Big 5 one step closer to leaving NCAA

The biggest news of the day was the NCAA's decision to allow members of the Big 5 to create a new set of standards for staff, recruiting, academics and of course player compensation. The New York Times has a good breakdown of what it all means. The new guidelines are still vague enough that no one really knows what schools will do. Just assume that all of this will lead to an expanded arms race. If Alabama pays each student $2,000 annually and takes parents to the bowl games, you can be sure that all the other SEC schools will follow. And then all the other Big 5s will follow too. 

This all might seem like a losing proposition for BC with our smaller fanbase and smaller revenue streams, but I actually see a role for us. If the Big 5 really close ranks and only play each other, I think it will create a lot more parity. The bigger programs won't be able to pad win totals with cupcakes. That leads to more pressure to win and more coaching turnover. If we can play close to our historical norm, I think we will be much more stable and have our occasional runs of greatness. 

Reader Rog raised a question about hockey. The majority of hockey schools are not part of the Big 5. If BC and the hockey Big Ten pay, it might make college hockey awfully lopsided. But hockey is not the priority. It will be football first and then what can they do with March Madness.

The Big 5 doesn't provide lifetime membership, so there is always the chance that BC ends up out of the picture down the road. I will take that chance though since this move removes one more layer of hypocrisy.

Boston Politics get involved in college sports

With Former athletes suing the NCAA and Northwestern players exploring labor options, it is open season on taking on the hypocrisy of the NCAA. Now Boston City Councilor Josh Zakim wants to impose a “College Athlete Bill of Rights" on NCAA athletes that play within the city limits of Boston. His laws would apply to all schools but would have the biggest impact on BC since we host some of the most high-profile college teams in the country due to the ACC schedules. While I am for paying athletes and potentially disbanding the NCAA, I don't have much faith in Zakim's intentions or his motivation.

The issues that he's attacking are not really relevant to the current situation. Most athletes have plenty of time to graduate. A fifth year for players who don't work out on the field, is a small, small issue. Medically most of these guys are essentially covered year round. The head trauma debate is relevant, but I would say the NCAA and the teams in Boston are relatively ahead of the game. BC has been granting full medical waivers to head injury victims for two decades (think of Jim Unis). Why isn't Zakim mandating head injury policies for Massachusetts High School sports, the NHL, MLS, and NFL?

I don't mind attacking the system. But the real issue isn't health. It isn't safety. It's money. When Zakim figures out a way to mandate payment for players, then he will have my attention. Right now he just feels like someone trying to make a name for himself.

BC has a lot at risk in this process, but I predict these laws are a long way from being passed and then enforced.