NCAA President Charlie Baker calls for new tier of Division I where schools can pay athletes
NCAA President Charlie Baker says he wants the association to create a new tier of Division I athletics where highly resourced schools would be required to offer at least half their athletes a payment of at least $30,000 per year.
apnews.com
When the Pac-12 was imploding the pit in my stomach was Stanford and Cal were going to be left out of the top tier of College Football. That concern was assuaged a bit by the ACC life raft, but I'm not naive and know the ACC is next on the chopping block. It's not like Stanford and Cal secured a spot at the highest level with their move. But even if the ACC survived, the question wasn't really would the ACC be a place to secure competing at the highest level, it was how does Stanford view big time sports participation in the long run? Will Stanford do what it takes to meet the requirements to compete at the highest level? How does it make sense to get your brains beat in by not doing what it takes to compete at the highest level of College Football? I still don't have a clue.
Last year, Notre Dame's AD said he sees it inevitable that schools would be paying players because it was clear NIL isn't the ultimate answer. Then The Hoover Institute interview with Luck and Rice feature Luck saying within 5 years athletes would be getting revenue from media rights deals. There was talk about how College Football needed to break away from the NCAA and do its own thing.
Now, this week, the NCAA President Charlie Baker has come out and said it is time to create a higher level of competition that includes schools directly paying players and administering NIL transactions. This is an absolute earthquake and it isn't being discussed here at all? Someone can feel free to make the argument that worrying about which football players return in 2024 is more important than understanding Baker's recommendation and how it will impact Stanford, but it will be a difficult one to make.
Baker is effectively saying he wants schools to be responsible for all payments to athletes and require them to make a minimum payment commitment to compete in the highest division of competition he envisions. This will allow schools to clawback some money brokering NIL deals that they have lost to NIL collectives that used to go direct to athletic departments, but more importantly, it will allow the NCAA to regulate the marketplace.
To me, if there is a different division of competition, it also opens up the possibility of one College Football Super League that makes the current conferences totally moot, and would allow geographic divisions. Baker's comments make it seem like he's calling for a show of hands. He wants all schools ready to pay players to raise theirs so they can be included in the professional division. It has kind of been an article of faith around Stanford fans that Stanford would never participate in a level of competition that requires paying athletes. I don't know if this is wishful thinking, guessing, or informed thinking. Stanford has been able to sort of punt and not address this question head on to this point, but here we are. Is Stanford in or out of paying athletes to participate at the highest level of college sports, and football in particular? Nobody here knows, but it's time Stanford be forced to answer the question, because it isn't any longer just a theoretical possibility.
I've got better things to do with my life than invest any time in Stanford sports if not participating at the highest level. So it isn't just a curiosity to know, it's something I want to know to plan my own life.
Last edited:
