Mark Schnabel: SportSpeak

Earlier this year, the NFL Players Association came out with a survey of the members concerning the league’s training facilities.

The Super Bowl Champion Kansas City Chiefs came in dead last.

A few days ago, the athletic director of my beloved alma mater Ohio State said he would be cutting the budgets of the non-revenue sports by $8 million. He announced no sports will be cut — as of now.

What do these two seemingly unrelated events have to do with the cost of rice in Malasia? Not a whole lot. What do they have to do with recent changes in college sports, which may soon include direct payment to athletes? Seemingly everything.

What could be the effect on the smaller colleges, such as the ones here in our area? It might not be all that bad.

The NCAA and member conferences will settle a lawsuit for $2.8 billion to provide previous athletes with income previously denied. NCAA members also will have to share future revenues to current and future athletes.

In the past couple of years, NIL (name, image and likeness) money has turned college athletics into a professional endeavor without some of the hindrances such as salary caps, contracts or drafts.

With all bets off, there is a chance that if you aren’t playing NCAA football or basketball in Division I, your sport may disappear.

Those football players are going to want your fair share and more since football brings in the most revenue.

As it relates to my alma mater, the women’s synchronized swimming team may have won 34 national team championships, more than any other sport at the school, but they are taking money away from the football team — as is men’s and women’s cross country, fencing, golf, gymnastics, ice hockey (including two of the last three NCAA women’s champions), lacrosse, rifle, pistol, soccer, swimming and diving, tennis, track and field, volleyball, wrestling, women’s field hockey, women’s rowing, women’s softball, women’s dance and co-ed spirit.

Since the courts are increasingly viewing Division I college athletes not as students, but employees, Title IX may go out the window. That means a school doesn’t have to ensure equal scholarship numbers between the genders. Schools may not even have to pay scholarships to any athlete. As an employee, an athlete may not even have to attend classes.

There is precedent for universities owning professional sports franchises. Two members of the top division of Mexican pro soccer (football) Liga MX are owned by universities.

On the bright side, since the player is an employee, dorms and meal plans won’t be needed, the football players can pay for room and board themselves.

This is where the Chiefs’ training facility comes into play.

Colleges have built palatial training and locker room facilities in recent years, mainly as a recruiting enhancement. In this new environment, why should a school build anything more than the basics. The athlete is going to determine his choice of school by how much money he is offered.

This probably won’t trickle down to the Division II, III and NAIA levels. (If it did, that would be the end of intercollegiate athletics at those levels). That should be good news for schools like Bethel.

The smaller schools will still be able to offer a full range of sports, maybe even expand those offerings. It also means the level of competition at the lower levels will increase.

Now I’m not saying everything I’ve predicted here will happen. We’re just in a state of major chaos and general disarray. Who knows what will happen.

Mark Schnabel is the sports editor for the Kansan and was a member of his college’s chess team, where players could claim prize monies (since it was not an NCAA sport) and has lifetime earnings of about $45, including something like $25 as the four-way champion of the Class D-E-Unrated Division of the 1980 Buckeye Open. It was a messy tie that couldn’t be broken.