NIL ruling Title IX

[David321]

What are the implications of this, and what does it mean going forward?

 

[JRHEETER]

What are the implications of this, and what does it mean going forward?

A lot of schools will be cutting programs and thus cutting women’s programs I would assume

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

Only if schools provide NIL

 

[JeremyCuse]

What are the implications of this, and what does it mean going forward?

This will likely change in the very near future when the Trump administration installs new officials. The article also notes this ruling doesn't impact collectives so schools will just go back to collectives paying athletes versus 100% coming from schools directly. Either way the Power schools will find away around this Ohio State, Bama, Oregon, Penn State, Miami, Texas etc aren't gonna pay anywhere close to a 50/50 NIL split to their men and women athletes regardless of any directive.

 

[JRHEETER]

Only if schools provide NIL

Starting in July schools will be providing NIL and most have already starting going to that model

 

[Moontan]

Starting in July schools will be providing NIL and most have already starting going to that model

Many schools may be putting that on pause until things are fully clarified.

 

[Sdot]

I’m worried even if we do pull of the $20 million mark like most schools. If these other boosters still can put as much money in what’s going to stop these schools,from having an extra $10-15 million from boosters on top of the 20 million from there respective school.

 

[Crusty]

I’m worried even if we do pull of the $20 million mark like most schools. If these other boosters still can put as much money in what’s going to stop these schools,from having an extra $10-15 million from boosters on top of the 20 million from there respective school.

Nothing

 

[JeremyCuse]

I’m worried even if we do pull of the $20 million mark like most schools. If these other boosters still can put as much money in what’s going to stop these schools,from having an extra $10-15 million from boosters on top of the 20 million from there respective school.

There's always going to be schools with much larger war chest, there's no way around that unfortunately.

 

[Sdot]

There's always going to be schools with much larger war chest, there's no way around that unfortunately.

True but if there is still a $10-15 million dollar difference even after schools start paying, what’s gonna be different than now?

 

[JeremyCuse]

True but if there is still a $10-15 million dollar difference even after schools start paying, what’s gonna be different than now?

There isn't going to be a difference, the only difference is that schools can now pay directly and up 20.5 million a year. That doesn't stop outside groups or collectives from still paying players if they want to above and beyond whatever the school is. Most schools will request that donors give to the directly but certainly some schools will have not only the 20.5 million but other millions from collectives/boosters etc.

 

[Libero2]

True but if there is still a $10-15 million dollar difference even after schools start paying, what’s gonna be different than now?

The women's basketball players are going to be making a whole heck of a lot more money than they are today.

I also think this ends up meaning that non-revenue sports get NIL funds primarily through the school, while the non-school funds and collectives (and as always, backroom deals) will be doing the majority of the funding for your athletes from Mens BBall and football. The schools $ will be seen as the 'sweetener' is my best guess.

 

[JeremyCuse]

The women's basketball players are going to be making a whole heck of a lot more money than they are today.

I wouldn't bet on it, there's loopholes around the directive.

 

[qdawgg]

When Elon gets rid of the Dept of education, nothing will be changed.

 

[richmondcuse03]

I wouldn't bet on it, there's loopholes around the directive.

And as you said this will be changed in a new admin. They want to gut the dept of education. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a legal challenge to title ix- there have been some brewing and with the makeup of the SC, they will likely get the ruling they want.

 

[chuck]

And as you said this will be changed in a new admin. They want to gut the dept of education. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a legal challenge to title ix- there have been some brewing and with the makeup of the SC, they will likely get the ruling they want.

No politics.

 

[EnviroSciGuy]

No politics.

Comment seemed neutral, factual, and relevant to me. Unfortunately, sometimes it's unavoidable.

 

[oldpinepoint]

Comment seemed neutral, factual, and relevant to me. Unfortunately, sometimes it's unavoidable.

This, I’m actually surprised they announced will probably be overturned nextvweek

 

[All4SU]

I’m sure this will be discussed and analyzed in detail. I admit I don’t know what this ruling is trying to say/accomplish. But it seems to me that the very nature of “Name, Image and Likeness” implies that all athletes are not “equal” and that no “equitable” structure can be created. The starting QB, RB and WR on the D1 football team have a different NIL “value” to an outside entity than the second string faceoff player on the women’s LAX team.

 

[Newhouser]

This, I’m actually surprised they announced will probably be overturned nextvweek

I am confused by the timing too. What's the point when the issue and the world change in a week.

My only thought on this is SU paying the athletes from the non-revenue sports and relying on donors to fund hoops and football is a road to ruin for those 2 programs.

 

[Sudano]

I’m sure this will be discussed and analyzed in detail. I admit I don’t know what this ruling is trying to say/accomplish. But it seems to me that the very nature of “Name, Image and Likeness” implies that all athletes are not “equal” and that no “equitable” structure can be created. The starting QB, RB and WR on the D1 football team have a different NIL “value” to an outside entity than the second string faceoff player on the women’s LAX team.

I think the main point we all intentionally ignore is the collective donor based 'NIL' isn't really NIL, it's a pay to play model that has nothing to do with name, image, likeness and everything to do with yearly contract negotiation shopping their on field talent under a big lie everyone ignores.

 

[JKinPhilly]

Would it apply to private NIL funds or only those funneled through the schools? Not sure how you can dictate to a private donor where their money can or cannot go.

 

[CuseLegacy]

 

[RF2044]

There's always going to be schools with much larger war chest, there's no way around that unfortunately.

And lots more donors.

Ohio State [just for example] has >50K students. Over time, that generates a lot more alums than a school like Syracuse.

 

[javadoc]

Would it apply to private NIL funds or only those funneled through the schools? Not sure how you can dictate to a private donor where their money can or cannot go.

Has to be just the school's bag. The Supreme Court ruling stressed that NIL as we know it is commerce between private parties, over which the NCAA has no jurisdiction. Interesting question - if the school is essentially funneling money from television contracts to the athletes, and that is open to regulation, then what if private individual donors' monies flow through that same channel? Expect to see schools keep that revenue stream strictly distinct.

At some point someone is going to make the argument that football is no longer within the educational ambit of a university, it's straight business, so Title IX doesn't apply anyway.