That guy proved to be a nut with an agenda early on. Discredited time and again
We should all feel comfortable ignoring his slanted content
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
That guy proved to be a nut with an agenda early on. Discredited time and again
We should all feel comfortable ignoring his slanted content
Many big 10 schools were in the red prior to Covid. And no athletic department purposely operate at a deficit. They are just like any other business
Except they aren’t a business. That’s the point and what a lot of people hand wave away without actually thinking about it due to people throwing the phrase around.
AD’s operate more like govt depts. if they get a budget for the year you better believe they are spending every penny allotted towards them. If they make up additional money from higher then expected ticket sales/media deals/donations/etc then great. If they don’t it’s not a huge problem unless stuff gets really out of control or starts to spiral like at UCLA or Arizona (although that was due to incompetence)
Problem with that line of thinking is athletic departments are supposed to be self sufficient, like a business. Any business can choose to spend every penny they can; however, they won’t be successful long term.
And with any business, they plan for the future. But they also have enough funds for “unforeseen circumstances” aka a rainy day fund.
Bigger issue is many athletic departments feel the need to “keep up with the joneses” and their spending gets out of control
get ready for cyclone football and basketball to be streamed on FOX now, too
Basically this will be the equivalent of espn+ so I would imagine Fox will try and put Big 12 content on there if able.
Basically this will be the equivalent of espn+ so I would imagine Fox will try and put Big 12 content on there if able.
Department of Education rescinds Title IX guidance that NIL payments must be proportionate
How Title IX would factor into schools' revenue-sharing decisions has been a lingering question.
www.nytimes.com
NIL won’t need to be equal. That’s a major game changer for alot of AD’s
This seemed like a forgone conclusion after the election but am I the only one who shrugs at this?Department of Education rescinds Title IX guidance that NIL payments must be proportionate
How Title IX would factor into schools' revenue-sharing decisions has been a lingering question.
NIL won’t need to be equal. That’s a major game changer for alot of AD’s
It's the way it should be.
Department of Education rescinds Title IX guidance that NIL payments must be proportionate
How Title IX would factor into schools' revenue-sharing decisions has been a lingering question.
NIL won’t need to be equal. That’s a major game changer for alot of AD’s
Let’s wait and see how this plays out going forward. Interpretations of the DofE do not matter after the Chevron decision. There will eventually be a court case that will set the precedent that schools will follow. Until then, it’ll be up to the school to do what they want.
I agree but I know schools were planning on some type of distribution based on title 9. With this you will see very limited NIL funding to women’s sports from schools. I imagine for the women’s teams that make money there will be some minor comp but those teams are few and far between.
Despite this DoE T9 ruling (which was expected and rational) there will be some RevShare allocated to top individual (i.e. AA and all conference) women athletes for retention purposes regardless of sport. Audi Crooks and Addy Brown would be obvious examples. Now Bill Fennelly may request/insist on all of his players being paid equally (not equal to star FB/MBB players) and if he does that, JP and the Cap Manager will have to deal with that request accordingly.
Sure. I just am saying that this really doesn’t mean much. Title IX still is a law on the books. Rescinding the Chevron deference has more impact on this than this letter or lack of letter. Without Chevron, the DofE’s interpretation has no value in court. I’d imagine we’ll have NIL court decisions within a year that will drive the actual instructions to the adherence to Title IX.
That being said, I’d imagine the courts will side with the money. And the money doesn’t want to pay non-revenue sports a penny.
Agreed, you’re more likely to see results of the P4 negotiating NIL regulations before having the courts broadly weigh in and if the courts decide something super broad it might just move those talks along faster.
I’d be a little surprised if it went towards individual athletes instead of teams at large. I could see a position breakdown maybe but not individual athletes per say for women’s sports (or really sports in general)
It should be based off revenue brought in plain and simple
I'd actually want to hear the argument for why funds raised, however tenuously, to support a player's name, image and likeness as representative of their individual media value, would be distributed instead, even in part, to players no one has heard of.
I think the ISU collective has been very responsible in raising and distributing funds for as many players as possible and getting those kids to give back to the community in return.
The B1G and SEC feel like two criminals who keep getting away with a crime—each time escalating until they reach a breaking point. What happens when they grow tired of each other or decide to cut the dead weight from their conferences? And when $100 million per team is no longer enough and they are sitting in a room with each other wanting more, what will be their next move?
MAJOR College Football Playoff Expansion Is Coming - Josh Pate Cut
MAJOR College Football Playoff Expansion Is Coming - Josh Pate Cut
This feels almost inevitable. At some point the actual big earners in those leagues are going to tire of subsidizing the remoras. 2/3rds of the Big 10 especially are much more like Big 12 and ACC schools than they are the top 1/3rd of the Big 10.
I could totally see the B1G moving to a payout scenario where programs that make the CFP or high-paying bowl games get a bigger cut of the total CFP/bowl payout to the conference than schools that make lower-tier bowls or no bowl games at all. That would be fair. But I highly doubt we'll see a situation where there's unequal revenue sharing from the B1G's media deal/revenue.
The Great Compromise, again. It makes sense, you have to have some balance, and you have to have some reward for being bigger/better. Do a little of both.
