Welcome to the New World of NIL

[temptation]

15 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

Translation:  Send us a lot of money so we can buy a good football team.    This is now going on everywhere.

How soon before the pretense of big-time college athletic departments holding it's "students" to any sort of academic competence (aka going to classes) is finally done away with, and these athletes become employees of the school's athletic department with no academic responsibilities whatsoever? 

 

I have long wondered about this an cynically believe we are closer than you think.

[PDB26]

2 hours ago, Muda69 said:

How soon before the pretense of big-time college athletic departments holding it's "students" to any sort of academic competence (aka going to classes) is finally done away with, and these athletes become employees of the school's athletic department with no academic responsibilities whatsoever? 

I don't know that becoming employees of the athletic department necessarily means the athletes couldn't be subject to academic eligibility standards. 

On 11/15/2024 at 4:52 PM, Irishman said:

That ruling came from SCOTUS, so it will not change any time soon.

Wait, which case, Alston?

[temptation]

Also helps when the GOAT sported the winged helmet.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/tom-bradys-role-in-michigan-securing-future-star-qb-bryce-underwood/

[Coach Nowlin]

 

 

[Irishman]

28 minutes ago, Coach Nowlin said:

 

 

Saw that coming 

On 11/15/2024 at 4:52 PM, Irishman said:

The issue is that the money and people handling it to make these offers cannot be officially connected to the universities. That ruling came from SCOTUS, so it will not change any time soon. The current path has it heading to semi pro or minor league level play. The only path I see for it to continue is for teams to be run by a President of the NIL group along with a GM, similar to how NFL teams operate. And they would pay the schools a fee to use the uniform, school name and nickname, stadium and other facilities. 

 

[PDB26]

3 hours ago, Irishman said:

The issue is that the money and people handling it to make these offers cannot be officially connected to the universities. That ruling came from SCOTUS, so it will not change any time soon.

But the Supreme Court never ruled on the permissibility of NIL, NIL rules, or NIL recruiting inducements. Alston was on the narrow issue of whether NCAA rules prohibiting members from offering full cost of attendance scholarships was permissible under the Sherman Act. Cavanaugh's threatening concurrence and evisceration of the NCAA's theory of amateurism as pro-competitive rule making is what let the floodgates loose on NIL. The NCAA isn't bound by Alston in a way that would prevent it from changing the rule to permit schools to make cash offers to athletes.

The NCAA then adopted NIL rules which in part classed collectives as boosters, thereby prohibiting collectives from making offers as NIL recruiting inducements. The rule has been challenged under the Sherman Act by the attorneys general of Tennessee and Virginia in a recent action in federal court in Tennessee, and the NCAA has been temporarily enjoined from enforcing that rule because the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits at trial. Basically, the rule prohibiting collectives from making NIL offers as recruiting inducements is likely to violate anti-trust law––so far as the federal judge in Tennessee is concerned. 

[Irishman]

32 minutes ago, PDB26 said:

But the Supreme Court never ruled on the permissibility of NIL, NIL rules, or NIL recruiting inducements. Alston was on the narrow issue of whether NCAA rules prohibiting members from offering full cost of attendance scholarships was permissible under the Sherman Act. Cavanaugh's threatening concurrence and evisceration of the NCAA's theory of amateurism as pro-competitive rule making is what let the floodgates loose on NIL. The NCAA isn't bound by Alston in a way that would prevent it from changing the rule to permit schools to make cash offers to athletes.

The NCAA then adopted NIL rules which in part classed collectives as boosters, thereby prohibiting collectives from making offers as NIL recruiting inducements. The rule has been challenged under the Sherman Act by the attorneys general of Tennessee and Virginia in a recent action in federal court in Tennessee, and the NCAA has been temporarily enjoined from enforcing that rule because the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits at trial. Basically, the rule prohibiting collectives from making NIL offers as recruiting inducements is likely to violate anti-trust law––so far as the federal judge in Tennessee is concerned. 

Thanks for clarifying that.......I should have deleted the first part of my quote and leave just the part about it becoming a semi pro thing in it. 

[Irishman]

Aspects of this have been brought up here over the last couple years. Bottom line is this is heading rapidly toward a professional league outside the NCAA. 
https://www.si.com/college-football/pitch-college-football-super-league-private-equity 

[Coach Nowlin]

 

[Muda69]

IU Athletics eliminates 25 positions in layoffs as it braces for NCAA revenue sharing: https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/college/indiana/2025/01/17/iu-athletics-cuts-25-positions-in-layoffs-as-it-braces-for-ncaa-revenue-sharing-indiana-hoosiers/77775492007/

Quote

 IU Athletics endured a round of layoffs this week aimed at reducing costs as it prepares to share revenues with athletes at the start of the 2025-26 academic year, according to multiple sources with knowledge of the situation. 

The department eliminated 25 positions — 12 were open positions that are not being filled — as it looks to trim 10% of the budget from each of its auxiliaries (compliance, academic services, communications, etc.) and programs.

According to multiple sources, Deputy Director of Athletics and Senior Woman Administrator Mattie White was among the employees laid off. 

White spent 19 years in the department, working her way up through academic and student services to a senior administrative role during Fred Glass’ tenure. She was elevated to her current position as one of Athletic Director Scott Dolson’s deputies in 2020, when Dolson was promoted to AD as Glass’ replacement. 

...

As part of the House vs. NCAA settlement, the nation’s top conferences agreed to pay nearly $2.8 billion directly to players. The new revenue-sharing model allows schools to give up to 22% of the average power league school’s annual revenue to athletes. 

The initial cap for 2025-26 will be around $20.5 million per school and go up as revenues rise throughout the 10-year agreement. The proposal was granted preliminary approval by a federal judge in October. 

There’s a final hearing scheduled for April, but Indiana has already been signing athletes to revenue sharing agreements in anticipation of a July 1 start date. The department anticipates having to reinvest some of the savings from the cuts into positions aimed at managing the new revenue-sharing program that will require having staff members knowledgeable in contracts and analytics. 

School administrators have been working for months to carve out space in a budget reported on the department’s fiscal year 2023 financial report to include more than $144.7 million in operating revenues. 

The Herald-Times and IndyStar understand Dolson has been working aggressively both internally and externally to streamline costs while opening new revenue streams. Indiana’s shift to third-party vendors Legends (apparel) and Levy (hospitality and concessions) were both designed to improve the department’s overall financial position.

One emerging area of growth that athletic departments from across the country are adopting is a per-seat contribution similar to the personal seat licenses used by professional teams. Kansas is introducing that model for its men’s basketball team for the 2025-26 season.

The hope within the department is that those additional revenue streams will eliminate the need for further staff reductions as the revenue-sharing cap increases in the years to come. 

Increased revenue from Indiana’s remarkable 2024 football season will also help in that effort. 

The Hoosiers saw a $4 million increase in ticket sales and more than 100% jump in concession revenues, thanks to a season that included eight home games and a department-record four sellouts of Memorial Stadium. Even with its number of home games reduced to seven in 2025, the department can likely expect a bump in revenues in the form of stronger season-ticket sales, as well as robust gameday revenues so long as the Hoosiers remain competitive. 

Plus, all Big Ten member schools will receive additional funds from the conference thanks to four teams reaching this year’s CFP.

The conference receives $4 million for each qualifier, $4 million for each team that reached the quarterfinals, and a further $6 million for each team that reached the semifinals and finals. By that math, the Big Ten stands to receive the largest per-conference share of Playoff revenue this year, $46 million in total distributions. 

Those funds are added to the Big Ten’s bowl pool and split up among league members. 

...

The difference now, for IU as well as all its Division I peers, is that the expense hole created by revenue sharing will be permanent. 

COVID was a system shock for college athletics but also a singular event mitigated by time. Revenue sharing will, on the other hand, remain standard practice indefinitely, meaning Indiana’s cost-cutting measures this time around needed to be more lasting. 

A second round of layoffs just in the last five years reflects the sometimes-dramatic impact of the shifting flow of money through college athletics. After nearly two decades of revenues pointing ever upward — thanks largely to ballooning television and media rights contracts — new challenges are changing the sports’ financial model, likely for good. 

Here we go.   I wonder this is also affecting the other "big" college athletic powers in Indiana,  namely Purdue and Notre Dame?

 

[Sparty]

48 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

IU Athletics eliminates 25 positions in layoffs as it braces for NCAA revenue sharing: https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/college/indiana/2025/01/17/iu-athletics-cuts-25-positions-in-layoffs-as-it-braces-for-ncaa-revenue-sharing-indiana-hoosiers/77775492007/

Here we go.   I wonder this is also affecting the other "big" college athletic powers in Indiana,  namely Purdue and Notre Dame?

 

All government schools, except ND. They will be just fine.  Raise tuition for the peasants.  

[Bash Riprock]

2 hours ago, Muda69 said:

IU Athletics eliminates 25 positions in layoffs as it braces for NCAA revenue sharing: https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/college/indiana/2025/01/17/iu-athletics-cuts-25-positions-in-layoffs-as-it-braces-for-ncaa-revenue-sharing-indiana-hoosiers/77775492007/

Here we go.   I wonder this is also affecting the other "big" college athletic powers in Indiana,  namely Purdue and Notre Dame?

 

My guess yes..  How soon will it be until athletic programs will begin phasing out more and more of the "non-revenue" generating sports....those sports that prepare our future Olympians.......

Stanford already attempted this....only big donors and lawsuit threats prevented them from doing so.  But with all the $$ going to football and some to hoops, I can see this day on the horizon.

https://www.si.com/college/2021/05/18/stanford-reverses-decision-eliminate-11-varsity-sports#:~:text=Stanford has reversed its plan,men's volleyball—in July 2020.

 

 

[Irishman]

4 hours ago, Muda69 said:

IU Athletics eliminates 25 positions in layoffs as it braces for NCAA revenue sharing: https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/college/indiana/2025/01/17/iu-athletics-cuts-25-positions-in-layoffs-as-it-braces-for-ncaa-revenue-sharing-indiana-hoosiers/77775492007/

Here we go.   I wonder this is also affecting the other "big" college athletic powers in Indiana,  namely Purdue and Notre Dame?

 

The money Notre Dame has made without being required to share from advancing to the championship game has pushed them even further away from joining a conference. I gave Swarbick a hard time for agreeing to the current playoff format thinking it was going to force them to join a conference. But I am willing to admit I may have misjudged him. Maybe he did envision this if ND did reach a championship game. 

[PHJIrish]

Not many "peasants" at Notre Dame.  Your family has a lot of money or you have academic or sports skills that lead to a scholarship.  I didn't have either.

[PDB26]

19 hours ago, Irishman said:

The money Notre Dame has made without being required to share from advancing to the championship game has pushed them even further away from joining a conference. I gave Swarbick a hard time for agreeing to the current playoff format thinking it was going to force them to join a conference. But I am willing to admit I may have misjudged him. Maybe he did envision this if ND did reach a championship game.

The CFP money is cake, but the new NBC deal combined with ND's cut of ACC money is the feather in ND's football independence cap. The CFP deal was good business for structurally preserving independence. 

21 hours ago, Bash Riprock said:

My guess yes..  How soon will it be until athletic programs will begin phasing out more and more of the "non-revenue" generating sports....those sports that prepare our future Olympians.......

Stanford already attempted this....only big donors and lawsuit threats prevented them from doing so.  But with all the $$ going to football and some to hoops, I can see this day on the horizon.

I always thought the reporting on Stanford was incomplete. Consider that Stanford's reported revenues place it well outside the top 25––operating at a loss––yet only Michigan (29) and Ohio State (35) come anywhere close to offering the number of varsity sports as does Stanford. Most of the high-earning departments sponsor between 19-21 varsity sports.

I wonder if, in a strange way, football and Title IX end up being sufficient to save many potentially at-risk programs. I think it will be hard for departments to offset for football and still cut the number of sponsored sports substantially while staying compliant with Title IX.

On 1/17/2025 at 1:09 PM, Muda69 said:

Here we go.   I wonder this is also affecting the other "big" college athletic powers in Indiana,  namely Purdue and Notre Dame?

The department went through staff reductions during COVID, but, after a glance at the athletics department directory, I think they've actually surpassed the number of pre-COVID staff. Notre Dame doesn't do anything off the cuff, so I imagine all department growth has taken place with an eye to the likely future of paying players as employees or engaging in revenue sharing. So far as the changes to the business side at IU go, Notre Dame has been playing that game for decades.

I suspect the House settlement will have limited impact on Notre Dame.

[Bobref]

5 hours ago, PDB26 said:

The CFP money is cake, but the new NBC deal combined with ND's cut of ACC money is the feather in ND's football independence cap. The CFP deal was good business for structurally preserving independence. 

How likely is it that Jack Swarbrick foresaw something like this? It’s looking now like he was playing chess while everyone else was playing checkers.

[Sparty]

2 hours ago, Bobref said:

How likely is it that Jack Swarbrick foresaw something like this? It’s looking now like he was playing chess while everyone else was playing checkers.

Only the GREAT ones can play chess when others are playing checkers.  

[Coach Nowlin]

On 1/17/2025 at 12:59 PM, Sparty said:

All government schools, except ND. They will be just fine.  Raise tuition for the peasants.  

I don't know, Purdue hasn't raised tuition since......checks notes..... yep, 2013, don't see that happening now because of IU laying of folks.   Perhaps there was too much fat in there anyways, okay to trim at that point??   Excessive waste in positions?   Maybe that is why IU did it?   I read the article, not sure what some of those titles actually did,

 

Quote

 

According to multiple sources, Deputy Director of Athletics and Senior Woman Administrator Mattie White was among the employees laid off. 

White spent 19 years in the department, working her way up through academic and student services to a senior administrative role during Fred Glass’ tenure. She was elevated to her current position as one of Athletic Director Scott Dolson’s deputies in 2020, when Dolson was promoted to AD as Glass’ replacement. 

 

 

Mark Cuban should just buy 51% of the Football and Basketball teams and then boom, everything is solved as far as saving smaller programs and all that 

[Muda69]

Biden Makes Last-Ditch Pass at Interfering in College Sports: https://reason.com/2025/01/17/biden-makes-last-ditch-pass-at-interfering-in-college-sports/?itm_source=parsely-api

Quote

On President Joe Biden's way out the door, his Education Department has thrown a wrench into plans for universities to pay student-athletes directly. The payments will almost certainly still happen, but instead of schools using the vast majority of the payments on athletes in big-revenue programs (i.e. football), the Education Department says under Title IX the payments must be "proportionate" between male and female athletes.

The news probably gave some college football coaches and administrators a small heart attack—would they be able to keep the promises they made to a star recruit about how much money he'd make?—until they realized this is far from settled law.

The idea that Title IX applies here comes from a fact sheet published by the department's Office for Civil Rights. The incoming Trump administration's Education Department staff can just as easily publish their own fact sheet that says otherwise (as predicted by Sen. Ted Cruz (R–Texas)). Even if the Trump administration leaves the issue alone, the fact sheet is not a formal regulation and didn't go through any kind of rule-making procedure. It doesn't carry the force of law and probably wouldn't have much weight in court.

 

But the fact sheet still serves as a warning to college athletic departments: Next time there's a Democrat in the White House, be ready for this possibility.

The fact sheet says payments must be "substantially proportionate to the number of students of each sex participating in interscholastic or intercollegiate athletics at that school." Data vary, but the NCAA seems to have a slight majority of male athletes. If that ratio holds up across most schools, then it would upend plans to spend the vast majority of the money on football teams, which often generate the vast majority of athletic department revenue. Instead, almost half of the payments would have to go to women's sports. (Presumably, within the sexes, schools could still spend the vast majority on one sport, such as football or women's basketball.)

The controversial justification is that the payments are "athletic financial assistance," and thus subject to Title IX rules. "The basis for the Title IX guidance is that it classifies revenue sharing as financial assistance (similar to athletic scholarships) which appears to be highly questionable," Patrick O'Rourke, an accountant who compiled possible revenue-sharing estimates, wrote. But others think the application of Title IX to the payments is more clear. "Of course it applies to Title IX, it applies to higher education and has for all sorts of other things," says Mark Owens, an associate professor of economics at Penn State University. "I don't know why this is any different."

Either way, future presidential administrations could just as easily put out a fact sheet like this one, and even go further and put a less-ambiguous interpretation through the formal rule-making procedure.

Or, since the original 1972 law that included Title IX did not address how schools distribute revenue-sharing payments (since such payments did not exist), courts may not defer to the Education Department's interpretation of the law. The Supreme Court's recent overturning of Chevron doctrine may play a role here. "Per the Court's ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, judges may no longer defer to an agency interpretation because the statute is ambiguous," University of New Hampshire Law Professor Michael McCann wrote in a Sportico column. This "could play an instrumental role in diminishing the [name, image, and likeness] fact sheet's importance."

Starting next school year, universities will likely be allowed by the NCAA to start directly paying student-athletes under revenue-sharing agreements. The new payments will be allowed under a new legal settlement that's expected to be finalized in April. Schools will be allowed to spend up to $20.5 million in that school year, with the number set to grow every year. Some coaches have already told the media they expect to have somewhere between $12.5 million or up to $17 million to spend on their football rosters—which would clearly not be compliant with Title IX.

If enacted, the new rule would further burden athletic departments with another regulation to keep track of. "That's kind of another layer that, within these institutions, you have to make sure that everything is, you know, Title IX compliant," Owens says. Throw that on the pile along with a complex web of recruiting rules, NCAA student-athlete rules, and all state and federal laws that affect athletic departments, and it's hard to see how any college sports teams manage to get through a season without breaking anything.

 

[Irishman]

From the early stages of this, I and others knew and posted that Title IX would be an issue. It played into my prediction of this lasting 5 years tops (1 year down, 4 to go). 

[Bobref]

Unintended consequence of NIL … or is this one of its intended results?

Olivia Miles is a standout guard on a very good Notre Dame women’s basketball team. Graduating this Spring, with a year of eligibility remaining, she was expected to be drafted as high as the #2 pick in the upcoming WNBA draft. But she shocked people by declaring — not for the draft — but for the transfer portal. She will likely make more $$ from NIL at her new school than as a rookie in the WNBA, Angel Reese’s outrage notwithstanding.

[US31]

Recent comments by Standford President on state of college football (it was a long statement so I'll paraphrase):

...modern college football is "unethical", "unchristian", "unsportsmanlike" and "a monstrosity".  "Practically all the major universities employ questionable methods in securing athletes".  The President heaped particular scorn on Michigan, where it was claimed the alumni and cheap gamblers of the town brought in men...and paid them salaries to play on Michigan teams

 

[Coach Nowlin]

See how this will shakeout with the federal court settlement that goes into effect this summer:

Here's a more detailed breakdown:

Back Pay:

The settlement includes approximately $2.78 billion in back pay for former Division I student-athletes who played between June 15, 2016, and September 15, 2024, due to the statute of limitations on antitrust claims. 

Revenue Sharing:

Schools can now share up to 22% of their average athletic revenue (from media rights, tickets, and sponsorships) with student-athletes, starting in the 2025-26 academic year. 

Power Five Conferences:

The settlement primarily affects the Power Five conferences (Atlantic Coast, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12, and Southeastern), but other Division I schools can choose to participate. 

NIL Opportunities:

The settlement allows schools to enter into name, image, and likeness (NIL) deals directly with student-athletes, something previously prohibited by the NCAA. 

Roster Limits:

The settlement eliminates scholarship limits in favor of roster limits, allowing schools to determine how many players they can have on their roster. 

Estimated Payouts:

The settlement anticipates that student-athletes could receive $1.5 billion to $2 billion in new benefits annually. 

Claim Period:

Former and current student-athletes who began competing in 2016 through Sept. 15, 2024, are eligible to submit claims for backpay. 

Settlement Cases:

The settlement resolves the House v. NCAA, Carter v. NCAA, and Hubbard v. NCAAcases. 

Law Firm Fees:

Berman and Kessler's law firms requested nearly $500 million in fees and expenses, plus roughly 1% of the money schools pay players during the next 10 years. 

 

[Irishman]

[Coach Nowlin]

What is a Boilermaker?   

Just ask Jimmy Fallon