Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Pac-12 trying to adjust to NIL and the Alston ruling, per Wilner
Author Message
Transic_nyc Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,401
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 194
I Root For: Return To Stability
Location:
Post: #1
Pac-12 trying to adjust to NIL and the Alston ruling, per Wilner
Jon Wilner today with two very revealing articles on the issues the conference is having over complying with two big changes in the last year.

First, the troubles within the PAC over how to adjust to the Alston ruling:

Quote:Falling: Pac-12 presidents and chancellors

Yet more evidence has surfaced this week to suggest conference leadership is hesitant to plunge into the world of compensation for athletes.

Last June, the Supreme Court ruled in Alston vs. NCAA that universities could provide up to $5,980 annually in academic-related compensation. This could come in the form of equipment and supplies or payments in exchange for classroom achievement.

Within months, the SEC presidents voted to allow schools to determine their methods for providing academic rewards; the conference then went public with the collective show of support.

Thus far, the Pac-12 has remained quiet. A conference source said the presidents, as a group, are wary of following the SEC’s path.

“(Commissioner George) Kliavkoff is doing as good a job as anyone could do under the circumstances,” the source said, “but it didn’t have the support.”

More details on the topic surfaced this week, when ESPN published a list of schools that have “plans in place” to provide academic bonuses this year.

Only three Pac-12 schools are committed to the process of rewarding players for classroom achievement, per ESPN: Colorado, Washington and Oregon.

Over in the SEC, there are 10. (If you include Oklahoma and Texas, which are set the join the league in a few years, the total rises to 12 of 16 schools.)

“We’re limiting ourselves,” the Pac-12 source said.

College athletics entered a new era last summer with the legalization of compensation to athletes for academic performance (via the Alston case) and through promotional opportunities in the private sector (name, image and likeness).

Both carry massive recruiting implications even if they aren’t supposed to be used as recruiting inducements.

In each case, Pac-12 campuses are moving more deliberately than many peers:

Only three schools reportedly are set to make cash payments for academic achievement, and several lack the donor collectives that underpin NIL endeavors.

For both matters, the willpower begins at the top, with the presidents and chancellors.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/07/p...nds-alone/



Wilner doesn't seem positive that the PAC could weather the transition to NIL and, possibly, pay-for-play as a collective.

Excerpt:

Quote:In the world of NIL, the rules of engagement are blurred, NCAA oversight is non-existent, and the cheating that used to occur under the table is now in plain sight — inevitable, unstoppable and, it appears, perfectly acceptable.

NIL opportunities weren’t supposed to be dangled as recruiting inducements for transfers or high school players but … wouldn’t you know it … are being dangled as recruiting inducements for transfers and high school players.

In fact, that has quickly become their primary purpose.

And at the highest levels of Pac-12 power, there are questions about the path forward — and if there should even be a path forward.

Should the schools become immersed in aspects of NIL that contradict the spirit of amateurism still alive in Ivory Towers across the conference?

“Some schools want to pursue football and basketball at the highest level,’’ a source said. “Other schools think that approach is destructive.”

If NIL remains unchecked for years to come — the NCAA has asked Congress for help regulating the marketplace — the Pac-12 eventually could cease to exist as we know it.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/06/a...ing-trail/

Kliavkoff has a really tough job to do to bring the PAC presidents into the new reality. The old model is dead but that shouldn't mean that they have to drop everything they believed in. Perhaps it would require building an alternative vision for the new college athletics, likely with the cooperation of the Big Ten. I get that some are reticent but it's not time to throw the baby out with the bathwater just yet.
04-07-2022 05:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,913
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #2
RE: Pac-12 trying to adjust to NIL and the Alston ruling, per Wilner
(04-07-2022 05:27 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Jon Wilner today with two very revealing articles on the issues the conference is having over complying with two big changes in the last year.

First, the troubles within the PAC over how to adjust to the Alston ruling:

Quote:Falling: Pac-12 presidents and chancellors

Yet more evidence has surfaced this week to suggest conference leadership is hesitant to plunge into the world of compensation for athletes.

Last June, the Supreme Court ruled in Alston vs. NCAA that universities could provide up to $5,980 annually in academic-related compensation. This could come in the form of equipment and supplies or payments in exchange for classroom achievement.

Within months, the SEC presidents voted to allow schools to determine their methods for providing academic rewards; the conference then went public with the collective show of support.

Thus far, the Pac-12 has remained quiet. A conference source said the presidents, as a group, are wary of following the SEC’s path.

“(Commissioner George) Kliavkoff is doing as good a job as anyone could do under the circumstances,” the source said, “but it didn’t have the support.”

More details on the topic surfaced this week, when ESPN published a list of schools that have “plans in place” to provide academic bonuses this year.

Only three Pac-12 schools are committed to the process of rewarding players for classroom achievement, per ESPN: Colorado, Washington and Oregon.

Over in the SEC, there are 10. (If you include Oklahoma and Texas, which are set the join the league in a few years, the total rises to 12 of 16 schools.)

“We’re limiting ourselves,” the Pac-12 source said.

College athletics entered a new era last summer with the legalization of compensation to athletes for academic performance (via the Alston case) and through promotional opportunities in the private sector (name, image and likeness).

Both carry massive recruiting implications even if they aren’t supposed to be used as recruiting inducements.

In each case, Pac-12 campuses are moving more deliberately than many peers:

Only three schools reportedly are set to make cash payments for academic achievement, and several lack the donor collectives that underpin NIL endeavors.

For both matters, the willpower begins at the top, with the presidents and chancellors.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/07/p...nds-alone/



Wilner doesn't seem positive that the PAC could weather the transition to NIL and, possibly, pay-for-play as a collective.

Excerpt:

Quote:In the world of NIL, the rules of engagement are blurred, NCAA oversight is non-existent, and the cheating that used to occur under the table is now in plain sight — inevitable, unstoppable and, it appears, perfectly acceptable.

NIL opportunities weren’t supposed to be dangled as recruiting inducements for transfers or high school players but … wouldn’t you know it … are being dangled as recruiting inducements for transfers and high school players.

In fact, that has quickly become their primary purpose.

And at the highest levels of Pac-12 power, there are questions about the path forward — and if there should even be a path forward.

Should the schools become immersed in aspects of NIL that contradict the spirit of amateurism still alive in Ivory Towers across the conference?

“Some schools want to pursue football and basketball at the highest level,’’ a source said. “Other schools think that approach is destructive.”

If NIL remains unchecked for years to come — the NCAA has asked Congress for help regulating the marketplace — the Pac-12 eventually could cease to exist as we know it.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/06/a...ing-trail/

Kliavkoff has a really tough job to do to bring the PAC presidents into the new reality. The old model is dead but that shouldn't mean that they have to drop everything they believed in. Perhaps it would require building an alternative vision for the new college athletics, likely with the cooperation of the Big Ten. I get that some are reticent but it's not time to throw the baby out with the bathwater just yet.

If as expected pay for play becomes law, there will be no middle ground. You will either cease to play or pay for play. There is no middle ground, which is what I've been trying to get so many to see. You will either be in, or out. It's why I pointed out to Frank that division over this is in every house/conference. Ohio State, Penn State, Iowa, and Nebraska will do what they must, as will Oregon, Washington and some others out West. Vandy has a decision to make. I haven't just been making these issues up. They are real. It is why I said from the beginning some would opt out.
04-07-2022 05:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
domer1978 Online
All American
*

Posts: 3,469
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 367
I Root For: Notre Dame/Chaos
Location: California/Georgia
Post: #3
RE: Pac-12 trying to adjust to NIL and the Alston ruling, per Wilner
(04-07-2022 05:44 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(04-07-2022 05:27 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Jon Wilner today with two very revealing articles on the issues the conference is having over complying with two big changes in the last year.

First, the troubles within the PAC over how to adjust to the Alston ruling:

Quote:Falling: Pac-12 presidents and chancellors

Yet more evidence has surfaced this week to suggest conference leadership is hesitant to plunge into the world of compensation for athletes.

Last June, the Supreme Court ruled in Alston vs. NCAA that universities could provide up to $5,980 annually in academic-related compensation. This could come in the form of equipment and supplies or payments in exchange for classroom achievement.

Within months, the SEC presidents voted to allow schools to determine their methods for providing academic rewards; the conference then went public with the collective show of support.

Thus far, the Pac-12 has remained quiet. A conference source said the presidents, as a group, are wary of following the SEC’s path.

“(Commissioner George) Kliavkoff is doing as good a job as anyone could do under the circumstances,” the source said, “but it didn’t have the support.”

More details on the topic surfaced this week, when ESPN published a list of schools that have “plans in place” to provide academic bonuses this year.

Only three Pac-12 schools are committed to the process of rewarding players for classroom achievement, per ESPN: Colorado, Washington and Oregon.

Over in the SEC, there are 10. (If you include Oklahoma and Texas, which are set the join the league in a few years, the total rises to 12 of 16 schools.)

“We’re limiting ourselves,” the Pac-12 source said.

College athletics entered a new era last summer with the legalization of compensation to athletes for academic performance (via the Alston case) and through promotional opportunities in the private sector (name, image and likeness).

Both carry massive recruiting implications even if they aren’t supposed to be used as recruiting inducements.

In each case, Pac-12 campuses are moving more deliberately than many peers:

Only three schools reportedly are set to make cash payments for academic achievement, and several lack the donor collectives that underpin NIL endeavors.

For both matters, the willpower begins at the top, with the presidents and chancellors.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/07/p...nds-alone/



Wilner doesn't seem positive that the PAC could weather the transition to NIL and, possibly, pay-for-play as a collective.

Excerpt:

Quote:In the world of NIL, the rules of engagement are blurred, NCAA oversight is non-existent, and the cheating that used to occur under the table is now in plain sight — inevitable, unstoppable and, it appears, perfectly acceptable.

NIL opportunities weren’t supposed to be dangled as recruiting inducements for transfers or high school players but … wouldn’t you know it … are being dangled as recruiting inducements for transfers and high school players.

In fact, that has quickly become their primary purpose.

And at the highest levels of Pac-12 power, there are questions about the path forward — and if there should even be a path forward.

Should the schools become immersed in aspects of NIL that contradict the spirit of amateurism still alive in Ivory Towers across the conference?

“Some schools want to pursue football and basketball at the highest level,’’ a source said. “Other schools think that approach is destructive.”

If NIL remains unchecked for years to come — the NCAA has asked Congress for help regulating the marketplace — the Pac-12 eventually could cease to exist as we know it.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/06/a...ing-trail/

Kliavkoff has a really tough job to do to bring the PAC presidents into the new reality. The old model is dead but that shouldn't mean that they have to drop everything they believed in. Perhaps it would require building an alternative vision for the new college athletics, likely with the cooperation of the Big Ten. I get that some are reticent but it's not time to throw the baby out with the bathwater just yet.

If as expected pay for play becomes law, there will be no middle ground. You will either cease to play or pay for play. There is no middle ground, which is what I've been trying to get so many to see. You will either be in, or out. It's why I pointed out to Frank that division over this is in every house/conference. Ohio State, Penn State, Iowa, and Nebraska will do what they must, as will Oregon, Washington and some others out West. Vandy has a decision to make. I haven't just been making these issues up. They are real. It is why I said from the beginning some would opt out.


Agreed, I am curious if ND goes all in on the pay for play. We are invested big time in college football and keep investing so it seems we're all in. But previous ND admin statements makes me curious if we fold up the tent.
04-07-2022 05:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SouthEastAlaska Online
1st String
*

Posts: 2,191
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation: 308
I Root For: UW
Location:
Post: #4
RE: Pac-12 trying to adjust to NIL and the Alston ruling, per Wilner
Nothing surprising here. My beloved PAC is officially on the clock, they need to figure it out or they will be picked apart and left behind.
04-07-2022 07:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Big 12 fan too Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,660
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 210
I Root For: NIU
Location:
Post: #5
RE: Pac-12 trying to adjust to NIL and the Alston ruling, per Wilner
(04-07-2022 07:32 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  Nothing surprising here. My beloved PAC is officially on the clock, they need to figure it out or they will be picked apart and left behind.
It’s been a zombie conference, the weakest P5 for awhile. Nothing is more threatening than locals and even schools not carrying about staying major college athletic programs.

The early “leak” by A&M distracted attention from the fundamental challenges of the Pac 12. Had that not occurred until closer to the Big 12 deal was up, the talk would be whether the NIL committed schools of the Pac 12 go to OU/UT Big 12, whether OU/UT go to an uncommitted Pac 12, or whether the Pac 12 loses schools to the BIG.

A lot of benefit to the SEC with that leak.
(This post was last modified: 04-07-2022 08:35 PM by Big 12 fan too.)
04-07-2022 08:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Transic_nyc Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,401
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 194
I Root For: Return To Stability
Location:
Post: #6
RE: Pac-12 trying to adjust to NIL and the Alston ruling, per Wilner
The Spring Dish: College football shifting quickly to a Power Two

https://247sports.com/Article/Power-Five...185912484/


Article from last July but one can see the issues becoming more important since then:

Big Ten needs to go BIG with expansion -- and target the Pac-12

https://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/2021/...oliti.html
04-12-2022 07:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,301
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #7
RE: Pac-12 trying to adjust to NIL and the Alston ruling, per Wilner
(04-07-2022 05:44 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(04-07-2022 05:27 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Jon Wilner today with two very revealing articles on the issues the conference is having over complying with two big changes in the last year.

First, the troubles within the PAC over how to adjust to the Alston ruling:

Quote:Falling: Pac-12 presidents and chancellors

Yet more evidence has surfaced this week to suggest conference leadership is hesitant to plunge into the world of compensation for athletes.

Last June, the Supreme Court ruled in Alston vs. NCAA that universities could provide up to $5,980 annually in academic-related compensation. This could come in the form of equipment and supplies or payments in exchange for classroom achievement.

Within months, the SEC presidents voted to allow schools to determine their methods for providing academic rewards; the conference then went public with the collective show of support.

Thus far, the Pac-12 has remained quiet. A conference source said the presidents, as a group, are wary of following the SEC’s path.

“(Commissioner George) Kliavkoff is doing as good a job as anyone could do under the circumstances,” the source said, “but it didn’t have the support.”

More details on the topic surfaced this week, when ESPN published a list of schools that have “plans in place” to provide academic bonuses this year.

Only three Pac-12 schools are committed to the process of rewarding players for classroom achievement, per ESPN: Colorado, Washington and Oregon.

Over in the SEC, there are 10. (If you include Oklahoma and Texas, which are set the join the league in a few years, the total rises to 12 of 16 schools.)

“We’re limiting ourselves,” the Pac-12 source said.

College athletics entered a new era last summer with the legalization of compensation to athletes for academic performance (via the Alston case) and through promotional opportunities in the private sector (name, image and likeness).

Both carry massive recruiting implications even if they aren’t supposed to be used as recruiting inducements.

In each case, Pac-12 campuses are moving more deliberately than many peers:

Only three schools reportedly are set to make cash payments for academic achievement, and several lack the donor collectives that underpin NIL endeavors.

For both matters, the willpower begins at the top, with the presidents and chancellors.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/07/p...nds-alone/



Wilner doesn't seem positive that the PAC could weather the transition to NIL and, possibly, pay-for-play as a collective.

Excerpt:

Quote:In the world of NIL, the rules of engagement are blurred, NCAA oversight is non-existent, and the cheating that used to occur under the table is now in plain sight — inevitable, unstoppable and, it appears, perfectly acceptable.

NIL opportunities weren’t supposed to be dangled as recruiting inducements for transfers or high school players but … wouldn’t you know it … are being dangled as recruiting inducements for transfers and high school players.

In fact, that has quickly become their primary purpose.

And at the highest levels of Pac-12 power, there are questions about the path forward — and if there should even be a path forward.

Should the schools become immersed in aspects of NIL that contradict the spirit of amateurism still alive in Ivory Towers across the conference?

“Some schools want to pursue football and basketball at the highest level,’’ a source said. “Other schools think that approach is destructive.”

If NIL remains unchecked for years to come — the NCAA has asked Congress for help regulating the marketplace — the Pac-12 eventually could cease to exist as we know it.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/06/a...ing-trail/

Kliavkoff has a really tough job to do to bring the PAC presidents into the new reality. The old model is dead but that shouldn't mean that they have to drop everything they believed in. Perhaps it would require building an alternative vision for the new college athletics, likely with the cooperation of the Big Ten. I get that some are reticent but it's not time to throw the baby out with the bathwater just yet.

If as expected pay for play becomes law, there will be no middle ground. You will either cease to play or pay for play. There is no middle ground, which is what I've been trying to get so many to see. You will either be in, or out. It's why I pointed out to Frank that division over this is in every house/conference. Ohio State, Penn State, Iowa, and Nebraska will do what they must, as will Oregon, Washington and some others out West. Vandy has a decision to make. I haven't just been making these issues up. They are real. It is why I said from the beginning some would opt out.

NIL has been much bigger than I expected. We are already in pay for play, just not directly. And it goes far beyond just football and basketball. Its why a 360+ Division I is not viable long term.
04-13-2022 12:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DawgNBama Offline
the Rush Limbaugh of CSNBBS
*

Posts: 8,320
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation: 446
I Root For: conservativism/MAGA
Location: US
Post: #8
RE: Pac-12 trying to adjust to NIL and the Alston ruling, per Wilner
(04-13-2022 12:38 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(04-07-2022 05:44 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(04-07-2022 05:27 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Jon Wilner today with two very revealing articles on the issues the conference is having over complying with two big changes in the last year.

First, the troubles within the PAC over how to adjust to the Alston ruling:

Quote:Falling: Pac-12 presidents and chancellors

Yet more evidence has surfaced this week to suggest conference leadership is hesitant to plunge into the world of compensation for athletes.

Last June, the Supreme Court ruled in Alston vs. NCAA that universities could provide up to $5,980 annually in academic-related compensation. This could come in the form of equipment and supplies or payments in exchange for classroom achievement.

Within months, the SEC presidents voted to allow schools to determine their methods for providing academic rewards; the conference then went public with the collective show of support.

Thus far, the Pac-12 has remained quiet. A conference source said the presidents, as a group, are wary of following the SEC’s path.

“(Commissioner George) Kliavkoff is doing as good a job as anyone could do under the circumstances,” the source said, “but it didn’t have the support.”

More details on the topic surfaced this week, when ESPN published a list of schools that have “plans in place” to provide academic bonuses this year.

Only three Pac-12 schools are committed to the process of rewarding players for classroom achievement, per ESPN: Colorado, Washington and Oregon.

Over in the SEC, there are 10. (If you include Oklahoma and Texas, which are set the join the league in a few years, the total rises to 12 of 16 schools.)

“We’re limiting ourselves,” the Pac-12 source said.

College athletics entered a new era last summer with the legalization of compensation to athletes for academic performance (via the Alston case) and through promotional opportunities in the private sector (name, image and likeness).

Both carry massive recruiting implications even if they aren’t supposed to be used as recruiting inducements.

In each case, Pac-12 campuses are moving more deliberately than many peers:

Only three schools reportedly are set to make cash payments for academic achievement, and several lack the donor collectives that underpin NIL endeavors.

For both matters, the willpower begins at the top, with the presidents and chancellors.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/07/p...nds-alone/



Wilner doesn't seem positive that the PAC could weather the transition to NIL and, possibly, pay-for-play as a collective.

Excerpt:

Quote:In the world of NIL, the rules of engagement are blurred, NCAA oversight is non-existent, and the cheating that used to occur under the table is now in plain sight — inevitable, unstoppable and, it appears, perfectly acceptable.

NIL opportunities weren’t supposed to be dangled as recruiting inducements for transfers or high school players but … wouldn’t you know it … are being dangled as recruiting inducements for transfers and high school players.

In fact, that has quickly become their primary purpose.

And at the highest levels of Pac-12 power, there are questions about the path forward — and if there should even be a path forward.

Should the schools become immersed in aspects of NIL that contradict the spirit of amateurism still alive in Ivory Towers across the conference?

“Some schools want to pursue football and basketball at the highest level,’’ a source said. “Other schools think that approach is destructive.”

If NIL remains unchecked for years to come — the NCAA has asked Congress for help regulating the marketplace — the Pac-12 eventually could cease to exist as we know it.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/06/a...ing-trail/

Kliavkoff has a really tough job to do to bring the PAC presidents into the new reality. The old model is dead but that shouldn't mean that they have to drop everything they believed in. Perhaps it would require building an alternative vision for the new college athletics, likely with the cooperation of the Big Ten. I get that some are reticent but it's not time to throw the baby out with the bathwater just yet.

If as expected pay for play becomes law, there will be no middle ground. You will either cease to play or pay for play. There is no middle ground, which is what I've been trying to get so many to see. You will either be in, or out. It's why I pointed out to Frank that division over this is in every house/conference. Ohio State, Penn State, Iowa, and Nebraska will do what they must, as will Oregon, Washington and some others out West. Vandy has a decision to make. I haven't just been making these issues up. They are real. It is why I said from the beginning some would opt out.

NIL has been much bigger than I expected. We are already in pay for play, just not directly. And it goes far beyond just football and basketball. Its why a 360+ Division I is not viable long term.

You'll get no argument from me on that!! However, try telling that to posters like dbackjon and ccd, and tell me how that goes!! They think it's just football!!!
(This post was last modified: 04-13-2022 01:56 PM by DawgNBama.)
04-13-2022 01:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,301
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #9
RE: Pac-12 trying to adjust to NIL and the Alston ruling, per Wilner
https://texassports.com/sports/2021/8/12...s-nil.aspx
Texas has a webpage devoted to it.
And Texas has a program starting with $10 million across all sports:

https://swimswam.com/university-of-texas...l-program/
04-14-2022 01:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.