[82lsju]

Probably

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/27/t...t-schools/

From the Mercury-News:
“If SB-1401 becomes law, which seemingly could happen as soon as 2023, the requirements could place the California schools in the Pac-12 and Mountain West conferences at a significant financial disadvantage, create massive Title IX complications and threaten the long-term viability of Olympic sports, from softball to swimming to tennis.“
The proposal is to look at profits generated by sport. So this practically applies only to Men’s football and basketball and maybe women’s basketball. The example given was to take 50% of the profit generated by the sport, subtract scholarships and the balance would then then be allocated per athlete to a fund for degree completion.

I actually think this could be implemented in a way (and maybe the current proposal as such will need modifications) that won't result in massive reductions in the number of sports (I think the goal of this is constrain the massive increases in coaches salaries in these three sports). Now, will that make Pac football and basketball not competitive relative to the rest of the country if the Pac is paying a fraction of the other conferences to coaches? Probably.

I imagine this will also, like NIL, be passed pending movement on these issues elsewhere in the country (i.e. California won't do it unilaterally).

Also, softball is no longer a low revenue sport (see the ratings and attendance for just the WCWS for example). I think our recent investments in our stadium, payments for tickets, and the endowment of Coach Merchant's position show softball is closer to women's basketball than it is to other sports.

given the relatively high graduation rates for Stanford athletes I would think this would not be as big a problem here as elsewhere.

[82lsju]

Probably

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/27/t...t-schools/

From the Mercury-News:
“If SB-1401 becomes law, which seemingly could happen as soon as 2023, the requirements could place the California schools in the Pac-12 and Mountain West conferences at a significant financial disadvantage, create massive Title IX complications and threaten the long-term viability of Olympic sports, from softball to swimming to tennis.“
The proposal is to look at profits generated by sport. So this practically applies only to Men’s football and basketball and maybe women’s basketball. The example given was to take 50% of the profit generated by the sport, subtract scholarships and the balance would then then be allocated per athlete to a fund for degree completion.

I actually think this could be implemented in a way (and maybe the current proposal as such will need modifications) that won't result in massive reductions in the number of sports (I think the goal of this is constrain the massive increases in coaches salaries in these three sports). Now, will that make Pac football and basketball not competitive relative to the rest of the country if the Pac is paying a fraction of the other conferences to coaches? Probably.

I imagine this will also, like NIL, be passed pending movement on these issues elsewhere in the country (i.e. California won't do it unilaterally).

Also, softball is no longer a low revenue sport (see the ratings and attendance for just the WCWS for example). I think our recent investments in our stadium, payments for tickets, and the endowment of Coach Merchant's position show softball is closer to women's basketball than it is to other sports.

given the relatively high graduation rates for Stanford athletes I would think this would not be as big a problem here as elsewhere.