Cost-Of-Attendance & Multi-Year Scholarships Approved

[ScriptOhio]

The game of collegiate athletics will, officially, never be the same again.

In a series of votes in the affirmative that have long been expected, a handful of initiatives were voted into effect at an NCAA convention in Washington D.C. Saturday afternoon. Among the initiatives that were approved were schools being required to make up the difference for the full cost of attendance that an athletic scholarship doesn’t cover as well as four-year guaranteed scholarship (with some stipulations).

The former proposal passed by a vote of 79-1, with the lone dissenter being a school from the ACC. The latter, which guarantees that scholarships can’t be reduced or canceled for athletics reasons, was not nearly as unanimous as both the Big 12 and SEC both voted against it. The multi-year scholarships will replace the current model, which had been a one-year scholarship renewable on a yearly basis.

And, in actuality, the scholarship guarantee came very close to not being approved.

Because of the guaranteed scholarship, schools will not be permitted to rid their roster of a player who they deem to be underachieving athletically. Academics or off-the-field issues, including but not limited to failed drug tests and arrests, would allow schools the opportunity to strip a player of his/her scholarship.

Of the 80 voters in attendance at the historic convention, 15 are student-athletes — three each from the Power Five conferences. The other 65 voters represent each of the Power Five schools, a group that includes, the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12, SEC and Notre Dame.

The measures adopted today apply only to the Power Five schools. However, conferences that make up the Group of Five could adopt the legislation as well.

Other measures that were voted on and approved included new concussion management protocols, allowing athletes to borrow against future earnings and allowing schools to purchase loss-of-value insurance for players without using student assistance fund. The last two initiatives passed unanimously while there were 16 votes against the concussion protocols because it was felt they didn’t go far enough to protect athletes.

Entire article: http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsport...-attendance-multi-year-scholarships-approved/

 

[woofermazing]

Buh bye SEC.

 

[ScriptOhio]

Power 5 leagues pass cost of attendance proposal, don't stop there

At the NCAA convention Saturday, the Power 5 agreed to the long-simmering proposal that will increase the value of athletic scholarships toward covering expenses beyond tuition -- the federally determined "full cost of attendance." The proposal passed 79-1, with a single ACC school voting against.

The exact dollar amount per scholarship is still to be determined, but University of Texas athletes, for example, will get $4,500 to $5,000 per year, according to the Austin American-Statesman. The scholarship will now be able to cover transportation and miscellaneous expenses in addition to tuition, room and board and books.

Entire article: http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...s-cost-of-attendance-proposal-dont-stop-there

 

[AuTX Buckeye]

tl, allowing athletes to borrow against future earnings
Entire article: http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsport...-attendance-multi-year-scholarships-approved/

That is very dangerous.. I really hope these kids are helped out in some way.... To many sharks in the pool for these guys to get accurate and fair advice.

 

[UpNorth_Buckeye]

That is very dangerous.. I really hope these kids are helped out in some way.... To many sharks in the pool for these guys to get accurate and fair advice.

I thought the same. I'm only assuming it has to be capped at a certain level. And if it says against future earnings, does that mean assuming equal playing field (all players have same future value)? Or a stud sophomore will get more than a bench player? And who determines that? Does NFL give ratings every year now, and not only to draft eligible?

 

[Palpie]

So which fellow acc school voted against their student athletes? Have to think that fact will come up with future recruits for that school.

 

[BUCKYLE]

So which fellow acc school voted against their student athletes? Have to think that fact will come up with future recruits for that school.

Fellow?

Unless the minutes are made public, the school could say they voted against it because it didn't go far enough

I'd like to think it was Miami and they didn't want an even playing field.

 

[Palpie]

Fellow?

Unless the minutes are made public, the school could say they voted against it because it didn't go far enough

I'd like to think it was Miami and they didn't want an even playing field.

Ga tech is my school so, yeah fellow. Just odd that they'd mention an acc school voted no, but not say which one.

 

[Mike80]

Other measures that were voted on and approved included new concussion management protocols, allowing athletes to borrow against future earnings and allowing schools to purchase loss-of-value insurance for players without using student assistance fund. The last two initiatives passed unanimously while there were 16 votes against the concussion protocols because it was felt they didn’t go far enough to protect athletes.

Entire article: http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsport...-attendance-multi-year-scholarships-approved/

Because borrowing money on something that may or may not happen is ALWAYS the best way to go about things....borrowing on speculation is a sure way to fuck yourself.

There is clearly a need that has been determined, but hopefully the other parts (insurance, cost allowance increases, etc) are far more utilized than what amounts to a payday loan without an actual paycheck.

 

[BUCKYLE]

Ga tech is my school so, yeah fellow. Just odd that they'd mention an acc school voted no, but not say which one.

Honestly didn't know you were a Ramblin' Wreck. I thought you were a Buckeye.
Makes way more sense.

I wonder if it were say....Duke that voted against it, would the fact they're a private school somehow keep it from being reported. Kinda like how private schools don't have to deal with the whole FOIA.

 

[Palpie]

Honestly didn't know you were a Ramblin' Wreck. I thought you were a Buckeye.
Makes way more sense.

I wonder if it were say....Duke that voted against it, would the fact they're a private school somehow keep it from being reported. Kinda like how private schools don't have to deal with the whole FOIA.

Was born a buckeye, chose to become a ramblin wreck.

Wake or miami would make the most sense as they probably are the two ads most likely to not want to take on the added expenses.

 

[BUCKYLE]

Ok, now it makes perfect sense.

Or Miami because they'd have paperwork to file when their players are paid. Such a hassle.

 

[SloopyHangOn]

So which fellow acc school voted against their student athletes? Have to think that fact will come up with future recruits for that school.

Most smoke evidences Boston College as the school in question.

Which makes sense. Boston's expensive.

 

[woofermazing]

That is very dangerous.. I really hope these kids are helped out in some way.... To many sharks in the pool for these guys to get accurate and fair advice.

The article had an error, they can borrow against future earnings only to purchase loss-of-value insurance.

 

[Steve19]

Heads up for SEC athletes. If you're not in the two-deep, bring your own water bottle to practice and keep it under your control at all times. Prepare your own food.