What does the NCAA antitrust settlement mean for the future of Track & Field/Cross Country

Exactly my thoughts^^^

I wonder if the athletes fighting for this are aware of the effects it's going to have on college sports? I'm all for athletes getting paid and I think a lot of my coworkers are too but even at the top level of college sports we truly do not have the money to spend more. I work at a major school and we're swimming in debt with no end in sight.

Don’t forget the NCAA has dog in this fight as well, though they certainly care more about the revenue sports part of their power is governing over all sports - there is a reason they have set up the min sports to be in d1 - as many have suggested, it would not surprise me if the P5 break away & police themselves and then rest of D1, 2, &3 gets the NCAA and essentially mirror much of what we see today with limits on scholarships and a limited revenue stream for athletes.

There is going to be a certain ration/balance tho.
Obviously not as much. No school will just have football n basketball $.
I get your point tho.

There are multiple lawsuits "resolved" by this and multiple other lawsuits and potential lawsuits. The results of these suits are as clear as mud. The NCAA has definitely been identified as an organization which (along with its major college members) has committed an unlawful restraint of trade with respect to the terms of "employment" of student-athletes. The courts so far have not identified "employment" practices by the NCAA (and major colleges) that are not illegal (short of actually making the student athletes actual employees of the universities). It also isn't clear whether the rulings that apply to big time sports also will apply to the lesser DI and DII/DIII schools. For these schools it would seem to be wise to not give athletic scholarships at all, or any other form of special financial compensation to enrolled students who happen to be athletes. The "minor" sports at all schools, and especially "Power 5" type schools, are going to be heavily impacted.

the majority of the athletes are blissfully ignorant about where this is going.

they can't limit revenue streams. that is one of the major issues.

I agree. Based on the present outlook (as murky as that is), D3 appears to be the most stable in terms of coaching job security moving forward.

While a potential positive for those in that division, a negative consequence could evolve.

With less D1, D2 coaching positions the demand for D3 positions may increase - and the already low paying positions at many of these D3 schools will continue as ADs realize there is a greater pool of qualified candidates willing to work for less.

Alumni donors care about football, even for teams routinely ending up with losing records. Do the alumni still donate - you might have to eat the cost if the alumni donations are high enough.

And it sounds like the employee status / workers compensation issue is still big unknown

The Legendary Olympics Four schools will continue to lead the Olympic T&F Medal Count. I just wonder why UC Berkeley doesn't want any Olympic events at the 2028 Los Angeles Summer Olympics when Stanford and UCLA will assist USC the main host, headquarters, and command center for the games.

Listening to somewhat intelligent sports talk radio footballers and their reps have already been saying that all the money generated from male bball and fball should stay in their sports - not to fund all non-revenue sports.

I predict in 5 years that state sponsored schools will no longer have bball or fball and they will be privatized. Parents of non-athletes will not want to have any of their money not helping to fund anything but their kids education.

The Austin Peay model is even more cynical than the Vanderbilt model. Vandy makes a token effort, then sticks their hand out for that big SEC check every year. AP doesn't even have that, so they just recruit a bunch of guys that arent even good enough to walk on at the big schools, and send them out to get their brains ripped out by the big boys 3-4 times per year, just to get a percentage of the gate and big pay day.

They then use that money to help fund other sports.

Sorry, but even somewhere far from the P5 or FBS like Eastern Washington or Northern Illinois, the football program has far greater draw and is a rallying point for students and alumni fundraising alike than any or all of their Olympic sports combined. I don't even like football and I get that.

I'm trying to fact check some of these posts as I prepare to teach a unit on this in an Introduction to Sport Management course this fall. I'm sure these changes will be a hot topic.

The Vanderbilt model will be discussed, and I agree that Austin Peay is similar interms of offering 6 men's teams (and a few with very small rosters) as compared to 9 women's teams. Vanderbilt offers 6 and 10 (as an FBS they need 16 teams).

I'm not finding the part about getting their "brains ripped out by the big boys" though. Do they play one "payday game" a year? Yes. But so do all the mid-majors.

Recent losses:

2023: Southern Illinois, Tennessee, Chattanooga (playoff game)

2022: Western Kentucky, Central Arkansas, Jacksonville State, Alabama

2021: Ole Miss, Eastern Kentucky, Tennessee State, Southeast Missouri, UT Martin

Parents of both athletes and non athletes have never wanted their money funding anything but their kids' education now and it never has been. Funding for athletic departments comes from revenue generated by teams, mainly football and basketball, from alumni and booster contributions, or from student activity fees. You could sort of argue that the activity fees are financing something other than students' education but money generated by those fees finances a lot more than athletic programs many of which are educational, speaker series, campus radio and newspaper and who knows what else, which includes some funding for athletic teams. But that is just the nature of universities these days.

And rightfully so. If football and basketball want to make a doofus minor league with name of universities on their shirts, let them do it, but I don't see why anybody should contract studend debts to help fund them. Let them compete with the NBA G-League or whatever football minor league if they want to, but not with students money.

Incorrect - A sports fee is included yearly on what you pay the school. This past year was a llittle over $600

I have been seeing a lot of the anti-NCAA movement being lead by non-revenue/olympic sport athletes the last few years (this particular lawsuit was brought by a college swimmer and a women's basketball player, and there is a prominent former UCLA distance runner who has been leading another athletes' right movement) and I have been wondering if those kids are aware that they are actually contributing to the demise of their sports at the D1 level as we know them.

Consider the average track or swimming athlete that has a scholarship. Add up the value of that 4 year scholarship, the value of all team-issued gear, sports medicine department, and free coaching on top of other things. Whatever number you come up with is astronomically higher than the money that that athlete generated for their school or the NCAA. That athlete's program without a doubt operates at a substantial loss, and is subsidized by money generated by others.

As others have pointed out, it looks like the gravy train may leave the station in the next few years.