Drew
Its a post, about nothing!
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2013
- Messages
- 7,852
- Reaction Score
- 27,900
I interpreted the article differently although I could be mistaken. I believe the big football schools want to inhouse NIL with a cap at $20mil. Otherwise how would their retroactive payout be calculated?
Per the article, there are two lawsuits happening at the same time that this “settlement” would hope to address:I read the article as Fishy did, that NIL basically comes in house.
That said, using the limited amount of info out there that's been cobbled together, we're like 51st in terms of what the collectives have raised, over $3 mill. Which is more than 5 other P4s, and pretty much every G5. While we're a long way away from Texas, tOSU and LSU (all over $20 mill), there are a ton of schools in the $5-$6 mill range with competitive football that will also be hurt by this, even some from the SEC and B1G (i.e., we get more NIL than Maryland). I would think, using SJ's comment above, that schools would start to look at whether Title IX could be overturned, given the current makeup of SCOTUS, as there are likely enough teams that would be financially hobbled to the point of considering such a drastic outcome. And if it looks like SCOTUS would be willing to hear such case, well, everyone probably goes back to the negotiating table.
I also don't know what kind of rationale would be used to suggest a ton of former UConn athletes missed out on tens of thousands of NIL dollars. There aren't many pulling down NIL now. I don't think anyone on the swim team is making anything. Why would they be entitled to retroactive pay?
In short, it'll hurt. But I wouldn't jump to a conclusion that it's a death sentence at this point.
One from previous collegiate athletes who are suing the NCAA for lost wages due to being unable to monetize their Name, Image, Likeness while in school
One suing the NCAA stating that schools should be able to pay their athletes directly for performance in the form of revenue sharing for revenues earned by the schools from the athlete’s games and performances.
In order to settle the first lawsuit for lost wages, member institutions of the NCAA will be on the hook for payouts to former athletes totaling over $4B. In order to settle the second lawsuit, they are looking to institute this $20M annual “cap” allowing schools to directly pay their players in the form of sharing incoming revenues (ticket sales, TV money, etc) with them.
Nowhere in the article does it state that all NIL related payments would come in house and/or that because the schools will provide revenue sharing with their athletes, that they cannot earn outside NIL monies.
Ultimately where I think this will wind up is two fold, schools who contribute to the $4B settlement with former athletes will wind up forming a “new” division within division one. These schools will likely be your large football schools + other P5’s willing and able to contribute. Then, that division (and potentially others outside of it) will share revenues generated through activities such as ticket sales and TV money with their athletes at $20M annually. Those athletes will then also earn in addition to the $20M revenue share whatever “outside” NIL money they are able to earn from collectives, autographs, appearances, etc.
TLDR: Some schools will have to pay lots of money to former athletes to settle lawsuit 1. Schools that contribute to that settlement will form new NCAA Division. New NCAA Division will share revenue with athletes In addition to collective and appearance based NIL. In order to afford all of that, school must be very rich. UConn not rich. Therefore bad for us.