forums

2025 revenue sharing and Title IX

Advertisement
Thanks to Title 9, alot of Olympic men's programs were cut and often eliminated. The DOE didn't seem to have an issue with this and they've been conspicuously quiet with men competing in women's sports. So fk them. What next, are they going to force folks to buy season tickets to women sports teams if/when they buy season tickets for their favorite college football team?
 
From on3

The memo also makes clear that the Department of Education does not view “compensation provided by a third party (rather than a school) to a student-athlete” as a Title IX violation. In addition, it does not “offer specific guidance on Title IX’s application in the context of compensation provided for the use of a student athlete’s NIL by a third party, including an NIL collective.”
 
Imukat said:
From on3

The memo also makes clear that the Department of Education does not view “compensation provided by a third party (rather than a school) to a student-athlete” as a Title IX violation. In addition, it does not “offer specific guidance on Title IX’s application in the context of compensation provided for the use of a student athlete’s NIL by a third party, including an NIL collective.”
Click to expand...
It also says any booster related NIL would be clawed back into the title ix financial assistance/opportunities basket so NIL is ****ed in its current form unless its Bose, Dodge, Pepsi, etc offering true NIL deals.
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
this is hard to NOT get political about, but Biden admin dropping this as going out the door. Wow.
Get rid of the department of education, there hasn't been a single good thing they have done.
This will get torn up in court. I can't wait for the first athlete to again sue and tear the DOE and NCAA a new *** with this.
Interested in seeing what the next admin does from a DOE perspective.
 
Sounds like Trump’s immediate to do list next week looks like saving tiktok and abolishing DOE
Do both and I’m sure he will have a long runway of positive approval ratings
 
MedleyCane said:
Thanks to Title 9, alot of Olympic men's programs were cut and often eliminated. The DOE didn't seem to have an issue with this and they've been conspicuously quiet with men competing in women's sports. So fk them. What next, are they going to force folks to buy season tickets to women sports teams if/when they buy season tickets for their favorite college football team?
Click to expand...
The WNBA is almost entirely subsidized by the NBA so…ya. Why not lol
 
Advertisement
OR maybe thinking "college" sports should be treated like a professional sports league isn't quite the way to go? So much federal and state money being thrown in there along with no taxation as a "non-profit", but you don't expect any kind of government involvement?


steve guttenberg comedy GIF
 
MedleyCane said:
Thanks to Title 9, alot of Olympic men's programs were cut and often eliminated. The DOE didn't seem to have an issue with this and they've been conspicuously quiet with men competing in women's sports. So fk them. What next, are they going to force folks to buy season tickets to women sports teams if/when they buy season tickets for their favorite college football team?
Click to expand...
Exactly. **** the DOE.
 
Advertisement
Title 9 should be interpreted to make a distinction between fair discrimination and unfair discrimination. Just as the insurance industry does. Making dangerous drivers pay more because they are more dangerous is fair discrimination. Making a group pay more for no “loss” related reason is unfair and illegal. Paying students based upon revenue generated should be fair and not even based upon gender. Paying the income generating students LESS even though they generate the 💰 should be the unfair discrimination. Paying non generating students based upon what the generating students bring is soo unfair. It is an improper windfall. Funding these programs should be what is focused on, not robbing other students.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top