Significant News in Regards to Rev Sharing / Title IX
- Thread starter Richie O
- Start date
I was first!! Have to find the post. Looks like we are board legends
All this money talk. I’m becoming a bored legend.
Why so?
I think I agree, but have not dug in too deep. But just a quick glance at Title IX, and tagging @retired711 for his thoughts:
"Title IX states:
No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.
.......
A recipient institution that receives Department funds must operate its education program or activity in a nondiscriminatory manner free of discrimination based on sex, including sexual orientation and gender identity. Some key issue areas in which recipients have Title IX obligations are: recruitment, admissions, and counseling; financial assistance; athletics;"
Preliminary thought- can see the argument holding some water that women will claim they are being denied benefits and financial assistance that men's sports are receiving. Not saying I agree, just saying. . . . .
Title IX and Sex Discrimination
Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 protects people from discrimination based on sex in education programs or activities which receive Federal financial assistance.www.ed.gov
My post from a thread earlier this year^^^^^, linked below:
NIL allocation
What should atheltic revenue pay for? What should any entity revenue pay for? Am I entitled to a percentage of my companies REVENUE? What about HC Schiano? No you’re entitled to your salary. Do you guys have any understanding of (1) what a business is and how it works and (2) the fact that...
rutgers.forums.rivals.com
Last edited:
You either cut more sports so there is less mouths to feed or drop all sports together. Sometimes it's not worth the headache. 😢😢😢
I have been worried about this since “revenue sharing” started being discussed several months ago.
"name, image and likeness"
I can see having to provide equal opportunities for publicity. But if the athlete isn't a star and they're on a team that isn't popular, that athletes name image or likeness isn't worth anything. Not sure if even men on the soccer team or even baseball or wrestling are getting what football and basketball players get....but I don't think the money schools will be paying out is considered nil, that's revenue sharing I believe. Even then, if your sport isn't generating any revenue that's like getting paid for not doing anything. This is all new so there haven't been enough cases to clear everything up and set a precedent. Will take some time.. To me this seems like the equivalent of a referee calling an unsure play a touchdown because they know they can take a closer look in video review.
I can see having to provide equal opportunities for publicity. But if the athlete isn't a star and they're on a team that isn't popular, that athletes name image or likeness isn't worth anything. Not sure if even men on the soccer team or even baseball or wrestling are getting what football and basketball players get....but I don't think the money schools will be paying out is considered nil, that's revenue sharing I believe. Even then, if your sport isn't generating any revenue that's like getting paid for not doing anything. This is all new so there haven't been enough cases to clear everything up and set a precedent. Will take some time.. To me this seems like the equivalent of a referee calling an unsure play a touchdown because they know they can take a closer look in video review.
U.S. Dept of Education should be a prime target for DOGE.
Yeah, I was gonna say in a couple of days you may not even have to provide the women uniforms with names on them. Just hand out numbers so they can reuse the jerseys next year. Lol
That texts stayed NIL opportunities provided by school, this whole time I thought we were talking about moving towards revenue share provided by school?
Wouldn’t that be out of scope here?
@retired711 ?
Wouldn’t that be out of scope here?
@retired711 ?
they are
>President-elect Donald Trump has vowed to get rid of the Education Department — and his so-called Department of Government Efficiency will likely play a key role in any cuts to or restructuring of the federal agency.
Of the two DOGE leaders, Ramaswamy has made the most public remarks about education. He has asserted that education should be funded by state and local governments, “not the feds,” and returning that responsibility to the states is part of a “key solution to our federal deficit problem.”<
maybe some will consider this DOE propaganda or consider it insight
No matter what you might want to read this if you're not sure just what the DOE is supposed to do.
Overview
Education is primarily a State and local responsibility in the United States. It is States and communities, as well as public and private organizations of all kinds, that establish schools and colleges, develop curricula, and determine requirements for enrollment and graduation. The structure of education finance in America reflects this predominant State and local role. Of an estimated $1.15 trillion being spent nationwide on education at all levels for school year 2012-2013, a substantial majority will come from State, local, and private sources. This is especially true at the elementary and secondary level, where about 92 percent of the funds will come from non-Federal sources.
Federal Role in Education
This page discusses the role of the U.S. Department, providing a brief history of the Department as well as a descrption of the Department's mission and staffing.
I mean it’s a really wild idea that Revenue would be mandated to be shared equally amongst the sports that don’t contribute to earning the revenue. What makes a swimmer different from a club soccer player or an intramural flag football qb in that regard.
because of years of pushing EQUITY.... everyone is for equality but this sounds like equity...at the end of the day very little people care about womens sports to throw huge money at it....womens hoops yes does bring in some revenue at some schools....this is a farce, you knew they would want women to have access to making as much as men
The idea is that the revenue sharing consists of payments to the athletes for NIL. That's why "revenue sharing" and "NIL" are being talked about together.
This issue came up in the 1970s when the Department of Education was proposing that financial aid be allocated proportionally. The NCAA argued that requirement should not apply to revenue sports. The Department rejected that position. So far as I know, the Department's decision was not challenged in court.
I am *not* saying that revenue sharing should or will be treated the same way. What I am saying is that the idea that revenue sports and non-revenue sports are treated the same is not a new one.
It's as real as the White House Chief of Staff.
The title 9 problem starts and ends with the fact that football should never have been counted as a sport for equal treatment because even at bad schools, it generally generates enough revenue to pay for itself. The schools are not spending more on football than they are on women’s sports because football generates the revenue to fund the program, whereas for all of the Olympic sports (men and women’s), the school funds 100%. That Olympic funding should be done evenly for both men and women. But football should not be part of the equation. Because football has been counted title 9 has decimated men’s Olympic sports in college and had a terrible impact on men’s teams performance on the U.S. Olympic team as well because schools have cut the men’s programs to compensate for the 85 men’s scholarships for football, decimating the training grounds for male Olympic athletes.
Similar threads
