Jon Joseph No. 1 Share Posted April 19 (edited) I know that the NCAA has often voiced that "THIS", whatever "THIS" is from time to time poses an existential threat to college sports. IMO, and the opinion of many folks more invested in college sports than I am, the House case truly poses an existential threat. I'm afraid I have to disagree with the plaintiff's counsel's statement that there is plenty of money to cover the possible 4B dollars in damages from the Hosue case and that nonrevenue sports will not have to be eliminated, should the plaintiffs in the House case prevail. The lawyer's statement that athletic directors are paid $3.5M a year and that athletic programs are flush with cash is nonsense. I do agree that if this case is to be settled, it will have to be settled by the Power 4 conferences and more likely, the Power 2 conferences. The programs most affected by a House win. The majority of NCAA member institutions do not have a dog in this fight. For example, the Big Sky Conference and the conference Linfield plays in are not named defendants. Oregon will come out of 'whatever' just fine but many programs may have to make drastic changes to field varsity and not club sports. Meet the man responsible for bringing disorder to college athletics ... and who could shape its future SPORTS.YAHOO.COM Jeffrey Kessler is the lead attorney in what is shaping up to be the most revolutionary case in NCAA history. "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers." Dick Butcher, Henry VI. (But please skip the retired lawyers.) Edited April 19 by Jon Joseph Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solar No. 2 Share Posted April 19 I agree Jon. College athletics can adapt to revenue stream changes, but only if there is time to adapt. Getting hit over the head with a 4B dollar bill at the same time you are reacting to the revenue changes that are hitting over just a few years time puts the future of non revenue sport in great peril. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
