCAA has indicated that, nationally, there is an average difference of about $2,500 between the value of a current athletic scholarship and the value of an athletic scholarship based on cost of attendance.

Just with the 65 schools in the autonomy conferences and figuring schools would pay for at least around 200 athletes (85 football players, 13 men's basketball players and an proportionate amount of women), the starting total would be $32.5 million.The belief is other Division I schools would at least pay for men's and women's basketball which could bringing the total to $51.9 million.

As under the current system, that could mean cash into some athletes pockets. Currently, for instance, an athlete living off-campus can get a housing stipend based on the school's dormitory costs; if the athlete's actual living arrangement costs less, they can keep the difference, said ACC senior associate commissioner for internal affairs Brad Hostetter.

My question on another thread is- How soon before Ohio State pays Toledo to take a player off the Buckeyes' roster so OSU can get a better player or because the player wants to start?

So players will be going to schools that give them the best financial package? Regular students have been doing that for years. But will this start a bidding war for football players?

If we start seeing situations like Florida offering a player $3,000 in expense money, but Alabama offers $5,000, so the player goes to Alabama ... then college football as we know it is dead.

(01-18-2015 12:33 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  So players will be going to schools that give them the best financial package? Regular students have been doing that for years. But will this start a bidding war for football players?

If we start seeing situations like Florida offering a player $3,000 in expense money, but Alabama offers $5,000, so the player goes to Alabama ... then college football as we know it is dead.

This is a great point. Spot on imo. The potential for corruption is huge. Also, I can imagine that some players on the team will be paid more in relation to their worth of the team. How about transfers. Will a kid from Louisville be indicted to go to Wake Forest, because Wake has more money to spend. Who is going to monitor all of this? We are about to return to the 1970's in college football, where high school players will suddenly be seen trying a trans am( okay old car, but reference to what happened to Eric Dickerson in High School. Dickerson literally started driving a new trans am, given to him by some booster. Certainly did not come from Dickerson who was poor and living with his grandmother.

Players need to get paid. Make it happen!

This is why the way to actually solve this problem is take the schools completely out of the business of "compensating" players and allow any player free access to make money off their image if someone wants to pay them for it. If someone wants to pay you to sign things or do a commercial or anything else then good for you. No it's not "fair" to the entire team but in reality for some players the value of a scholarship is more than fair for what they bring and for others it's nowhere close and no couple of thousand will make it fair. The Olympics have this model of "amateurism" and that's how it should be in football, but the schools want to continue to profit off the players images.

(01-18-2015 12:33 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  So players will be going to schools that give them the best financial package? Regular students have been doing that for years. But will this start a bidding war for football players?

If we start seeing situations like Florida offering a player $3,000 in expense money, but Alabama offers $5,000, so the player goes to Alabama ... then college football as we know it is dead.

Because that would be a big reduction in power conference player salaries, I believe.

(01-18-2015 04:19 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Players need to get paid. Make it happen!

True, the NFL should institute a minor league system just like baseball is forced to do. Let the scholar/athletes compete for the scholarships and the athletes compete for minor league money or NFL money.

Separate academics and athletics to make college be what they are meant to be, places of higher education.

Does this mean boosters will give more or less hundred dollar handshakes ?

Our blogs analysis of impact on AAC / Memphis: Link.

Events have been slowly gravitating towards this point for a long, long time. But yesterday's vote is a key milestone on the road to completely professionalizing "college" sports, once and for all.

How fitting that the only dissenting voice came from a private school (Boston College).

The thread-title asks "what will be the real impact on the AAC"? I think there will be notable trends in the near-future: First of all, the so-called "P5" will become further separated from the other leagues in the NCAA. Second of all, the Mtn. West, MAC, C-USA, and Sun Belt will fall further behind the AAC. I think the members of the AAC are much, MUCH better-positioned and -equipped to survive in the new era than the members of the other four leagues.

But we'll see. Sometimes, things that seem "inevitable" never actually happen.

Aresco has said we will do what we need to do to keep up and offer the same as the P5. I'm not sure about the details yet.

(01-18-2015 12:33 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  So players will be going to schools that give them the best financial package? Regular students have been doing that for years. But will this start a bidding war for football players?

If we start seeing situations like Florida offering a player $3,000 in expense money, but Alabama offers $5,000, so the player goes to Alabama ... then college football as we know it is dead.

In order for the "full cost of attendance" system to work there must be some checks and balances, a limitation or cap as to how much a school can pay the atudent athletes. There is absolutely no way 64 of the 65 P5 schools would have approved this vote if "full cost of attendance" came without clearly defined limitations. I serious do not think Alabama, Texas, or Ohio State will be allowed to offer a recruit $3,000 more than Notre Dame, USC, or Florida. Simply does not make sense.

IMO there is a hard number, very likely the $2,500 figure being tossed around. I would think EVERY recruit who signs a NLI will be given the same amount, otherwise schools will be subjected to discrimination lawsuits.

What I do not understand is why can't the AAC, MAC, C-USA. MAC, and Sun Belt sue the P5 for creating an environment exclusive to themselves? Why does the P5 not have to extend voting privledges and convention participation to the G5 conferences who wish to participate in the autonomous change or changes. (i.e. - AAC "full cost of attendance")


TX

There are limitations and most schools will probably simply offer the max they are allowed. That number will vary a little based on cost of living in the regions, but this is still a far cry from paying the players in my opinion.

(01-19-2015 12:35 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  There are limitations and most schools will probably simply offer the max they are allowed. That number will vary a little based on cost of living in the regions, but this is still a far cry from paying the players in my opinion.

What are those "limitations"? How are those "limitations" defined?

Aresco speaks:

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2015-01...llion-vote

Leagues and schools not in that autonomous group also have the option of joining the new legislation, and most already are planning to offer the cost-of-attendance scholarships.

“There is a public perception that this is some kind of mini Armageddon, and it is not,” American Athletic Conference Commissioner Mike Aresco said in an interview.

Oliver Luck, who spent four and a half years as athletic director at West Virginia University before taking an executive position at the NCAA last week, said that despite the obvious resource gap, many will keep pace with the autonomous schools.

“My sense is that more will opt in than will opt out, at least initially,” Luck said. “I don’t know if there’s really going to be that much more separation than there inherently is today.”

None come as a surprise to those within the NCAA, which means other schools and conferences had time to prepare for the next step. Like the AAC, the Mid-American Conference has said its schools will follow the autonomous ones in offering cost-of-attendance scholarships, as has Conference USA.

Aresco said he was not worried that joining the autonomous group in these measures would set a precedent to match them stride for stride, or dollar for dollar, in future decisions.

“I don’t think anyone is concerned about that,” he said. “You can always scale back if you have to, and you can always decide you can’t do certain things if it reaches that point.”

(01-19-2015 01:22 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Aresco speaks:

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2015-01...llion-vote

Leagues and schools not in that autonomous group also have the option of joining the new legislation, and most already are planning to offer the cost-of-attendance scholarships.

“There is a public perception that this is some kind of mini Armageddon, and it is not,” American Athletic Conference Commissioner Mike Aresco said in an interview.

Oliver Luck, who spent four and a half years as athletic director at West Virginia University before taking an executive position at the NCAA last week, said that despite the obvious resource gap, many will keep pace with the autonomous schools.

“My sense is that more will opt in than will opt out, at least initially,” Luck said. “I don’t know if there’s really going to be that much more separation than there inherently is today.”

Just like those in the Middle East that are trying to "break" US Companies fracking for oil (forcing the price to plunge), P5 schools will do the opposite...$5,000 cost of attendance will soon be $10,000 then $15,000 then $20,000 etc...eventually breaking G5 schools that don't have $25 Million - $40 Million annual TV deals.

The key for P5 schools was to initially get this measure passed...as now they can easily increase it each and every year.

NOTE: Remember how Ohio State got travel expenses for family members approved for the National Championship Game?

In a year or two, it will be approved for all PLAYOFF GAMES.

After that, it will be approved for ALL ACCESS BOWLS....and it will STOP THERE...because P5 schools will have either all of those slots...or all but one.

P5 schools are now using the "since we are in the P5...we have a shot at the playoffs...and your family can travel to the game(s) for FREE" line.

BC was 100% correct. Schools are going to start dropping programs for this and limiting opportunities because of this stuff.

G5s are going to be doing the equivalent of maxing out credit cards paying the minimum payments to try to live beyond their means.

I almost wish I did plaintiff work because when this starts, the suits by members of nonrevenue sports who are going to want equal treatment are going to explode. Wonder how they will deal with baseball partial scholarships? Going to be a zoo.

(01-19-2015 12:49 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(01-19-2015 12:35 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  There are limitations and most schools will probably simply offer the max they are allowed. That number will vary a little based on cost of living in the regions, but this is still a far cry from paying the players in my opinion.

What are those "limitations"? How are those "limitations" defined?

The Federal Financial Aid Cost of Attendance is the limitation. Anything above what the university states is the COA for all students becomes an IRS issue.

I guess there will need to be a 'salary cap' so a conference cannot gain an advantage over another by offering more money.