New Rules for Power 5: How does this effect Nebraska?

[MichiganDad3]

If I read the article correctly, Power 5 schools can no longer pull scholarships, and they can offer full cost of attending school scholarships.

 

"Several of the student-athlete representatives spoke passionately against the proposal that prohibits the removal of a scholarship for athletic performance. They argued that such a rule could inhibit team chemistry and undermine coaches' authority. "People forget that it is our job to perform," Florida baseball player Josh Tobias said.

Ultimately, the scholarship proposal passed by three votes after receiving late support in the discussion period."

"Stipends, determined by institutions under federally created guidelines, have been estimated at $2,000 to $4,000 annually. They are designed to cover the cost-of-living expenses that fall outside athletic scholarships."

 

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/12185230/power-5-conferences-pass-cost-attendance-measure-ncaa-autonomy-begins

 

These measures will have a major impact. SEC schools will essentially absorb a loss in the number of scholarships, and non-power 5 schools will be at disadvantage because they are at a lower wage scale.

 

What do you think the impact will be?

[Hedley Lamarr]

Since we are one of the "haves" it won't hurt us

[MichiganDad3]

I'm thinking it will be easier to recruit SEC country and make it easier to lure recruits looking at non-power 5 conferences that are a long distance from Nebraska. It should also weaken the recruiting classes of SEC schools.

[Eric the Red]

Do all schools pay the same amount to each student-athlete?

 

If so, wouldn't Nebraska and other smaller cities have an advantage because of lower cost of living?

[Abdullah the Butcher]

Do all schools pay the same amount to each student-athlete?

 

If so, wouldn't Nebraska and other smaller cities have an advantage because of lower cost of living?

No cost of attendance is different at each school.

[Hayseed]

Have to think it's good for honest schools like Nebraska that try to treat their players right. I'm guessing some of those SEC schools are run by real lowlife scumbags who only care about the bottom line.

Not making them beggars should be good as well.

[mnhusker]

For the huskers I don't see it mattering. SEC not being able to cut players I think is a big deal. Less margin for error, smaller recruiting classes so not able to sift as many players, and have to live with mistakes for four years.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Have to think it's good for honest schools like Nebraska that try to treat their players right. I'm guessing some of those SEC schools are run by real lowlife scumbags who only care about the bottom line.

 

Not making them beggars should be good as well.

What they care about is winning... if they were cheap, they wouldn't pay their assistants and head coaches the most.

[Hayseed]

 

Have to think it's good for honest schools like Nebraska that try to treat their players right. I'm guessing some of those SEC schools are run by real lowlife scumbags who only care about the bottom line.

 

Not making them beggars should be good as well.

What they care about is winning... if they were cheap, they wouldn't pay their assistants and head coaches the most.

 

I mean they care about winning and the money it brings them no matter how it impacts the students.

[Kiyoat Husker]

This is good for B1G, good for student-athletes, bad for coaches and teams that make a practice of over-signing, like Saban and Miles in the SEC. The B1G has already had policies that prevent over-signing and cutting rosters pre-season based on performance. This just levels the field a bit against SEC cheaters.

 

The thing that I don't get is that the athlete delegates, at least some of them, tried to stop the proposal. Sometimes it's hard to see the big picture when you respect and are loyal to your coaches so intensely, and think there is no way they would do anything underhanded to gain a competitive advantage. Just like when players are almost always very upset when a coach is fired.

 

I understand the arguement that if players get lazy they shouldn't just be entitled to the scholarship, but coaches and schools will abuse the privilege of cutting scholarships. They already do in some places.

[Sargon]

Have to think it's good for honest schools like Nebraska that try to treat their players right. I'm guessing some of those SEC schools are run by real lowlife scumbags who only care about the bottom line.

 

Not making them beggars should be good as well.

 

Agree with this. It'll help NU a bit. The larger effect will be the negative effect it has on the few schools who have been much too aggressive with pushing guys out the door.