[font=Helvetica][/font]
[font=Helvetica][size=2]Conference USA is cushioning the blow for its 14 members by offering each school $450,000 over three years to help in the transition.[/size][/font][font=Helvetica][/font]
Power conference schools have far more resources than mid-major schools such as ODU to pay for the cost of attendance because of lucrative TV contracts. Yet, even some power conference officials are concerned about the new rule.Auburn’s athletes will receive nearly $6,000 in stipends, nearly twice the average in the SEC.
Clemson football coach Dabo Swinney told USA Today that the new rule is well-intended, but also is a “nightmare.”“For one school to be able to pay $3,000 or $4,000 more than another school, that means at the end of the day, guys are going to make decisions for the wrong reasons. I don’t like where we are now.”
Neither does the Colonial Athletic Association, which opposed the legislation. William & Mary athletic director Terry Driscoll said after the legislation passed that there was “little appetite” among Football Championship Subdivision schools to pay the stipends.
Still, Liberty University, which has aspirations of moving to the Football Bowl Subdivision, has announced it will pay full stipends - the only FCS school to do so. It will give the Flames a recruiting advantage among the state’s seven FCS schools.
Liberty is a member of the Big South, which decided to offer stipends only in men’s and women’s basketball. But schools aren’t limited by conference decisions.
James Madison, a member of the CAA, estimates its cost of attendance stipend at $4,180 per athlete. Athletic director Jeff Bourne told the Richmond Times-Dispatch last week that he’s in the same situation as ODU - unsure of how much, if any, the Dukes, will pay.
The easy answer is the NCAA needs to pool all the money and pay it out to all athletes at the same price.
This will get fixed (or fixed by SEC standards) pretty quickly. No way the other SEC teams will tolerate Auburn being able to double them in stipends.
I read somewhere where UT was able to almost triple what UGA was paying. That’s messed up.
It will continue to escalate as well unless it’s capped by the NCAA. Providing stipends is a good idea, and long overdue. This implementation is not.
Football players at Auburn are taking a pay cut!?
I read somewhere where UT was able to almost triple what UGA was paying. That’s messed up.[/quote]
Most of these kids are getting a free education to play sports. These stipends are whats messed up.
I am a broken record on this, bur yes. Exactly.
I read somewhere where UT was able to almost triple what UGA was paying. That’s messed up.[/quote]
Most of these kids are getting a free education to play sports. These stipends are whats messed up.[/quote]
Sorry but that boat has sailed already.
I read somewhere where UT was able to almost triple what UGA was paying. That’s messed up.[/quote]
Most of these kids are getting a free education to play sports. These stipends are whats messed up.[/quote]
Sorry but that boat has sailed already.[/quote]
Perhaps so but just throwing my 2 cents in.
Do the schools get to pick which sports they will pay stipends for, and if so, which athletes? What about walk-ons? Where is the line drawn?
Based on my understanding the school does choose sports but same formula applies to any sports chosen Can’t do one amount for baseball and another for basketball or football. I also believe it is only applied to those on scholarship not sure about partial scholarship
That picking sports thing isn’t likely to survive title ix challenges
It shouldn’t and I don’t see how you say one sport gets it and another doesn’t. It needs to be everyone and both genders. Would be curious if app has to pay everyone if suddenly how they are factoring the amount gets adjusted.