NIL and Title IX

[HDuck]

Well now, how is this gonna work...?

 

 

NCAA Athlete NIL Pay Must Be Title IX Compliant, Dept. of Education Says

WWW.SPORTICO.COM

---

DoE's Office of Civil Rights has released its long-awaited guidance on Title IX and NIL, two weeks before House v...

 

 

[DanLduck]

If this is upheld, there will be some major problemos!

Will tOSU pay 20M+ for girls bball and softball?

 

I have a daughter, but I think title IX is too much.

There is no gender equality, only equity, it's not the same.

 

Why do female gymnasts get more $$ then the guys?!

 

Oy vey!

August can't come soon enough!

[Fitnessczar]

Okay I will take a stab at this.

If revenue sharing is based on sharing revenue from your specific sport than it might actually work. Men's tennis and golf make little to no money. Just as women's tennis and golf.

 

At most universities football pays for itself and every other sport, except men's basketball at some schools.

 

So, if there is no revenue there is nothing to share. So, the discrepancy is not about male and female. It is about generating or not generating revenue.

 

I can't i imagine the business school being required to share donations with the history department.

 

As for NIL. It stands for name, image and likeness. An athlete's name and image carries weight based on  who they are. Based on ON3 one of the top 5 NIL valuations is a young lady who plays volleyball for LSU. You have seen her on commercials during football games. Her valuation is strictly based on her image. None of her teammates get anywhere near her valuation.

 

This will be "interesting" to watch in the coming months and years.

[HDuck]

"...putting the onus on schools to ensure their male and female athletes receive proportionate NIL opportunities and resources—regardless of whether the funding comes from external sources."

 

"Resources" is code for equal outcomes.  tOSU's $20 million in football NIL agreements would have to be matched for women athletes.   Even though tOSU's NIL may have an outside NIL organization funded by donors interested only in laying NIL dollars on football.

 

OCR further stressed that even when NIL payments are made by third parties, such as booster clubs or collectives, schools remain responsible for ensuring that these funds do not create sex-based disparities.

 

OCR wrote. “The fact that funds are provided by a private source does not relieve a school of its responsibility to treat all of its student-athletes in a nondiscriminatory manner.”

 

If the test was "opportunities" rather than "resources" then there would be some flexibility, but I don't see the advocates of Title IX buying anything except equal outcomes.

[1Funduck]

They truly do not know what they are demanding. What happens if you are 'forced' to NIL pay these kids by the department of education? Then that means the DOE is controlling the schools and that in turn means that getting paid by said school means you are potentially a government worker. This in turn means that you get to 'retire' with state benefits. Now, what happens if these kids get paid millions of dollars per year only to transfer every year to a different school in a different state? 5 state pensions? Really? 

 

How about this? Title IX linked to profit sharing in said sport you get a scholly from? 

 

(sigh) (ugh)

[DrJacksPlaidPants]

Remember this. NIL stands for Name, Image and Likeness. The money earned from NIL is driven by the free market. They're not saying that the payout has to be equal. Just the opportunities and resources (marketing, brand management, etc.). If they dictate equal outcomes (i.e. money earned) then the courts will intervene as they would if Nike were forced to pay Sabrina as much as they pay Justin.

[David Marsh]

For revenue sharing I can absolutely see how title IX comes in for that. 

 

But the very essence of NIL is that it is NOT connected to a school. Sure, these NIL collectives have a school focus but they aren't connected to a school as an institution. If these collectives were directly connected to a school then I can see how title IX comes into play and can be upheld but the whole point of NIL is that athletes sell their name, image and likeness to third parties that use it.

[Jon Joseph]

Here's the story from AP.

 

 

Title IX memo throws wrench in plans for schools to pay NIL money directly to athletes

APNEWS.COM

---

The U.S. Department of Education says plans for colleges to pay athletes directly for their name, image and likeness deals would run afoul of Title IX.

 

Timing? On Monday, there's a new sheriff in town. Hmmm?

[kirklandduck]

On 1/17/2025 at 8:58 AM, David Marsh said:

For revenue sharing I can absolutely see how title IX comes in for that. 

 

But the very essence of NIL is that it is NOT connected to a school. Sure, these NIL collectives have a school focus but they aren't connected to a school as an institution. If these collectives were directly connected to a school then I can see how title IX comes into play and can be upheld but the whole point of NIL is that athletes sell their name, image and likeness to third parties that use it.

I think it probably just applies to revenue sharing (I could be wrong though).  But I think this throws a wrench for some schools because they want to disassociate themselves from NIL collectives and just pay their players directly.  Some schools like Colorado have already, pre-emptively, ditched their NIL in anticipation of this.  Now they're kind of screwed.

 

*Edit* Nevermind!  Looks like it does claim to apply to NIL according to the article...I'm not exactly sure how that would work though.  This is getting messy in a hurry!