Revenue Sharing Challenges One of the significant challenges posed by the NCAA's proposed governance changes is the issue of revenue sharing. If the House v. NCAA settlement is approved, Power Four schools may need to fund revenue sharing up to $22 million annually for the next decade. This financial burden could be particularly challenging for smaller schools within these conferences. The proposed changes could exacerbate existing financial disparities, forcing some schools to make tough decisions about participating in top-tier college sports. #NCAA #RevenueSharing #CollegeSports
Cyprian McFarlane’s Post
More Relevant Posts
-
"The ground shifted in 2021, when the US Supreme Court cast aside whatever remained of the imagined ideals of amateurism with a unanimous ruling that described the National Collegiate Athletic Association, the governing body for sports at US universities, as a price-fixing monopoly." How does a ruling that draws a distinction between cash payments from SCHOOLS that are: "professional level" -- which the NCAA is allowed to prohibit (as the Ninth Circuit even ruled in O'Bannon as well) VS. "education-based" -- which the NCAA is allowed to cap at $5,980 annually cast aside whatever remained of the imagined ideals of amateurism? And how does it help the situation to continue spreading a narrative that the NCAA "is losing" and "will lose" in court? #ncaa #nil #antitrust https://lnkd.in/g2UbKKKK
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
My questions to the current College Football Bowl System Owners are; 1. What EDUCATIONAL value does participating in the extra practices and playing in the extra games during finals time and during their winter break schedule provide to the “STUDENT” Athlete Football Players? 2. What MEDICAL or HEALTH benefits does participating in these extra practices, and playing in these extra games provide to the Football Players? 3. What ECONOMICAL benefit does this extra work and additional time away from home provide to the Football Players or their families? The answer is ZERO to all three! While my Plan offers Major Benefits in all three Categories to the Players and their Families!
With the new Virginia law allowing state institutions to provide Name, Image and Likeness compensation to college athletes, it is critical for lawmakers and the NCAA to address essential questions in our recent letter to NCAA: • Will institutional NIL money be taxable income for athletes? • Is institutional NIL money subject to Title IX? • Reported on NCAA financial reports like other athlete benefits? Read our letter in response to Project D1 proposals here: https://lnkd.in/esv_XcMY #collegeathletes #collegesports #NIL #TitleIX #NCAA
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
"The five autonomy conferences and the NCAA agreeing to settlement terms is an important step in the continuing reform of college sports that will provide benefits to student-athletes and provide clarity in college athletics across all divisions for years to come" 😂 🙄 AND PROVIDE CLARITY: 1. Employees or not 2. Can the cap be circumevented 3. How does a newly imposed Salary Cap not violate Anti-Trust Laws 4. Will athletes opt in 5. How if at all does Title IX apply 6. Why are non-P4 programs paying 60% vs. P4 at 40% 7. Media rights valuations 8. What protections, if any, are provided for future lawsuits 9. Who was this collectively bargained with 10. Conflicts of Interests everywhere (university level, athlete level, conference levels, P4 vs. G5 vs. FCS) Anything but CLARITY!!!! #NIL #nameimagelikeness #ncaa #revenueshare #housesettlement https://lnkd.in/eW7wJUmW
Joint statement on the agreement of settlement terms - NCAA.org
ncaa.org
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
House v. NCAA settlement-Student Athlete Claims In the settlement documents the class of student athletes covered under the agreement are those who were SA's from June, 2016 to Sept, 2024. (please refer to the court documents for specifics on the proposed settlement) This covers a wide range of former and present student athletes. The Court has created a settlement administrator in order for those student athletes who wish to make claims under the settlement, object or opt out. The website is: https://lnkd.in/gpQXtd7R The current deadlines are as follows: Claim Filing Deadline: January 31, 2025 Opt out Deadline: January 31, 2025 Objection Deadline: January 31, 2025 Final Approval Hearing of Settlement: April 7, 2025 If you are a former or present student athlete or know someone who is, please pass on this information. The goal of the Player Protection Program is to educate and protect all student athletes.
College Athlete Compensation
collegeathletecompensation.com
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
The second comment we would like to highlight from the online journal is by Justin Elkin, entitled "Fool’s Gold: An Exploratory Analysis into How Recent Student Successes against the NCAA Poses a Serious Risk to Equity in College Sports" Check it out in the link below!
Fool’s Gold: An Exploratory Analysis into How Recent Student Successes against the NCAA Poses a Serious Risk to Equity in College Sports
ecommons.udayton.edu
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
The NCAA has decided to settle and end the antitrust lawsuits by agreeing to pay former and current athletes $2.7 billion over 10 years. This settlement marks a significant shift in the landscape of amateurism, as athletes can now receive compensation from their schools. Starting in 2025, revenue sharing will occur with $20 million a year allocated to paying athletes. While this is a small step forward, many questions remain about how these funds will be distributed. For student-athletes, it's essential to understand that the world of college athletics is changing. Prepare yourself for financial opportunities, continue to build your personal brand, and stay updated on NCAA legal cases and how your school will distribute these funds. #ChatZDP #NCAA #studentathletes #compensation #NIL #Personalbranding
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
🙌 There’s some good financial news for college athletes 🏈🏀, thanks to the settlement reached between the NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) and its Power Five conferences. Part of the deal is paying student athletes $2.7 billion over ten years. Perhaps even more significant, it opened the door for colleges to directly pay their athletes. 🎓💰🤝 Whatever your take on the settlement, it’s easy to agree that everyone deserves to be paid -- equally -- for the work that they do. ⚖️ #FinancialNews #NCAA #EqualPay #CollegeSports #FinancialKnowledge #FinancialWellness
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
Today, on CNBC’s ‘Squawk Box. Joe Moglia discussed the NCAA’s pending settlement and its implications for collegiate athletics. The revenue-sharing model in collegiate sports heavily favors programs that generate significant income, primarily football and basketball. This model exacerbates the financial divide between these programs and smaller, less lucrative sports. The result? A growing disparity that could endanger the sustainability and diversity of collegiate sports programs across the country. Collegiate sports should not merely be profit-driven. They are a vital part of our educational system, providing opportunities for personal growth, education, and the building of community spirit. When only a few sports benefit from the majority of funding, we risk losing the broader educational and social values that these programs provide. #NCAA #RevenueSharing #Athletics #EducationFirst #Leadership
NCAA student payment deal former creates big liability issues, says TD Ameritrade CEO Joe Moglia
cnbc.com
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
💰 Industry shaping news happened over the past week, as the NCAA board of governors and the Power Five conferences have approved a historic settlement that, pending legal review and judge approval, will end “amateurism” as we know it and usher in a new era of college athletics where student athletes are paid by the schools. There are still way more questions than answers and a lot to figure out, but the one fundamental thing that has been agreed upon with this settlement: the notion of “amateurism,” the much maligned, 100+ year bedrock of the current college sports system that has long been guarded by the NCAA and other college administrators, is dead. In its place, there is a framework for $2.8 billion in backpay to former athletes for lost compensation plus a revenue sharing agreement on up to $20 million per year for future players. If approved, this new framework would be implemented by 2025. 🧠 My three takeaways from the deal: - This proposed system is a net positive, but it will only deepen the chasm between the “have’s and the “have not’s.” - The settlement doesn’t provide a real solution for NIL collectives, and they are unfortunately going to continue to operate mostly as is, for now. - Private Equity is going to fill the void for these schools in need of salary cap funding, and it likely paves the way for the privatization of athletic departments 🔥There is still much to be sorted out with this new system. I have three burning questions about the deal. Time will tell how these shake out. - Does this new world run afoul of Title IX? - Will student athletes keep going and push to be student athletes? - Will Congress finally step in and create a national standard? Interested in learning more? Check out this week's Sports Business Playbook 👇 https://lnkd.in/gESavwcc
Amateur Hour is Over
sportsbusinessplaybook.beehiiv.com
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
Dartmouth's basketball players and the union that purports to represent them have filed a failure to bargain charge with the #NLRB. Now we're getting somewhere. For those who are new here, this charge will almost certainly set up a test-of-certification case. The Board will be asked to determine whether the university unlawfully refused to negotiate with the basketball team (spoiler: the answer will be "yes"), and then Dartmouth will appeal that decision to the First Circuit. What happens at the Circuit is an open question. What's nearly certain, though, is that this issue will end up in front of the Supremes. Of course, Congress could (and probably should) intervene here, but it's an election year and they're all seemingly focused on November's outcome instead of legislating. Frankly, the need for Congress to figure this all out is compounded by the growing challenges to the constitutionality of the Board's structure. Assuming more injunction requests are granted, it's unclear to me where or how an aggrieved party might litigate a ULP charge. Federal court, maybe? Although then what do you do with all of the Board's rules and regulations? [Shrugs].
To view or add a comment, sign in