Dept. of Education says Title IX applies to payments to athletes (NIL)

[NT80]

This NIL garbage keeps getting more stupid each week, lol...

"However, the Office for Civil Rights -- the division of the Department of Education that enforces Title IX law -- said in its memo Thursday that those future payments should be considered "athletic financial assistance" and therefore must be shared proportionally between men and women athletes."

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/43443976/dept-education-says-title-ix-applies-payments-athletes

 

[MeanGreen22]

P4s looking at this

[MeanGreenZen]

So Caitlin Clark should have had to share her State Farm $$$ with some men’s Iowa basketball player?

[Wag Tag]

Nope, not going to happen!

[NT80]

3 hours ago, Wag Tag said:

Nope, not going to happen!

I guarantee a lawyer will use this ruling and get a female athlete group to sue for it. 

[NorthTexasWeLove]

lol. People will treat this as they have been treating this since its onset, no respect and minimal recognition. And for this ruling, rightfully so. They expect UNT to NIL to its women's team every cent on the dollar as its men's team. lololol. Just isn't happening. 

[GMG_Dallas]

5 hours ago, MeanGreenZen said:

So Caitlin Clark should have had to share her State Farm $$$ with some men’s Iowa basketball player?

Her boyfriend was on the men's basketball team. Case settled. NEXT

[GMG_Dallas]

Really though, this will probably affect the P4s and wealthier G5s than those with limited money like us. Some of these schools are paying $4 million plus for a QB. Find me a women's sport that with receive any pay close to that.

[MeanGreenTexan]

5 hours ago, MeanGreenZen said:

So Caitlin Clark should have had to share her State Farm $$$ with some men’s Iowa basketball player?

I don't think so.   That would be considered N-I-L money from private entities.   You know, what the actual rule was made for.   

This ruling sounds like it's coming down due to institutions taking on the NIL funding in-house and dispersing checks like SMU back in the day.    It has morphed into true pay-for-play.   And in that case, yeah, Title IX would/should apply.

[NT80]

17 minutes ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

I don't think so.   That would be considered N-I-L money from private entities.   You know, what the actual rule was made for.   

This ruling sounds like it's coming down due to institutions taking on the NIL funding in-house and dispersing checks like SMU back in the day.    It has morphed into true pay-for-play.   And in that case, yeah, Title IX would/should apply.

Exactly.  If schools give NIL out, like scholarships, they are saying schools have to (should) comply with Title IX rules on how it's split between men and women.

Someone would probably have to come up with proof showing this is revenue to be split with players, but earned more by men's sports.  They would need to show/prove that the men's sports provided x amount of the total revenue compared to women's sports for that school.

[NT93]

3 hours ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

I don't think so.   That would be considered N-I-L money from private entities.   You know, what the actual rule was made for.   

This ruling sounds like it's coming down due to institutions taking on the NIL funding in-house and dispersing checks like SMU back in the day.    It has morphed into true pay-for-play.   And in that case, yeah, Title IX would/should apply.

I love it.  I’m for anything that throws a wrench in the farce known as “NIL”