Latest news with #JohnCohen
New York Times
a day ago
- Business
- New York Times
Recruits can receive rev-share offers starting Aug. 1: What does it mean for prospects, schools?
The House settlement ushered in a new era of college athletics in which athletic departments can now pay athletes directly in the form of revenue sharing. From a recruiting standpoint, the reality of that ruling starts to hit home in earnest on Aug. 1, the first day that college football programs can extend rev-share contract offers to prospects entering their senior year of high school. Advertisement After months of making verbal promises involving high dollar amounts, programs can now show recruits how much they truly value them. This is a distinct change from recent history, when schools could officially extend a scholarship offer — without compensation — on Aug. 1. 'That's still there, but it's lost its luster in the era of paying players,' a Power 4 personnel director said. The Athletic spoke to staffers in the personnel and roster-building fields to better understand how significant Aug. 1 will become in the new landscape. They were granted anonymity so they could speak freely. Athletic departments are allowed to pay their athletes, across all sports, about $20.5 million through revenue sharing for the 2025-26 academic year. Most schools are allotting about 75 percent of that to football. On Friday, schools can start divvying out some of that $15.4 million pie to high school recruits. 'That's a big day,' Auburn athletic director John Cohen said earlier this month. 'It's not rumor (of how much you are offering). It's not innuendo. It's not, 'This person said this.' It's an offer on paper.' It's important to note that the revenue-sharing pool is different than the compensation players can earn through name, image and likeness deals. There is still a lot of uncertainty in the NIL space, but that extra revenue is not reflected in the revenue-sharing offers extended by the schools. In this era of college football, roster retention and the transfer portal are significant expenses. That spending calculus will have to be kept in mind as programs decide whether to hand out financial offers to high school recruits right now or wait until closer to the early signing period in December, when they have a better idea of what their needs might be in the transfer portal. Advertisement Several personnel staffers don't believe there will be an avalanche of offers on Aug. 1. 'Now, will (offers) happen a lot? Probably not,' a personnel director said. 'It's going to come back to the top 25, 50 players in the country — if you've got one of them (committed in your class), you're probably sitting there thinking about (making an official offer). 'It's going to be more of a reflection of, 'Do we have to (pay) in order to keep the guy?'' Another personnel director said his program is likely to offer several prospects who have already committed to more high-profile programs. His school can give those recruits a significant offer to show how much it values them. Will the other schools, which likely have to focus on prospects higher on their boards, do the same? 'Our plan is the guys we felt really strongly about, that we were willing to pay good money for a high schooler, putting that offer in front of them and just letting them sit there with that offer,' he said. 'We're going to try to use that to our advantage at the end of the day and put numbers in front of somebody and get them re-interested. That's kind of where it'll be for us, and I imagine it'll be the same for everybody at our level. 'It'll get a lot of guys paid. Some, it won't. Basically, what's going to happen is some guys are going to find out very quickly how much (the other school) values them as opposed to us.' Actually, no. They can't sign the contract until the early signing period in December. Recruits and agents will be able to only view these contracts for now. 'That's what I don't understand about all of it,' said a P4 assistant general manager. 'They can't sign it, so it's not binding. So what does it actually mean? When they would come on visits and stuff, at some point, you would talk numbers and what you're going to get. Just because you're getting a piece of paper, it's not binding. If you have a bad senior year, you get hurt, this or that, a school doesn't then have to actually give it to you. Advertisement 'If the attempt is to add transparency, it's not really accomplishing that because it's not binding. If the kid could actually sign it, then yeah, I think that could be a good thing.' It's simple: It can give you a sense of security. And while the offers are not binding, schools will be reluctant to pull or lower the amount of an official offer. That's bad business. And once you receive an offer, you can shop it around and try to get a better deal from other programs and create leverage. Those scenarios will create some issues for schools. 'There's risks to it also,' a P4 general manager said. 'You're going to present a contract that is not legally binding, but you're also at risk of the prospect shopping it around to other schools and sharing the language and details of your contract.' That language part is important. Some schools have already sent out rev-share offers to current players, particularly transfers who joined over the summer. Florida State has been criticized for what has been viewed as one-sided language in its contracts. As with any contract, it will be important for a player and his agent to review everything before it's time to sign and make it official in December. 'There's a million ways to cut the pie,' said an agent who served as an NIL representative for several years, 'but at the end of the day, there's a way to come down to what the school wants and what the player needs, and usually it always happens if it's the right fit.'
CNN
26-06-2025
- Politics
- CNN
DOGE-driven cuts could weaken administration's ability to handle Iran conflict
The US military's strikes in Iran over the weekend prompted a swift response from across the federal government to react to any fallout, but current and former officials say the administration's DOGE-driven cuts to a host of agencies have made it harder to grapple with the conflict and prepare for potential retaliation. At the federal agencies that handle cybersecurity, hundreds of departing staffers have heightened concerns about US vulnerabilities to cyberattacks coming from Iran or its proxies. Staffing shortages at the Federal Emergency Management Agency have raised fears about domestic preparedness inside the agency. At the FBI, some agents who were shifted into assisting immigration enforcement efforts are returning to focus on the agency's counterterrorism mission. At the State Department, career officials with decades of experience in the region have departed or been forced out of their roles. And journalists at the government-owned Voice of America say the administration's efforts to dismantle the agency have impacted broadcasting the American narrative — depleting the government's soft power — to Iranians following Saturday's strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities. There is optimism that the US-brokered ceasefire between Iran and Israel in the aftermath of the US attack — and a mostly performative Iranian response launching missiles at a US airbase in Qatar — will lessen the risk of Iranian-linked retaliation inside the United States. But while Tehran's ability to respond militarily to the US and Israeli strikes is limited, the regime's abilities to react in other ways is more robust. 'There is significant concern that Iran will try to engage in either cyber or kinetic, asymmetric tactics in response to this conflict,' said John Cohen, the former acting undersecretary for intelligence and analysis and counterterrorism coordinator at the Department of Homeland Security, who led the effort at DHS under the Obama administration to develop response plans to threats from Iran. The Iran strikes came after the first months of Trump's second term saw the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency force deep staffing cuts across government, including resignations and layoffs of more than 100,000 federal workers and the attempted dismantling of several federal agencies, though many of the reductions are still being litigated in court. In addition to cuts, the Trump administration has also shifted priorities, focusing much of its domestic security thus far on securing the border. As part of its plan to make good on President Donald Trump's promise to enact the largest deportation effort in history, his administration over the last several months has moved significant resources toward immigration enforcement or removal operations. Asked on NBC's 'Meet the Press' in the immediate aftermath of the US strikes on Sunday whether the administration was concerned about the threat of Iran or Iranian proxies carrying out an attack in the US, Vice President JD Vance pointed to the administration's border efforts. 'This is one of the reasons why border security is national security, is if you let a bunch of crazy people into your country, those crazy people can eventually take action,' Vance said. 'We're going to do everything that we can to make sure that doesn't happen and to keep Americans safe.' Former security officials say hacking threats from Iran and its proxies are one of the more likely forms of retaliation, if history is any guide. Since the start of the second Trump administration, hundreds of cybersecurity personnel across multiple federal agencies have left, or made plans to leave, the federal government. That includes people who were fired, took the 'deferred resignation' program or chose to leave for other reasons. There is concern among current and former US officials that the upheaval has disrupted the regular pace of briefings and coordination between cyber officials and critical infrastructure firms. The bulk of the DOGE-led cuts have been at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), a part of DHS charged with protecting non-military networks from hacking. 'The government generally and CISA specifically has lost a lot of great cyber talent, and we're going to feel that,' Jeff Greene, who until January served as CISA's executive assistant director for cybersecurity, told CNN. 'These losses will impact our defensive capabilities somewhere. If we shift more people to work Iran, that's going to come from somewhere. And the more empty chairs, the less we can do.' The Trump administration has pushed back on the notion that the workforce cuts have degraded cyber defenses. 'Some of these layoffs, reductions of forces are not intended to impact national security,' a senior White House official said in an interview in March. 'I think there's also been a lot of conflation of reductions in contracts [with the private sector] … with actual firing of government personnel.' CISA did not respond to requests for comment when asked how many cyber personnel have left in the last four months. CISA spokeswoman Marci McCarthy said in a statement: 'CISA is focused squarely on executing its statutory mission: serving as the national coordinator for securing and protecting the nation's critical infrastructure.' Rep. Mike Simpson, an Idaho Republican, said he didn't think that the government reductions overall would be harmful to the government's Iran response. 'Anytime you go in and try to reduce the size of a government program, there's going to be kickback. It's not anybody's fault,' Simpson said. 'I don't think that hurts us. We can actually handle this stuff. We can actually walk and chew gum at the same time. But is it disrupting? Yeah. And it is disrupting to employees.' The Trump administration's shift of hundreds of law enforcement agents to immigration enforcement potentially also complicates its response to threats from Iran, former officials say, even if some of those shifts have been reversed in recent days. Officers from agencies including the ATF, FBI and US Marshals Service paused some of their existing work and focus on immigration. 'While they had every right to do that, those are the very same resources that would be necessary to address the various threats that could potentially emerge if the conflict with Iran continues to escalate,' Cohen said. 'For any administration that comes into office, the real world has a way of impacting your initial priorities.' After the US strikes, the FBI told multiple agents with Iran knowledge, including cyber experts, to shift from immigration back to Iran. Sources stressed there is currently no known specific and credible threat, but agents must be available to fully staff the bureau's counterterrorism mission due to global hostilities. The FBI said in a statement Tuesday that it is continuously assessing and realigning 'our resources to respond to the most pressing threats to our national security and to ensure the safety of the American people.' In the immediate aftermath of the US airstrikes, a DHS bulletin obtained by CNN stated that Iran could try to 'target' US government officials if Iranian leaders believe 'the stability or survivability' of their regime is at risk. Iran's intelligence services are capable of using hacking to surveil targets of assassination or kidnapping, current and former US officials have told CNN, and the FBI is unique among US intel and security agencies in its ability to counter that hybrid threat. Ned Price, a former Biden and Obama State Department and National Security Council official, noted that one of Trump's first actions was to remove security protections from former officials who were under threat from Iran. 'If the concern is real — and I agree it should be that we face a heightened threat — they have taken away resources that directly contribute to seeking to counteract this threat,' Price said. US agencies tasked with responding to incidents on domestic soil, conducting diplomacy and projecting soft power overseas are also dealing with personnel reductions. Staffing cuts and internal turmoil at FEMA are fueling concerns about the agency's ability to respond if tensions with Iran trigger emergencies at home, several current and former agency officials told CNN. In recent years, FEMA developed plans to address threats from foreign adversaries, particularly after Russia's invasion of Ukraine. But those efforts, the sources said, have stalled as key leaders and frontline staff have left the agency and resources have dwindled. With the military focused on operations overseas, FEMA plays a key role in managing domestic crises — including terror-related and cybersecurity incidents — protecting the US population and ensuring the federal government remains operational. But the agency has faced months of upheaval, marked by a wave of departures, plummeting morale and mounting uncertainty about its future direction. As FEMA's pool of experienced personnel shrinks and resources become more limited, doubts are growing about its ability to fulfill its critical mission. Staffing cuts at the Mount Weather Emergency Operations Center — one of the nation's most vital emergency response facilities — are compounding these worries, sources told CNN. The State Department, meanwhile, has no deputy assistant secretary for Iraq and Iran. There is no longer a confirmed US ambassador in Qatar or Jordan and no confirmed assistant secretary of state for the Middle East. Former State Department officials say experts in diplomacy are essential when you get into the nitty gritty of complicated issues like an Iranian nuclear deal, something Trump still says he wants. 'A solid, verifiable, legally sound agreement is going to require experts in science, law, negotiation, nuclear policy, and international structures,' said Alexandra Bell, a former Biden administration deputy assistant secretary in State's Bureau of Arms Control, Deterrence and Stability. 'If you want deals, if you want to find diplomatic solutions, you need diplomats and you need to not be terrorizing them.' One congressional source said that most foreign democracy programming was cut under DOGE, but the administration is not answering questions about the status of a longstanding civil society program in the Middle East specifically that promotes democracy and the free flow of information into closed societies like Iran. A senior State Department official responded to CNN's request for comment, saying that department officials from previous administrations had 'no credibility' on Iran. At Voice of America, a government-funded news organization that's led America's efforts to broadcast information around the world for decades, most of the staff were put on leave in March after Trump signed an order to drastically shrink its parent, the US Agency for Global Media. There are now ongoing lawsuits to try to block the cuts. Following Israel's military campaign in Iran, the USAGM temporarily brought back VOA Persian employees to broadcast in Farsi. But about half of those employees were then part of widespread layoffs at Voice of America announced on Friday, one day before the US military strikes in Iran, according to VOA journalists. Kari Lake, a senior adviser for USAGM who is leading the effort to dismantle it, testified at a House hearing Tuesday that VOA successfully broadcast Trump's Saturday speech in Farsi. 'We are still broadcasting in Farsi,' she said. 'Sometimes a lean and mean and a smaller staff makes it easier to get things done.' But VOA journalists told CNN that the attempts to broadcast Trump's speech that night were chaotic because of the layoffs, and there were delays in publishing it translated into Farsi online. The Farsi translation of Trump's speech on social media lost audio roughly a minute in. 'It was a disaster,' said one VOA journalist, who requested anonymity to speak candidly without retribution. Patsy Widakuswara, VOA's White House bureau chief and a lead plaintiff in one of the VOA lawsuits, said that TV production that night for the Farsi broadcast was hampered by the lack of support and technical staff. 'Everything that's needed to support a good broadcast, they were not there,' she said. 'This is a lost opportunity, where we're not putting out the narrative that we would usually put out, which is factual, comprehensive, balanced.' Rep. Don Bacon, a Nebraska Republican, told CNN that cutting of Farsi radio was 'short-sighted.' 'That would be one clear example that they shouldn't have done,' Bacon said.
Associated Press
19-02-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
College baseball future may see greater imbalance in competition, high school prospects squeezed out
The Division I baseball season is less than a week old, and coaches already are planning for 2026 when it's all but certain scholarship limits will be removed, rosters downsized and players will have opportunities to make more money. They expect the fallout to be fewer opportunities for high school recruits at the top level of the sport, especially if the NCAA adopts a proposal that would extend eligibility from four to five years. They also predict a greater imbalance in competition. All is contingent on a federal judge approving the settlement of antitrust allegations against the NCAA and the nation's biggest conferences. A hearing is set for April 7 and changes would go into effect July 1, a few days after the baseball season. The framework for baseball would cap rosters at 34 with no scholarship limit for schools that opt in to the revenue-sharing model tied to the so-called House settlement. Currently there's a 40-man limit during the season and a maximum of 11.7 scholarships that can be spread among up to 32 players. 'I still think the majority of teams are going to be giving partial scholarships to at least part of their roster,' Nebraska coach Will Bolt said. 'Reading the tea leaves, it doesn't look like anyone is going to come up with 34 fulls.' No change in power structure Auburn athletic director John Cohen, previously head coach at Mississippi State and Kentucky, doubted the new rules would shake up college baseball's power structure. Only about half of the more than 300 Division I programs currently award 11.7 scholarships, and many of the ones that do could at least double that number next year. Programs that don't award 11.7 now still might struggle to offer that many going forward. With just a handful of programs generating a profit, financial constraints preclude big scholarship increases at most schools without additional fundraising. Even for schools where increasing scholarships is feasible, Title IX guidelines requiring proportional opportunities for men and women would have to be considered. The House settlement also would allow athletic departments to share up to $20.5 million in revenue among athletes across all sports starting next school year. Football and men's basketball players would be expected to receive the lion's share. How much is available to baseball players likely would be a fraction of what athletes in revenue-producing sports get and could amount to little or nothing for programs outside the Power Four. Modest NIL earnings for most Most players now receive partial scholarships and try to capitalize on opportunities allowing them to make money on their name, image and likeness. According to Opendorse's 2024 annual report, the top 25-earning baseball players could expect to make just under $48,000 per year, based on deals tracked by the NIL platform from 2021-24. Cohen said that figure seemed low. 'What I know about NIL currently is there is no accurate way to illustrate who's doing what,' he said, 'so it's hard to speak intelligently about NIL because what you're relying on is third-party information. You hear things and you just aren't sure what to believe.' Clemson coach Erik Bakich said he thought the $48,000 figure seemed high. Either way, he said, NIL money is not lucrative for the vast majority of baseball players. 'The majority of NIL in college baseball has been about paying your bills, not play for pay,' Bakich said. 'College baseball players are using NIL dollars to pay for cost of attendance. I'm for anything that reduces out-of-pocket cost for parents and anything that eliminates the need for any college kid to take out any type of loan debt.' Coaches said an often-overlooked consequence of roster reductions would be the squeeze it puts on high school prospects, especially at the top end of Division I. Bolt, the Nebraska coach, said he had honest and difficult conversations with some of his players last fall about where they fit in and whether they should consider transferring, perhaps to a lower division. Bolt typically has carried 45 or 50 players in the fall. The NCAA fall roster limit remains fluid but coaches have recommended it be 38 with the cutdown to 34 on Dec. 1. Bolt said it takes the typical freshman about three semesters to show whether he can be successful in Division I. The window of opportunity probably will shrink after this year. 'Unless you're a top-100 (high school) prospect or unless you're turning down significant money in the draft to go to college and it's a no-brainer you can play at the Division I level as a freshman, the junior college route does become a very desirable option,' Bolt said. Older players stick around The shortening of the Major League Baseball amateur draft from 40 rounds to 20 beginning in 2021 has kept more players in college longer. The transfer portal has allowed teams to fill immediate needs rather than roll the dice with young players. And teams would get older yet if there's passage of a proposal now under consideration to extend athlete eligibility from four to five competitive seasons. There also is some question about how junior college years will be counted against NCAA eligibility following the federal court injunction that gave Vanderbilt football player Diego Pavia an extra season after he argued his junior college years limited his ability to capitalize on NIL. Oregon State coach Mitch Canham said all those factors mean promising high school players who don't project to be an immediate starting position player or key member of the pitching staff will be passed over in coming years. 'With a roster of 34, you don't have room to keep a whole bunch of guys around to develop, which is tough because that's something we've done a lot of,' Canham said. 'It's almost as if, am I going to trust an 18-year-old who has never played Division I baseball to come in and do this? You better make sure. Or are you going to get a 21-year-old (transfer) who has hundreds of at-bats and experience against older competition?'
