Fictional scenarios about funds are all well and good until Title IX jumps up and tears models like that all to pieces.
Title IX implications were NOT addressed by the House Case, and that case has not even been approved. Title IX will be implemented (it ALWAYS IS - historically, look it up), and it has little to do with which sport generates the revenue. Title IX is about access and opportunities, not revenues. The source of the revenue is moot in the University decisions that I've seen over the past 25 years. The Government does not consider where the University funds come from (the State, Tuition, Endowments, Donations), they only evaluate equal opportunity.
I don't blame the ADs preparing for the most obvious scenarios, but those plans better consider Title IX
You can bet your last dollar that the $22M revenue sharing NIL money will be subject to Title IX. Any other outside NIL deals that players make ARE NOT subject to Title IX.
This whole mess is far from over.
Title IX implications were NOT addressed by the House Case, and that case has not even been approved. Title IX will be implemented (it ALWAYS IS - historically, look it up), and it has little to do with which sport generates the revenue. Title IX is about access and opportunities, not revenues. The source of the revenue is moot in the University decisions that I've seen over the past 25 years. The Government does not consider where the University funds come from (the State, Tuition, Endowments, Donations), they only evaluate equal opportunity.
I don't blame the ADs preparing for the most obvious scenarios, but those plans better consider Title IX
You can bet your last dollar that the $22M revenue sharing NIL money will be subject to Title IX. Any other outside NIL deals that players make ARE NOT subject to Title IX.
This whole mess is far from over.
