Nil isn’t going away. I don’t see this helping Iowa at all. This new money every big school will have. The NIL will still drive decisions by athletes.
Times are ‘a Changing. Finally, pay for play is here.
- Thread starter Mohawkeye
- Start date
All of this will save me hundreds of hours of worry, anger, heartache, and money, etc., in regard to Hawkeye sports. I watch some pro football (Viking fan. used to be a fanatic back in the Alan Page, Jim Marshall era) but no longer have any emotional investment because the players do not care. Players and rosters seem to change, daily. It is very hard to form any emotional attachment. College athletics is at that point for me. It is now only about money. No longer will athletes "bleed black and gold". They will only bleed whatever color pays the most. That's great for them. The schools and athletes will continue to make money while the fans continue to get fleeced.
Also did I read right that they will go back to 2016 to pay college athletes? Will that include every athlete in every sport, man or woman? Absolute insanity. Almost as stupid as the cadaver in the White House forgiving college debt.
I don’t think every school outside of the Big and SEC will be able to afford 20 million a year. That number is likely to go up considerably. I think this will help Iowa marginally, especially in basketball where our NIL is lagging.
Fans are always going to pay up. Have you priced a football game or cable subscription lately? The market decides prices. This just redistributes the money from athletic departments to players. Why is that bad? Let people get paid for the services they provide.
Yeah….handing out money to 17, 18, 19 20 year old kids sounds like a solid solution! What could possibly go wrong? Will these lads and lasses have to pay income taxes on this money?
University of Iowa Sports
A total number of 808 student athletes participate in varsity sports at the school, 373 of whom are male and 435 are female.
If split equally among all it would be $24,700 each.
A total number of 808 student athletes participate in varsity sports at the school, 373 of whom are male and 435 are female.
If split equally among all it would be $24,700 each.
It's going to be interesting to see how the $20M will be divided up. Hopefully, football & MBB will get the majority of the money.
I posted this on the first page but it appears that men & women won't have to be paid equally. It looks like, because of Title IX, that a lot of male & female athletes would get a cut of the $21m to $22M PER YEAR but the vast majority of the revenue sharing would be directed towards football and men's basketball.
When it comes to female sports, here are some excerpts from the linked article:
But how does Title IX apply in a revenue-sharing model?
That question remains unclear and there is ongoing litigation in Oregon that could, eventually, provide the answer.
In an interview in January, Baker said he believed that Title IX terminology is more “about equal participation” and not “so much about equal amounts.” That would open the door for a school to share more total revenue with men athletes as long as the school offers revenue to an equal number of women athletes.
In his appearance in Washington D.C., Kessler noted that he “hopes” Title IX is applied in any future athlete compensation model.
What would House v. NCAA settlement mean? A revenue-sharing model to end college amateurism
After months of negotiations in the House antitrust case, the next evolution of athlete compensation is on the horizon.
sports.yahoo.com
I agree players should be getting some money and coaches less. That said I don't think this plan levels playing field for Iowa and I am less likely to watch. Billionaire sponsored teams will still dominate. So I don't think being pro capitalism and not as interested in college athletics is inconsistent.
≤≥
why would the split of this $$ be any different than how money is split in “the real world” of business?
Its not "seemingly wrong", thats not NIL and never has been. Its simply what some schools are getting a way with at this point, and will hopefully be addressed. "Recruiting" future players is still the same old "bag o cash" and has nothing to do with NIL.....
This is exactly how I see it it too some people think this will just “fix” and level the playing field. When in reality everyone will have this money while still having a “huge” NIL edge on us.
It's not exactly volunteering if they are getting paid to go, is it? My point was those that are prospering, should be footing the bill.
So please explain this you are saying the athletes should be footing the bill? OR The general pubic who benefits from the wins and such....
I’m saying the universities should be footing the bill. If they have to take a little of the bloated coaches salaries, so be it.
Time for these overpaid coaches and athletic directors to be checked a little bit. They have been making massive amounts of money on the backs of these kids for the past few decades.
If you have half a brain Bear…..after the last couple of years, you would know why these folks get paid an arm and a leg…..”these kids” are getting free room and board, free education, free medical….and no income taxes…..it ain’t like they they are being raped and abused by Uncle Fred……Paying these kids thousands of dollars……gee, what could possibly go wrong? Phuquin’ 18-21 yr old kids with too much money……hmmmm……………..
We don't have to protect the young adults from too much money. If a person makes a dumb decision because they are young, dumb, and full of money then that is on them. At least they can afford a lawyer, it is the American way.
there's going to be a 22% salary cap for players when it comes to revenue sharing; why not have salary caps for ADs and coaches?
Coaches and ADs can get fired, too….and nothing “Ethical” is discussed….what might be the “ethics” involved a player is dropped from a roster for what ever reason? Or with “money” are ethics no longer a priority?
