Interesting, crux of the story is schools could opt into revenue sharing of up to $20m per year. Not a lot of details but have to feel it would benefit B10, SEC schools the most due to their massive tv deals. Also would be interesting how it would effect schools differently. For example we would have to share with hockey, whereas say Illinois wouldn't have that. Or schools in the Big East who have little to no football, would they have huge advantages in basketball then? Have to think so. Might have to cut back on some sports to load up in revenue sports.
NCAA in revenue sharing discussions
- Thread starter leib0039
- Start date
Interesting, crux of the story is schools could opt into revenue sharing of up to $20m per year. Not a lot of details but have to feel it would benefit B10, SEC schools the most due to their massive tv deals. Also would be interesting how it would effect schools differently. For example we would have to share with hockey, whereas say Illinois wouldn't have that. Or schools in the Big East who have little to no football, would they have huge advantages in basketball then? Have to think so. Might have to cut back on some sports to load up in revenue sports.
short ornery norwegian
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2011
- Messages
- 19,887
- Reaction score
- 13,644
- Points
- 113
in essence, NCAA powers-that-be are worried that the NCAA will lose the 'House' case if it goes to trial - and that could result in damages of up to $4-Billion. 'House' involves compensation to athletes who were not allowed to seek NIL in the past.
a settlement on the House case would potentially include an agreement on a separate case involving revenue-sharing. so the NCAA would be looking to wrap up two cases and obtain some certainty on a new compensation model going forward. this would establish direct payments from schools to athletes. not sure what that would mean for NIL collectives. but it would be a huge change in college sports.
stay tuned. as always, the devil is in the details.
a settlement on the House case would potentially include an agreement on a separate case involving revenue-sharing. so the NCAA would be looking to wrap up two cases and obtain some certainty on a new compensation model going forward. this would establish direct payments from schools to athletes. not sure what that would mean for NIL collectives. but it would be a huge change in college sports.
stay tuned. as always, the devil is in the details.
EasyThere Pilgrim
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2018
- Messages
- 1,159
- Reaction score
- 569
- Points
- 113
Anti-college-FB-&-men's-BB-forces are loving this. Creating chaos is the tactic.
We need to be clear. We can't all be waffling and trying to debate 100 different points. That plays right in to their game-plan.
College students should not be paid. Period.
We need to be clear. We can't all be waffling and trying to debate 100 different points. That plays right in to their game-plan.
College students should not be paid. Period.
College students who receive any revenue sharing or NIL money should not be receiving tax free college scholarships.
I also think that the NBA and NFL teams that use the colleges for another minor league system - should be repaying the schools for the scholarship when they take a kid early. The NBA and NFL benefit huge from the name recognition and training done in NCAA sports. They should contribute to a fund for the NIL as well.
Oh I bet it could...never doubt the Law of Unintended Consequences.
MNVCGUY
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2011
- Messages
- 18,981
- Reaction score
- 19,399
- Points
- 113
I honestly thought about rewording my post because yeah....it can always get worse.....but I would be terrified to see a worse system then the one we have right now with wide open pay for play and unrestricted free agency every year for every player.
Yeah it would be really bad...