The salary of the capping college coaches was discussed in the congressional hearing


The Chancellor of Power Five University and at least one US senator say they are among those who believe the NCAA should limit the amount of college coaches.

Chancellor Rebecca Blanc at the University of Wisconsin-Madison testified Tuesday morning at a Senate hearing that she would be “more than happy” to discuss the possibility of an antitrust law waiver that would give colleges the power to curb rapidly rising salaries . Coach in college sports.

“I think it’s appropriate for college sports,” Blanc told members of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. “I think it’s somewhat outrageous that the highest-paid employee in many states is their state university college coach.”

Blanc was one of four witnesses at the latest of a series of congressional hearings held this year to discuss whether the federal government should be involved in deciding whether federal athletes should be allowed to make money. Blanc called for assistance in providing legislation that would put railings on the path to funding available to college athletes when they are allowed to benefit from their names, pictures and likenesses.

As soon as state laws come into force next summer, it is expected to expand the ways in which college athletes can make money. The NCAA and other college sports stakeholders have asked Congress to enact uniform rules for all 50 states. College leaders have said that the rule should ban athletes in ways that coaches and others in college sports are not prohibited.

Blanc in his opening remarks did not include the ability to cap coaching salaries amid requests made to the committee. He said he was open to consideration after being asked by Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy. Why would Wisconsin not redistribute part of the money paid to football coaches among the players on that team.

Tennessee Sen. Lamar Alexander, chairman of the committee, said he also hopes the NCAA will ensure that athletes “get increased revenue, rather than higher salaries for athletes and administrators.” However, Alexander said that he wanted advertisers and other sponsors to continue to flow through schools rather than have the opportunity to directly pay money to athletes.

“I really don’t want to see individual athletes have the opportunity to profit while they are student-athletes by their name image and likeness,” Alexander said. “They want to be rewarded for their name, image and likeness, but in my view those dollars, like most endorsement dollars in most institutions, should be distributed for the benefit of all student-athletes at that institution.”

A previous effort by the NCAA to limit the salaries of some of the college’s assistant coaches was terminated by a judge, stating that they were in violation of antitrust laws. In the early 1990s, the NCAA raised the salaries of some lower-level assistant coaches to $ 12,000 per year. The practice came to an end after a federal judge ordered the NCAA to pay $ 66 million to those assistants and declared that it was illegally competing in the coaching market by placing a similar threshold of any kind What schools can offer to their coaches.

Murphy, who has been one of Congress’ biggest NCAA critics in the past year, said it was “absurdly absurd” that the rules could impose a cap on coach compensation but a cap on player compensation Please allow. Murphy said he is in favor of expanding the ways that college athletes can share in the profits of a multibillion dollar industry as well as adding other protections for athletes related to their health and education while they are in college. Are in

Murphy suggested that reducing coaching salaries could be a way to calm the fears of many in college sports, who say that allowing athletes to make more money would jeopardize the future of teams that the athletic department Do not make money for Some trainers and administrators say they are concerned that if sponsors can pay athletes directly, that money will only go to a select few athletes, who instead of passing through schools, who support students with greater opportunities Can distribute funds to do.

Karen Dennis, who oversees cross country and track programs at Ohio State, told members of Congress that unrestricted name, image, and rights to equality could have serious negative consequences for her team. Dennis was the first head coach to serve as a witness at this year’s hearing on the subject. He said he feared that “athletic departments may be forced to completely eliminate non-revenue-generating sports.”

It is not possible to estimate how much the revenue of the athletic department of the colleges will be affected by college athletes being able to make money. Some athletes, such as National Collegiate Players Association founder Ramogi Huma, who was one of the witnesses at Tuesday’s hearing, say it is wrong to assume that the athletic department will lose money at all.

Ohio State’s athletic department spent more than $ 220 million in the 2019 fiscal year. The spending of the six teams overseeing Dennis was less than 2% of the total department spending. The coaching salary for the same year totaled $ 39.3 million – or about 18% of expenses. Coaches and staff salaries are often among the largest annual expenses for most of the athletic department. For example, Wisconsin approved the 2020 athletic budget before the $ 186 million coronovirus epidemic, going into total salaries (benefits and benefits).

Dennis, one of 13 head coaches at Ohio State who earns more than $ 200,000 per year, told the Senate committee that sports like him depend on the money generated by the Buckeyes football and basketball teams. Asked whether Ohill State would have to abolish non-revenue sports in response to changes in NIL rules, an athletic department spokesman said: “We will allow Karen’s testimony to stand on its own.”

The spokesman also said that athletic director Jean Smith was not available to comment on Blanc’s view that the NCAA should consider how many coaches are allowed to make. The athletic department of Wisconsin did not immediately respond to questions from Blanc’s testimony.

    .

Leave a Reply