This blog is set up for the HHP 126, HHP 157, HHP 420, and HHP 428 courses along with other Sports Students as a way to communicate with fellow classmates and faculty members
A federal judge has ruled that South Dakota's lawsuit against the NCAA should proceed in state court, after the association previously sought to have the case moved to federal jurisdiction.
South Dakota's attorney general Marty Jackley originally filed suit in September on behalf of the state's two Division I schools—the University of South Dakota and South Dakota State—accusing the NCAA of breaching its constitution, bylaws and fiduciary duties to its members by agreeing without membership's vote to a $2.8 billion settlement to resolve the House v. NCAA, Hubbard v. NCAA and Carter v. NCAA antitrust cases.
South Dakota's suit argues that non-Power 4 Division I schools, such as USD and SDSU, who were not named defendants in those antitrust cases, are being inequitably burdened by their settlement's damage allocation model. A fairness hearing before U.S. District Court Judge Claudia Wilken, for final approval of the settlement, is scheduled next week.
If approved, approximately 60% of the back-pay damages outlined in the settlement agreement would be funded by reducing annual revenue distributions to schools. The extent of these reductions for individual schools would depend on the NCAA distributions their conferences received between 2016 and 2024.
According to the NCAA, non-Power 4 members would experience about a 1% to 2% reduction their total athletics revenue.
In a 12-page order issued late last week, U.S. District Court Judge Karen E. Schreier remanded South Dakota's case back to the state circuit court, where it had originally been filed. In turn, Jackley filed a motion Monday for a preliminary injunction in Brookings County, seeking to block the NCAA from withholding funds from the state's two Division I schools to cover the settlement costs.
"Having profited handsomely from their student athletes for decades, the Power 4 schools can better afford their proportionate share of the damages than publicly funded state universities like the University of South Dakota, South Dakota State University and hundreds of other state schools," the motion stated, echoing the arguments made in the original lawsuit.
An NCAA spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
"We intend to stop the NCAA from forcing South Dakota's Universities and students to be responsible for $8 million in the NCAA's mistake," Jackley said in a statement.
South Dakota's D-I schools compete in the Football Championship Subdivision, where they have enjoyed competitive success. Both schools' football teams advanced to NCAA FCS semifinals last season and SDSU's women's basketball team pulled off an impressive first-round NCAA tournament upset this month against Oklahoma State.
The NCAA sought to move South Dakota's case to federal court, arguing that some of its state law counts raised significant federal issues including one, in particular, addressing Title IX. South Dakota, in turn, removed the gender-equity count in an amended complaint and motioned to have the case returned to state court, where it is more likely to survive dismissal.
In arguing for state jurisdiction, the plaintiffs referenced the failed attempt by Houston Christian University to directly intervene in House, while raising similar issues over the settlement. Judge Wilken denied the school's motion, ruling that the university had not demonstrated the court's jurisdiction over the matter
Judge Schreier's ruling last week noted that Wilken's decision against Houston Christian University "bolstered" her own determination to allow the South Dakota case to proceed in state court. Concluding that a dispute over a settlement agreement "is a dispute under state contract law," she rejected the NCAA's argument that the original class actions' federal nature should dictate the venue for South Dakota's suit.
South Dakota's legal challenge is just one of several battles that will continue to plague the NCAA even if it successfully resolves House. Just last week, attorneys representing the prospective class in Fontenot v. NCAA, an antitrust case closely mirroring House, filed an amended complaint, adding 292 plaintiffs.
Meanwhile, lawyers advocating for current and former female college athletes—some of whom have formally objected to the settlement—have publicly signaled their intent to launch Title IX litigation if the agreement moves forward. Adding to the NCAA's legal woes is the ongoing Johnson v. NCAA class action suit, originally filed in 2019, which argues that college athletes should be considered employees of their universities.
(This has been updated with a statement from Jackley and in the third and fourth paragraphs with additional context about how the House v. NCAA settlement.)
The Hotline mailbag publishes weekly. Send questions to wilnerhotline@bayareanewsgroup.com and include 'mailbag' in the subject line. Or hit me on the social media platform X: @WilnerHotline
Some questions have been edited for clarity and brevity.
The Pac-12 is telling us that none of the available schools will move the media rights needle, so what's the reason for waiting to add a team to become compliant with NCAA regulations? Will the dollars impact the teams they add? The Mountain West expanded first, so there's precedent for doing it that way. — @brycetacoma
The Mountain West was operating from a position of weakness, having been raided and fighting for survival, while the Pac-12 is operating from a position of (relative) strength with its core intact for the next media rights cycle. Those differing dynamics account for the contrasting strategies since September.
In terms of the Pac-12's broad strategy, it's critical to recognize that the media rights negotiations and the membership question are, to a large extent, unfolding together.
The conference has a list of schools under consideration. It's a matter of wrapping up expansion once the media rights deal is secure, not starting from scratch.
Another key point: There are some expansion scenarios that would increase the media value more than others.
For instance, adding Memphis, Tulane and South Florida would generate more media dollars than only adding Texas State. But none of the scenarios will change the valuation in a meaningful way. The delta is a few hundred thousand dollars annually, not a few million.
Yes, the Pac-12 is following the same misguided strategy that led to its demise a few years ago. Had the conference added San Diego State and SMU immediately after USC and UCLA departed, it could very well be intact today.
But the circumstances are wildly different this time, and prioritizing the media deal over membership makes sense.
Why? Because the most important piece to the survive-and-thrive equation isn't the TV dollars; it's the TV exposure.
The rebuilt Pac-12 must partner with a linear TV network for its football product. Whether that's The CW or ESPN or Fox or Turner, exposure is everything over the second half of the decade as conferences compete for College Football Playoff access and schools audition for the sport's Great Restructuring in the 2030s.
Also, the media valuation could impact which schools are pursued. Some targets would demand full-share status; others would not. If the media deal lands on the low end of projections, the conference might opt to offer partial shares, thereby creating more dollars for the core eight.
Some basic math illustrates the point:
Let's imagine the Pac-12 agrees to a media deal with multiple partners for $75 million annually, which is on the low end of the target range, according to sources.
Split equally for nine schools, that's $8.3 million per campus per year. (Gonzaga receives a full share even though it does not compete in football.)
But if Texas State enters the conference as a quarter-share member, the Bobcats would receive $2.1 million and the remaining schools would split the rest. That's an additional $775,000 per year — not insignificant.
Again, the media valuation is one component. In addition to linear exposure, the conference must view everything through the lens of the College Football Playoff. Which school, or combination of schools, best positions the Pac-12 to earn the automatic bid reserved for the top team outside the Power Four?
At a certain level, all the issues addressed here (and more) are interconnected.
Regarding Pac-12 expansion: Is there a "3" with an eye toward other non-football schools? For example, Saint Mary's has plenty of basketball success and the Bay Area market. Another option would be Seattle, which is also in a major market not represented in the conference. — Josh F
Speaking of issues the Pac-12 must address, here's yet another: The degree to which it should focus on basketball, both with media rights and membership.
Here's where we enter the realm of cognitive dissonance:
The rebuilt Pac-12 should be a very good basketball conference — better on the court, perhaps, than on the field (thanks largely to Gonzaga's presence). What's more, there are more quality basketball schools than football schools potentially available in expansion scenarios.
With that framing, focusing on basketball makes sense. Why not add one school in all sports, to meet the requirements, and three non-football schools for a total of 12 basketball programs?
There's one hurdle, and it's significant. Basketball is responsible for just 20 cents of every media rights dollar, and an industry source noted recently that the figure could, in fact, be closer to 15 cents.
The only non-football school that pays for itself is already committed (Gonzaga). We aren't convinced the basketball-centric schools (Saint Mary's, Seattle and even Grand Canyon) are worthwhile at reduced revenue shares.
The discrepancy in valuation between football and basketball is enormous.
What is the latest on the Pac-12/Mountain West lawsuit? — @Jimmy0726
That depends on how closely you have been following the situation.
The Pac-12 and Mountain West filed a joint motion in the Northern District of California to stay the case March 14, approximately two weeks before U.S. Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen was to hear the Mountain West's motion to dismiss. (Our sources believe she would have allowed the case to continue.)
There have been no filings since then as the sides discuss mediation.
The Pac-12 issued the following statement at the time of the motion to stay:
"To safeguard the well-being and interests of our student-athletes, on September 24, 2024, the Pac-12 Conference initiated legal action against the Mountain West Conference for imposing unlawful 'Poaching Penalties' on the conference.
"Today, at the request of the Mountain West Conference, the Pac-12 has agreed to file a mutual 60-day order to stay in the case to discuss mediation options. It is important to state that we are in the early stages; no mediation dates have been set, and mediation is still uncertain.
"The Pac-12 remains confident in our position that the Poaching Penalty will be declared invalid and is committed to defending our stance."
And remember, there are two cases unfolding simultaneously, with the Mountain West as the defendant in both: The Pac-12's poaching penalty lawsuit and the exit fee case filed by Utah State, Colorado State and Boise State.
They will be addressed in totality by mediation, if all sides commit to solving the disputes outside the courtrooms.
Fair question, and we can offer a two-part response:
— The vast majority of questions about travel are focused on football and men's basketball.
— The UCLA and USC women's basketball teams are outliers.
They have overwhelming talent and, as a result, are poor reflections of the competitive challenges we foresee over time in Los Angeles and along the West Coast.
Perhaps Lincoln Riley (USC football) and Mick Cronin (UCLA basketball) will reach that point in the near future. Their programs have the requisite tradition and recruiting prowess. But we'll believe it, and address it, when we see it.
Andrew Luck seemed to support Troy Taylor during Stanford's Pro Day last week. Do we presume he had prior knowledge of the two investigations into Taylor? If so, should we question his judgment after the about-face when the ESPN story broke? — @Brian_Wood45
Stanford's handling of the situation absolutely deserves scrutiny, and that includes Luck's role, but let's start broadly.
Luck was hired in late November. We don't know what he knew about the two investigations into Taylor's conduct during discussions with president Jonathan Levin and what he learned after taking the role.
His session with the media occurred March 20, hours before ESPN's report broke. Did he know, while answering questions, that the story was about to be published?
It's also possible Luck wanted to make a change before ESPN's article but was overruled by Levin and/or university attorneys. We simply don't know.
But it's clear he and the university were swayed more by optics than substance. Frankly, Stanford's handling of the matter is embarrassing.
Let's also remember that Luck is a retired football player, not an experienced manager of people and departments. Also, the Cardinal currently lacks an athletic director.
It's a giant, stinkin' mess of Stanford's own making.
The makeup of the Sweet 16, with so many teams from the SEC, Big Ten and Big 12, is more evidence that the NCAA is broken. The western teams should split and form a new conference with new rules, money and a tournament. Something like the NFL/AFL model. — @BonitaVista1971
The central problem with your premise is that it would not be comparable to the NFL and AFL co-existence in the pre-merger era.
It would be more like the NFL and the CFL.
The western half of the country doesn't have nearly as many schools or championships as the eastern.
It has precious few major brands in football and men's basketball.
It lacks the resources and media dollars.
It would instantly be relegated to a secondary existence.
After all, the breakup of the Pac-12 began with USC and UCLA departing for the Big Ten — and all the revenue and media exposure the conference had to offer.
Where will Kyle Whittingham rank on the list of all-time college football coaches? — @utahfootballgm
It's difficult, if not impossible, to make the case Whittingham belongs on a short (or mid-sized) list of the best coaches in history. Not without a national title or a major bowl win — much less without multiple major bowl wins.
Is he one of the top 50? Maybe. We would have to take a deep dive. The sport is 150-something years old and, for the bulk of that time, has featured hundreds of teams. The candidate pool is hundreds of coaches deep.
But Whittingham has been one of the elite coaches for the past decade if judgement is based on maximizing a program's resources, winning consistently and exceeding the historical standard for success.
He built on Urban Meyer's foundation and won on the big stage, which helped the Utes gain admission to the Pac-12.
He then elevated the program to an unprecedented tier with back-to-back conference titles and Rose Bowl bids and regular finishes in the top 25.
In addition to the quantifiable standards, Whittingham's teams just look extremely well-coached. The Utes have been a model for numerous programs over the years.
In our estimation, only Chris Petersen has commanded the level of respect given to Whittingham over the years (among coaches in the western half of the country).
And eventually, Whittingham, like Petersen, will be elected into the Hall of Fame.
Unsubscribe from LiveTrack updates from Sean Mcandrews.
Do not reply to this message. It was sent from a notification-only address that cannot accept incoming email. Find contact information on our Contact Us page.
We respect your right to privacy and share your concern about the security of any information you may submit. For more information, see the Garmin Privacy Policy.
'You can't create 18-year-olds': What can colleges do amid demographic upheaval?
Raising retention and attendance rates, and accommodating diverse student bodies, could take on existential importance as the number of traditional-age students falls.
This is a moment for higher education 18 years in the making.
By the latest estimates, 2025 will be the year that the number of high school graduates peak.The long-dreaded demographic cliff — caused by declining birth rates starting in 2007 — is coming.
But the coming decline in traditional-aged college students might not be a "cliff," exactly, and it doesn't necessarily spell a disaster for the nation's colleges.
In its latest forecasts of future high school graduate numbers, the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Educationdescribed a more gradual drop over the next 15 years than the cliff metaphor suggests, though it also projected a slightly larger decline overall than previously expected.
"The decline is coming," Patrick Lane, report co-author and WICHE's vice president of policy analysis and research, said during a February panel at an American Council on Education event in Washington, D.C. "Whether it looks like a cliff or sort of a slowly sliding downward trend … that's the really big question."
A more gradual decline would give institutions and policymakers time to prepare and manage the change. After all, diminished numbers of high school graduates don't necessarily have to translate into fewer college students — though they probably will for certain institutions. The college-going rate, along with college student body makeup and retention, all play a role in mitigation strategies amid the decline.
However colleges and policymakers respond, it's time for them to get ready. As Lane emphasized, the decline will be real — and it's nearly here.
"The reason that we're pretty confident about this is because you can't create 18-year-olds out of nothing," he said. "There just aren't the bodies anymore."
Fewer students, more closures
Demographic shifts have already caused financial pain for many institutions, with some states already seeing their ranks shrink. In the Northeast — home to many of the country's private liberal arts institutions — high school graduate numbers fell from 637,000 in 2012 to 612,000 in 2024, a drop approaching 4%.
When Wells College in New York and Goddard College in Vermont shuttered last year, both cited demographic challenges.
Those and other recent college closures highlight the challenge in adapting to the sector's changes.
Such closures "may represent institutions that didn't act strongly enough soon enough, or else they were just overwhelmed by forces that were bigger than were possible to overcome," said Nathan Grawe, an economics professor at Carleton Collegeand author of "Demographics and The Demand for Higher Education."
But as populations of traditional-aged college students shrink more broadly and deeply, the pace of closures could accelerate.
A study released in December used machine learning techniques to forecast changes in college closure rates tied to the demographic cliff. The model, developed by researchers with the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, predicts that up to 80 additional colleges could close with an abrupt 15% decline in enrollment (from a 2019 baseline, chosen to avoid COVID disruptions) over the 2025-29 period.
That would effectively more than double the current average annual closure rate of institutions. While this represents a worst-case scenario, even gentler declines could still wreak havoc on some institutions. The researchers found a more gradual enrollment decrease happening over five years would lead to an 8.1% increase in annual college closures, or about five additional institutions per year.
An institution's size and stature could determine how it weathers coming population changes.
"Especially full-time traditional-age students are looking to go to the bigger-name universities if they can, which is further stressing some of the smaller colleges that are already facing enrollment declines," said Robert Kelchen, a visiting scholar at the Philadelphia Fed's Consumer Finance Institute and one of the paper's authors.
Location also matters.
WICHE's projection of peaking high school graduates — at around 3.8 million this year— represents a national average. But outcomes by state vary widely, with some actually forecasted to see increases rather than decreases.
Demographics will play out differently throughout the U.S.
Projected changes in the high school graduate population from 2023 to 2041 by state
Meanwhile, some locations and regions will experience steeper-than-average declines. Between 2023 and 2041, WICHE researchers estimate, graduates will drop 27% in New York and 32% in Illinois, for example. By contrast, are projected to grow by double digits in some states, including Tennessee, South Carolina and Florida.
Many struggling colleges "are in the Northeast and Midwest, which are on the higher side in terms of expected enrollment declines," said Kelchen, an educational leadership and policy studies professor at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. That means those institutions are likely more vulnerable.
'Going on offense' to raise attendance rates
Not every high school graduate chooses to attend college. And in recent years, a smaller proportion have done so. Between 2016 and 2022, the college-going rate fell about 8 percentage points to 62%.
Raising that rate could significantly help offset enrollment losses. WICHE found that increasing the college-going rate by just 0.5% per year would more than offset the enrollment shortfalls from demographic shifts. But increasing college attendance rate is no simple or easy task — nor is it entirely in anyone's control.
Much depends on the economy and job market.
Wage growth over the past decade could help explain lower attendance rates. "This is what it looks like to reduce inequality, but it does mean that students who are on the bubble between the job market and higher ed are more likely to choose the job market until that trend reverses," Grawe said.
College attendance rates have fallen in recent years
Rates of immediate enrollment of high school graduates in a postsecondary institution
Increasing skepticism about the value of college education also likely plays a role. Kelchen pointed to a "perception that college is unaffordable."
"That's different than the previous four decades, but that perception is there," he added. "Students have some pretty inexpensive options, especially with the growth of free community college programs. But those aren't going to save some of these small private colleges that are struggling to compete on price."
And while college's net price increases have slowed — attendance still comes with a heavy price tag for many.
"College costs too much. It takes too long," said Chuck Ambrose, a senior education consultant with law firm Husch Blackwellwho has served as chief executive at several colleges. "At the end of the day, you've got to borrow to pay, which leverages all that potential over a longer span" before benefits are realized.
So, not only does the economy affect college attendance — college attendance affects the entire economy.
"It's our game to lose because the kind of demand that we're going to continue to see on the need for postsecondary [skills] is going to be quite high," Jeff Strohl, a professor and director of Georgetown University's Center on Education and the Workforce, said during the ACE panel.
The higher education sector "really needs to go on the offense," he said, focusing on skills graduates need in the job market and recognizing that "education is, in fact, putting together packets of skills that match with occupations and packages of need, while not losing our commitment to general education."
'If we just kept the students we have, we'd be healthy'
The idea that demographic decline will usher in an "apocalypse" for higher ed institutions is an "unhelpful" notion, Grawe said at the ACE event.
"If it's an 'apocalypse,' we go home and we throw in the towel," he said.
Difficult as adjusting may be, institutions have some agency, experts have made clear. But that adjustment will likely require investments in services and infrastructure — and breaking old institutional habits.
"It's really important that you be realistic," Grawe said in an interview. "If you say, 'Well, we're going to just recruit our way out of this mess,' but then you don't recruit your way out of this mess — now you have really, really large budget shortfalls."
"It's really important that you be realistic. If you say, 'Well, we're going to just recruit our way out of this mess,' but then you don't recruit your way out of this mess — now you have really, really large budget shortfalls."
Nathan Grawe
Economics Professor, Carleton College
It's also important to remember that the pool of potential students is larger than just the annual waves of high school graduates. For one, there's all the students currently enrolled in college — many of whom, statistically, won't stick around to graduate. By the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center's latest count, the national completion rate stood at 61.1% for students who entered college in fall 2018.
WICHE's thought experiment with improving college-going rates could also be conducted looking at retention rates, Lane said in a December interview, adding that retention is "absolutely part of the puzzle" of managing the demographic decline.
Better retention could have a large, positive impact financially for many colleges in the face of a shrinking pipeline for new students.
"If we just kept the students we have, we'd be healthy," Ambrose said of the sector. "Students hire us to do three jobs. Recruit them, keep them and make sure their experience is of value."
But like the college-going rate, if improving retention were easy, it would be done. "There's no telling how many billions of dollars we spent on interventions and staff and analytics and all kinds of tools," Ambrose said.
With retention broadly, it could take a kitchen-sink approach to succeed. Ambrose listed a host of strategies that can help colleges retain their students, including expanding campus work, internship and apprenticeship programs; incentivizing completion, such as through scholarships; and providing personalized, comprehensive student support.
Put simply, boosting retention rates requires investment. In an interview, Grawe pointed to City University of New York's ASAP program for students seeking associate degrees. (CUNY has a similar program for bachelor's students).
ASAP provides financial assistance for tuition, transportation and textbookson top of intensive counseling and what Grawe described as "supports that may speak to a sense of belonging."
CUNY has found the graduation rate for ASAP participants to be 53%, more than double historical rates.
"They've had tremendous, tremendous success, more or less doubling the share of students who are completing their associate's degrees," Grawe said. "Now the downside is that program is wraparound, which means it's very expensive. But if you look at it on a per-degree basis, it doesn't look nearly so expensive."
Not every effort needs a wealth of funds or to be as comprehensive to make a difference, though.
Grawe also pointed to the University of Southern Maine, which last year showed some of the most dramatic improvement in its student retention rate across the University of Maine System, at 77.3%, up from a low of 70% four years prior. The institution turned retention around "by focusing just on just basic nuts and bolts of student advising," Grawe said.
UMS as a whole hit a record student return rate last fall. The system credited the rise in part to "intrusive advising." That includes such things as sending text alerts to students who miss classes or fall behind on their assignments. The messages then invite them in for advising or counseling appointments.
Equity as an 'imperative'
Equity and inclusion also play an ever more important role in retention. Future student bodies are projected to become more diverse, with WICHE forecasting rises in Hispanic and multiracial students.
College was "meant to be for privilege," Ambrose said. "If you put the supports in place that reverse these trends, you know we call it? Equity."
He also noted, "The impact of dismantling DEI also dismantles our greatest potential to survive."
Strohl echoed that point during the ACE panel, which occurred against the backdrop of the Trump administration's all-out attack on higher ed diversity, equity and inclusion programs.
"We've been afraid of, or we've been made afraid of, the word 'equity,'" Strohl said. "Right now, equity is going to be an economic imperative for the healthy growth of this country, and we need to figure out how to get all hands on board as we move forward."
He went on to explain that educational institutions must find ways of "picking up the people who have been left behind" — including both racial minority groups and low-income White people — to meet the skills gap.
Pivoting to adult students: 'A years-long process'
Nontraditional student recruitment is another possibility with promise, but, as with boosting retention, it requires investment as well as major cultural and operational changes in the higher ed world.
In Ambrose's view, college historically was a "four-year holding tank to assimilate young people into the workforce."
"Our campuses, infrastructure, facilities, schedules and intended outcomes are still designed to serve 17-to-24-year-olds," he noted.
"Our campuses, infrastructure, facilities, schedules and intended outcomes are still designed to serve 17-to-24-year-olds."
Chuck Ambrose
Senior Education Consultant, Husch Blackwell
Reaching older students is not easy, nor is there a straightforward playbook for how to do it. "You cannot become an adult-serving institution overnight," Lane said at the ACE event. "This is a yearslong process."
Knowing what works to attract and retain adult learners is an understudied topic — making it all the more difficult to act on.
"We don't really know what works, because we don't really have great data," Lane said. "We don't know, at the intervention level," what improves credit-earning, retention, and college completion for adults, he said.
Grawe echoed that caveat during the panel. "I hear too many institutions who respond to declining traditional-age students by saying, 'Well, we'll just shift toward adults' — as if it's a light switch."
Pivoting to attract more nontraditional students means "fundamentally rethinking how we do almost everything," Grawe added.
"We need to think about what it means to attend college with kids. What does it mean to attend college with jobs? Those are very, very different learning environments," he said. "And so to simply say, 'We will go out and tell adults, 'Well, now you are welcome here too, and they will of course want to hang out with us,' I think is very misguided."
