Jump to content
lu_alum

Does New Legislation Level the 9.9 Playing Field?

Recommended Posts

Picking up topic from the Lehigh forum...

The NCAA has passed legislation that will have a huge impact on most non-revenue college sports.

As of Aug. 1, teams will be allowed to provide need- and merit-based aid to student-athletes without it counting toward a program’s athletic scholarship limit. This is particularly helpful for the Division I sports that are considered “equivalency” sports, which means they’re able to offer partial athletic scholarships.

 https://d1baseball.com/featured/ncaa-division-i-council-set-to-vote-on-huge-aid-changes/#:~:text=The%20NCAA%20Division%20I%20Council,against%20a%20team%27s%20scholarship%20limit.&text=“Especially%2C%20now%2C%20where%20every%20dollar%20counts%20for%20student%20athletes
 
 
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Edited by lu_alum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw this...  And I am not sure it will level the field.  It does help private schools compared to public schools that were able to count additional government aid.  But it will really only help schools with large financial aid packages.  So, yes, it will help Lehigh and Bucknell but it won't really help Gardner-Webb or Campbell.   It also will set back state schools that don't offer much non-athletic merit aid like the CSU-Bakersfield or Edinboro.

This might help to get more wrestlers to go D1 at the expense of D2 or NAIA programs, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


As of Aug. 1, teams will be allowed to provide need- and merit-based aid to student-athletes without it counting toward a program’s athletic scholarship limit. 
 

So with schools struggling financially, where does the money come from for this extra aid? I get it’s now “allowed” but where does the school actually get the money to do it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Idaho said:


As of Aug. 1, teams will be allowed to provide need- and merit-based aid to student-athletes without it counting toward a program’s athletic scholarship limit. 
 

So with schools struggling financially, where does the money come from for this extra aid? I get it’s now “allowed” but where does the school actually get the money to do it? 

Carl knows and has a plan.  ;_;

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it will do the opposite of leveling the playing field. Limits to scholarships help spread the talent around, at least a little bit. If a blue chip talent only costs half a scholarship now instead of a full scholarship, it means a top team can now afford two of them when they could only get one before. A team outside the top tier could in the past potentially outbid a better team for an A- or B+ recruit by offering more money. That gets harder now.

That said, this should result in more total athletes getting money and more athletes going to college for free. Competitive balance aside, this seems like a good thing.

Also, getting good grades is more important now for top recruits. If they can increase the academic merit money earned from a school, they can help their new team by taking up less athletic money while still going to school for close to free. If a coach has to pick between a guy getting a 25% merit award and one getting 50%, it's an easy call now, all else being equal. 

I do think it could be a benefit to the smaller schools with well under 9.9 scholarships because it will allow them to stretch their budget further. It won't upset the hierarchy at the top, but there are schools that could leverage this into more success than they had before.

Edited by IronChef

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Idaho said:


As of Aug. 1, teams will be allowed to provide need- and merit-based aid to student-athletes without it counting toward a program’s athletic scholarship limit. 
 

So with schools struggling financially, where does the money come from for this extra aid? I get it’s now “allowed” but where does the school actually get the money to do it? 

I thought merit-based aid was already stackable and not counted in D1 and D2. For need-based aid, wouldn't it come in the form of tuition and campus housing subsidies? It seems like the assistance would be offered at the expense of regular (non-sports) students who would need the financial assistance. The other thing is, since these are likely soft subsidies, an athletic department could leverage the benefit almost exclusively towards its revenue sports and potentially make recruiting in sports like wrestling even tougher, or make the rich even richer. Yes, I am cynical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, IronChef said:

I think it will do the opposite of leveling the playing field. Limits to scholarships help spread the talent around, at least a little bit. If a blue chip talent only costs half a scholarship now instead of a full scholarship, it means a top team can now afford two of them when they could only get one before. A team outside the top tier could in the past potentially outbid a better team for an A- or B+ recruit by offering more money. That gets harder now.

That said, this should result in more total athletes getting money and more athletes going to college for free. Competitive balance aside, this seems like a good thing.

Also, getting good grades is more important now for top recruits. If they can increase the academic merit money earned from a school, they can help their new team by taking up less athletic money while still going to school for close to free. If a coach has to pick between a guy getting a 25% merit award and one getting 50%, it's an easy call now, all else being equal. 

I do think it could be a benefit to the smaller schools with well under 9.9 scholarships because it will allow them to stretch their budget further. It won't upset the hierarchy at the top, but there are schools that could leverage this into more success than they had before.

Any school that was well under 9.9 could have used this strategy already and just counted the academic scholarship to the 9.9. There’s no doubt this benefits the big programs like Iowa/PSU/tOSU who can afford to carry a big roster and now will be able to funnel in extra recruits due to academic scholarships. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Billyhoyle said:

Any school that was well under 9.9 could have used this strategy already and just counted the academic scholarship to the 9.9. There’s no doubt this benefits the big programs like Iowa/PSU/tOSU who can afford to carry a big roster and now will be able to funnel in extra recruits due to academic scholarships. 

Academic scholarships haven't counted against 9.9 for a few years. This is about need based.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

Was there something preventing schools from offering “need and merit-based aid” previously?

No, but need is only what percentage their financial formula dictates. And can't be mixed with merit based or it all counted as merit based.

That's what this new potential legislation appears to change. Need and academic aid would not count under the 9.9.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, gimpeltf said:

No, but need is only what percentage their financial formula dictates. And can't be mixed with merit based or it all counted as merit based.

That's what this new potential legislation appears to change. Need and academic aid would not count under the 9.9.

 

Got ya, thanks.  I probably don’t understand it correctly, but as far as I can tell I agree with IronChef, I feel like it could probably be moreso a way for bigger schools to get more kids on scholarship.  But hopefully it results in more guys on college rosters, which would be a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IronChef said:

That said, this should result in more total athletes getting money and more athletes going to college for free. Competitive balance aside, this seems like a good thing.


I think you’re right on this point.  
 

But I think you’re off on your assessment of small schools.  If there is more money for athletes then that means athletes will go to their first choice programs now.

The top programs will pick up a few athletes they wouldn’t have in the past.  And everyone moves up a little.  So the programs at the bottom are left with even less talented rosters.  
 

A big offer to a recruit use to be a way of overcoming a lack of other resources in a program.  But if those athletes now have more money available to them it reduces the chances of them going to the program with less resources.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

But hopefully it results in more guys on college rosters, which would be a good thing.

Are you saying there are D1 programs that can’t fill their rosters with athletes?  
 

Or are you saying there are kids who want to wrestle in college and have the ability to be on a D1 roster who are sitting at home because they didn’t get a scholarship and this might make a scholarship available to them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Pinnum said:

Are you saying there are D1 programs that can’t fill their rosters with athletes?  
 

Or are you saying there are kids who want to wrestle in college and have the ability to be on a D1 roster who are sitting at home because they didn’t get a scholarship and this might make a scholarship available to them?

Mostly the second part.   Depends what you mean by “fill” for the first part.  I would think not all teams are at their roster limits right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1032004 said:

Mostly the second part.   Depends what you mean by “fill” for the first part.  I would think not all teams are at their roster limits right?

I think teams are at their roster limits at the beginning of the year but attrition can lead to some issues with shortages late in the year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Turns out this was also hidden in a more general notice of changes. I didn't realize it was in there by the headline.
This might also lead to scholarship number changes per sport.

Council members also adopted legislation that would exempt from counting against team limits need-based financial aid given by the school that meets other specific criteria and other school-given, merit-based awards with no relationship to athletics ability. The rule is effective Aug. 1, 2020.

In conjunction with passing the legislation, the Council asked the Student-Athlete Experience Committee, which recommended the change, to conduct a comprehensive review of financial aid rules, including counter numbers per sport, average equivalencies per sport and roster numbers per sport. The study will ensure the legislation is helping students as intended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/17/2020 at 10:43 AM, Pinnum said:

I saw this...  And I am not sure it will level the field.  It does help private schools compared to public schools that were able to count additional government aid.  But it will really only help schools with large financial aid packages.  So, yes, it will help Lehigh and Bucknell but it won't really help Gardner-Webb or Campbell.   It also will set back state schools that don't offer much non-athletic merit aid like the CSU-Bakersfield or Edinboro.

This might help to get more wrestlers to go D1 at the expense of D2 or NAIA programs, though.

I remember a former lower-level Division I coach once telling me that he could only offer the equivalent of about two scholarships because so much was eaten up by non-athletic aid, but it counted as the full 9.9.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SetonHallPirate said:

I remember a former lower-level Division I coach once telling me that he could only offer the equivalent of about two scholarships because so much was eaten up by non-athletic aid, but it counted as the full 9.9.

Which would mean that the school offered so much aid to the non-scholarship wrestlers on the roster that it was the equivalent of a large scholarship at other schools.  

The issue was merely that it took the equivalent of two scholarships to supplement ten athletes to full rides.  

That’s not a bad thing.  
 

That program will not likely be better off when those same athletes have other schools able to offer them full rides as well. Especially if they are more storied programs with more resources. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, gimpeltf said:

Turns out this was also hidden in a more general notice of changes. I didn't realize it was in there by the headline.
This might also lead to scholarship number changes per sport.

Council members also adopted legislation that would exempt from counting against team limits need-based financial aid given by the school that meets other specific criteria and other school-given, merit-based awards with no relationship to athletics ability. The rule is effective Aug. 1, 2020.

In conjunction with passing the legislation, the Council asked the Student-Athlete Experience Committee, which recommended the change, to conduct a comprehensive review of financial aid rules, including counter numbers per sport, average equivalencies per sport and roster numbers per sport. The study will ensure the legislation is helping students as intended.

Thanks for the info.  
 

It might be a good thing to lower the scholarship limit while allowing for stacking of scholarships.  
 

Reduce the number the coaching staff can give out but let the coaches stack their funding on top of what the financial aid office gave out.  
 

I think that would help maintain competitive balance while offering more to Individual athletes.  
 

Sounds like a good balance to me.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...