Proposed House settlement and NIL

[Da Jumbo Mutombo]

Using title 9 like that is such horse****. They force you to have the sport (fine) but also gonna force you to pay non earning sports the same as the money maker?

They should absolutely get sued for that.

 

[CaneSinceForEver]

Using title 9 like that is such horse****. They force you to have the sport (fine) but also gonna force you to pay non earning sports the same as the money maker?

They should absolutely get sued for that.

That's what you would call welfare. That's like sharing an apartment with other people, but you have to pay all of the bills because you make the most money.

 

[3FW]

This will at the very least be litigated.

 

[bacane]

Ok, very simple and cost effective way to settle the nonsense around Title IX, transgender athletes, etc. Let’s eliminate separate men’s and women’s teams. Just have a football team, a basketball team, volleyball, etc. Forget about gender specific teams. Eliminates issue of confused guys wanting to participate on women’s teams. Also great option for major cost reductions on travel, facilities, coaching salaries.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Using title 9 like that is such horse****. They force you to have the sport (fine) but also gonna force you to pay non earning sports the same as the money maker?

They should absolutely get sued for that.

It's not "using" Title IX, because Title IX is already designed to provide equal opportunities in higher education. Title IX being cited here is, regardless of whether we like the outcome, an area where Title IX was intended to provide coverage and guidance. Now, obviously, there was no system of paying college athletes in 1972 when Title IX was enacted, so it can certainly have some unintended consequences to apply an old law to a new situation.

If the LEGAL SETTLEMENT OF THE LAWSUIT is intended to cover all sports, and to cover both scholarships (which will be expanded) and revenue sharing (which we can agree is driven more heavily by certain sports, then I would predict that "true NIL" will step in to compensate certain athletes in certain sports above and beyond what the NCAA House Settlement does (as proposed and limited by the citation to Title IX).

The next few months will be interesting, to say the least.

 

[TallyCaneFan]

Hadn't part of the settlement been that football and men's basketball would receive the largest of the payouts, followed by women's basketball? If so, why the *****ing about Title IX? Granted I haven't read the whole report. My daughter swam D1 in college during the period of the back pay portion and she's openly told me she's not expecting anything since her sport doesn't make money for the university. On the other hand, she was a multiple time conference champion and "star" of the team, so who knows if some local NIL opportunities may have been available back then? While we were researching how it works, we found that part about the much larger payouts to the revenue generating sports.

 

[Shogungts]

If the LEGAL SETTLEMENT OF THE LAWSUIT is intended to cover all sports, and to cover both scholarships (which will be expanded) and revenue sharing (which we can agree is driven more heavily by certain sports, then I would predict that "true NIL" will step in to compensate certain athletes in certain sports above and beyond what the NCAA House Settlement does (as proposed and limited by the citation to Title IX).

The next few months will be interesting, to say the least.

I am certain this will be challenged, but the guidance put out states that NIL is included as part of Title IX.

Thursday’s document was chock full of critical lines that may trigger alarm and change in many school plans, if the Trump administration does not rescind it. For instance, the department classifies future revenue payment as “financial assistance,” which “must be made proportionately available to male and female athletes,” the document says.​

​

“Schools remain responsible for ensuring that they are offering equal athletic opportunities in their athletic programs, including in the NIL context,” the guidance says. “A school may violate Title IX if the school fails to provide equivalent benefits, opportunities and treatment in the components of the school’s athletic program that relate to NIL activities.”​

....​

One of the more jarring portions of the guidance is related to these entities, targeting NIL compensation from some third parties, specifically those affiliated with boosters: “The fact that funds are provided by a private source does not relieve a school of its responsibility” for Title IX compliance, it says.​

I am certainly not a legal expert, but I am not sure how they can legally require the school to control boosters... then again the House settlement is suggesting that a clearing house would review all 3rd party NIL, but I also question the legality of that.

New Title IX guidance from President Biden's administration threatens to upend school rev-share plans in college sports

The outgoing administration's Department of Education dropped an 11th-hour salvo saying any payments must be “proportionately” distributed to men and women athletes to satisfy Title IX.

sports.yahoo.com

 

[TheOriginalCane]

I am certain this will be challenged, but the guidance put out states that NIL is included as part of Title IX.

Thursday’s document was chock full of critical lines that may trigger alarm and change in many school plans, if the Trump administration does not rescind it. For instance, the department classifies future revenue payment as “financial assistance,” which “must be made proportionately available to male and female athletes,” the document says.​

​

“Schools remain responsible for ensuring that they are offering equal athletic opportunities in their athletic programs, including in the NIL context,” the guidance says. “A school may violate Title IX if the school fails to provide equivalent benefits, opportunities and treatment in the components of the school’s athletic program that relate to NIL activities.”​

....​

One of the more jarring portions of the guidance is related to these entities, targeting NIL compensation from some third parties, specifically those affiliated with boosters: “The fact that funds are provided by a private source does not relieve a school of its responsibility” for Title IX compliance, it says.​

I am certainly not a legal expert, but I am not sure how they can legally require the school to control boosters... then again the House settlement is suggesting that a clearing house would review all 3rd party NIL, but I also question the legality of that.

New Title IX guidance from President Biden's administration threatens to upend school rev-share plans in college sports

The outgoing administration's Department of Education dropped an 11th-hour salvo saying any payments must be “proportionately” distributed to men and women athletes to satisfy Title IX.

sports.yahoo.com

Again, I'm just trying to differentiate types of NIL.

If the UNIVERSITY is providing NIL/revenue-sharing that is based on TV rights deals, merch sales, video game licensing, etc., then that is university-related NIL, which seems like Title IX could cover.

If it is a THIRD-PARTY NIL deal, such as when DJU signed with Dr. Pepper when he was at Clemson, or the deal that Jeremiah just did for Fortnite or whatever (Nintendo?), then that is TRUE NIL, unrelated to what the university does, and these opportunities would NOT need to be shared with all of the athletes at a university. So, in a large urban community like Miami, you let community businesses approach the players they want to approach, and those folks get paid more. Like Cam's deals with Bose and that jewelry/watch company that allowed him to gift all his teammates all that expensive jewelry.

 

[LeavingJesusland]

Tommy Tuberville can suck a big fat ****

 

[caneingville]

By my count, the Gator has FORTY-SIX walk-ons.

And this ***** Slingblade Billy is whining about how all these poor, poor kids will somehow "lose opportunities" to be tackling dummies for Desmond Fatson.

Maybe that’s why he still has issues getting the right number of men on the field. Too many idiots on the sidelines not knowing what to do.

 

[caneingville]

Schools will be able to spend a maximum of $20.5M in additional money.

But here's the problem. Schools aren't required to fully fund revenue sharing. Its an "up to" number. Not a minimum or set in stone requirement.

So yeah.. the max we can spend is $20.5M. But there's no guarantee Miami will commit to spending that much.

This is why getting into the B1G or SEC is so important. The additional revenue sure wouldn't hurt.

Do we really have to worry about not having this money? Of course the money wouldn’t hurt, and we want it, but should we be concerned about being able to get it?

 

[Shogungts]

Do we really have to worry about not having this money? Of course the money wouldn’t hurt, and we want it, but should we be concerned about being able to get it?

There is zero chance that Miami isn't spending the max they are allowed to... as long as it is in this 'affordable' amount. If that cap was raised to say $40M, then I think the SEC and BIG10 football revenue becomes much more relevant.

I think what will be interesting is that the ~$20M is across ALL sports, so it actually puts schools that truly compete in football and basket ball at a bit of a disadvantage.

Note: I have no inside information so I could be totally off here, but $20M seems pretty reasonable for us.

 

[SCarolina Ibis]

Do we really have to worry about not having this money? Of course the money wouldn’t hurt, and we want it, but should we be concerned about being able to get it?

Sounds like we're going to do everything we can to stay in the game. I asked @DMoney about it and he said we'd fully fund it. As long as there's a cap and we're fully funding, we should be good.

The problem is that the difference in the amount the SEC/B1G make can still go towards other things (recruiting dept budgets for ex). If for any reason the cap is ever removed, and schools can pay players whatever they want from their tv deals..? We're in trouble. Teams from outside the SEC/B1G are toast.