@AaronGogley@BQuillmanQcast@CTSports_Guy@PopeAgency You are incorrect about Division 1. What you describe for division two and NAIA hold for most sports in division one. They have equivalent rosters, which means they have a scholarship amount limit.
@crankitshankit@mw_formation@samcehrlich Most D1 athletes aren’t on full rides, but even at 3%, full rides would break many D3’s and at the very least take scholarship money away from the academic merit pool.
@crankitshankit@mw_formation@samcehrlich And you don’t think adding scholarships for athletes adds costs to those programs? Where is the money coming from, again?
@WhatdoIputher3_@CoachD178 The bottom line seems to be that you are opposed to the D3 model. And that’s fine - if students want scholarship opportunities for their athletic prowess, there are schools that they can apply to. D3 is a different beast, and to get rid of that distinction would be a travesty.
@WhatdoIputher3_@CoachD178 Merit aid is for academics - ALL students have access to that, as well as need-based aid. If you as a college want athletic aid, then go to a division that offers it. The leadership of Division III have decided for themselves already how they want to give out merit aid.
@WhatdoIputher3_@CoachD178 But these athletes and scholars are already getting merit based aid. There is no need to create a separate category for the special class of athletes.
@WhatdoIputher3_@CoachD178 I know many, many D3 athletes. I support them wholeheartedly and know their priorities. I teach them and do research with them. None of them is going to school with crippling debt because they are getting need-based and merit-based aid.
@Hoosierfan1997@samcehrlich It's the very definition of a frivolous lawsuit. There is no reasonable expectation that every college offer the same kind of scholarship opportunities as every other one. Where is the "price fixing"? The whole basis of their suit is vacant.
@crankitshankit@mw_formation@samcehrlich But let's not pretend that a) those students wouldn't be replaced, b) that they're full payers as you implied beforehand, and c) that there aren't other handles that college administrations have. But sure, if you blanketly assume that if the athletes are gone, there is an issue.
@mw_formation@crankitshankit@samcehrlich Yep, there may be some tiny institutions for which that's the case. But this has nothing to do with the outrageous claim that the existence of student athletes "paying near full tuition" is the only thing keeping them alive.