House v. NCAA settlement approved: Landmark decision opens door for revenue sharing in college athletics

[Psalm 1 guy]

It will be interesting to see how this new NIL era develops.

House v. NCAA settlement approved: Landmark decision opens door for revenue sharing in college athletics

A federal judge granted final approval for the $2.8 billion lawsuit Friday evening

www.cbssports.com

 

[OldAndInTheWay]

From
Mineo's site:

WHAT DOES THE SETTLEMENT MEAN FOR PENN STATE WRESTLING

1. According to the last official PSU financial report, wrestling lost $2,053,337 in fiscal year 2023-24. The total revenue was $2,403,242 and total expenses were $4,456,579. The PSU athletic department has announced that it will revenue share $20.5 million to PSU sports programs. The percentage breakdown of what each sport at PSU gets has not been announced yet.

That money has to come from somewhere so there will be pressure put on all the PSU non-revenue generating sports to increase their income and limit or eliminate their losses.

2. Pat Kraft, the PSU Athletic Director loves coach Cael Sanderson. He has repeatedly praised him for the way that he conducts his program. He can be seen at all the home wrestling matches and at the championship events. He has said very emphatically, "Cael will get what he wants". Does Cael want another staffer, does he want to opt out of the National Duals, or something else. But Cael will get what he wants!

What it does mean is that AD Kraft will continue to cover the multi-million dollar spending deficit every year by the wrestling program.

3. Sanderson has often stated his emphasis and focus is on raising money for more scholarships. He wants all his top wrestlers and top recruits to be on full scholarships. What he really wants is for all scholarships to be endowed. That means generating enough money that can be invested and the interest pays the scholarship each year.

4. NIL- Sanderson has said that he will not play the NIL game. What he means is that he will not get into bidding wars with other colleges for the commitment of a recruit (like Bo Bassett and his reported $5 million to commit to Iowa).

There is a full-time staffer that works directly with Penn State's Happy Valley United for all NIL deals. Every wrestler can solicit their own individual NIL deals.

5. Revenue Sharing- Penn State's Athletic Department will have $222 million to 'share with its athletes. $20.5 million will go to revenue sharing and $1.5 million to additional scholarships. The great majority of the money will go to football and basketball, probably around 85%.

Wrestling could get somewhere around 5% of the total amount of the revenue sharing or $1.025 million. Sanderson can distribute that money evenly among the starters, or promise a certain amount to a recruit, or base the money on performance, or any other type of distribution that he sees fit to do.

6. Because of the new roster limits Penn State wrestling has lost seven wrestlers on its roster in the past few months to the transfer portal. This was needed to make way for the six new high school recruits and two transfers coming in next season.

Penn State has already shown that they will be much more selective in their recruiting efforts going forward. Penn State will only lose two potential wrestlers after the 25-26 season due to eligibility (Haines and Ono). Only two 2026 high school wrestlers have committed (Jayden James and Sam Herring).

7. The Nittany Lion Wrestling Club is a Regional Training Center and it is a big factor in elite recruits picking Penn State. It is very well funded and it provides funds for Penn State wrestlers outside of the Penn State wrestling program for National and international competitions.

8. Sanderson likes to strategically schedule easier competition before the start of the Big Ten season. With the inevitable disappearance of some wrestling programs that task will be much more difficult.

 

[Psalm 1 guy]

From
Mineo's site:

WHAT DOES THE SETTLEMENT MEAN FOR PENN STATE WRESTLING

1. According to the last official PSU financial report, wrestling lost $2,053,337 in fiscal year 2023-24. The total revenue was $2,403,242 and total expenses were $4,456,579. The PSU athletic department has announced that it will revenue share $20.5 million to PSU sports programs. The percentage breakdown of what each sport at PSU gets has not been announced yet.

That money has to come from somewhere so there will be pressure put on all the PSU non-revenue generating sports to increase their income and limit or eliminate their losses.

2. Pat Kraft, the PSU Athletic Director loves coach Cael Sanderson. He has repeatedly praised him for the way that he conducts his program. He can be seen at all the home wrestling matches and at the championship events. He has said very emphatically, "Cael will get what he wants". Does Cael want another staffer, does he want to opt out of the National Duals, or something else. But Cael will get what he wants!

What it does mean is that AD Kraft will continue to cover the multi-million dollar spending deficit every year by the wrestling program.

3. Sanderson has often stated his emphasis and focus is on raising money for more scholarships. He wants all his top wrestlers and top recruits to be on full scholarships. What he really wants is for all scholarships to be endowed. That means generating enough money that can be invested and the interest pays the scholarship each year.

4. NIL- Sanderson has said that he will not play the NIL game. What he means is that he will not get into bidding wars with other colleges for the commitment of a recruit (like Bo Bassett and his reported $5 million to commit to Iowa).

There is a full-time staffer that works directly with Penn State's Happy Valley United for all NIL deals. Every wrestler can solicit their own individual NIL deals.

5. Revenue Sharing- Penn State's Athletic Department will have $222 million to 'share with its athletes. $20.5 million will go to revenue sharing and $1.5 million to additional scholarships. The great majority of the money will go to football and basketball, probably around 85%.

Wrestling could get somewhere around 5% of the total amount of the revenue sharing or $1.025 million. Sanderson can distribute that money evenly among the starters, or promise a certain amount to a recruit, or base the money on performance, or any other type of distribution that he sees fit to do.

6. Because of the new roster limits Penn State wrestling has lost seven wrestlers on its roster in the past few months to the transfer portal. This was needed to make way for the six new high school recruits and two transfers coming in next season.

Penn State has already shown that they will be much more selective in their recruiting efforts going forward. Penn State will only lose two potential wrestlers after the 25-26 season due to eligibility (Haines and Ono). Only two 2026 high school wrestlers have committed (Jayden James and Sam Herring).

7. The Nittany Lion Wrestling Club is a Regional Training Center and it is a big factor in elite recruits picking Penn State. It is very well funded and it provides funds for Penn State wrestlers outside of the Penn State wrestling program for National and international competitions.

8. Sanderson likes to strategically schedule easier competition before the start of the Big Ten season. With the inevitable disappearance of some wrestling programs that task will be much more difficult.

Regarding point #6 above, would the staff be amenable to any of those seven wrestlers coming back to or staying in the Penn State program based on the below-portion of the referenced article? Does the settlement even allow those who transferred prior to the settlement to return? There are definitely some unanswered questions regarding the transfer issue.

"The House settlement's final approval was twice delayed in April after the judge echoed objectors' concerns over imposing roster limits on current players, one of the pillars of the settlement. Schools were cutting players from rosters in the spring, even though the settlement had yet to be approved, complicating discussions during settlement hearings. The judge asked attorneys to craft a plan to allow current players to be "grandfathered in" with the new roster limits. The NCAA, power conferences and the plaintiffs in the lawsuit instead offered a compromise: schools have the option to keep current players on their rosters and temporarily exceed new limits until their eligibility expires."

 

[BriantheLion]

From
Mineo's site:

WHAT DOES THE SETTLEMENT MEAN FOR PENN STATE WRESTLING

1. According to the last official PSU financial report, wrestling lost $2,053,337 in fiscal year 2023-24. The total revenue was $2,403,242 and total expenses were $4,456,579. The PSU athletic department has announced that it will revenue share $20.5 million to PSU sports programs. The percentage breakdown of what each sport at PSU gets has not been announced yet.

That money has to come from somewhere so there will be pressure put on all the PSU non-revenue generating sports to increase their income and limit or eliminate their losses.

2. Pat Kraft, the PSU Athletic Director loves coach Cael Sanderson. He has repeatedly praised him for the way that he conducts his program. He can be seen at all the home wrestling matches and at the championship events. He has said very emphatically, "Cael will get what he wants". Does Cael want another staffer, does he want to opt out of the National Duals, or something else. But Cael will get what he wants!

What it does mean is that AD Kraft will continue to cover the multi-million dollar spending deficit every year by the wrestling program.

3. Sanderson has often stated his emphasis and focus is on raising money for more scholarships. He wants all his top wrestlers and top recruits to be on full scholarships. What he really wants is for all scholarships to be endowed. That means generating enough money that can be invested and the interest pays the scholarship each year.

4. NIL- Sanderson has said that he will not play the NIL game. What he means is that he will not get into bidding wars with other colleges for the commitment of a recruit (like Bo Bassett and his reported $5 million to commit to Iowa).

There is a full-time staffer that works directly with Penn State's Happy Valley United for all NIL deals. Every wrestler can solicit their own individual NIL deals.

5. Revenue Sharing- Penn State's Athletic Department will have $222 million to 'share with its athletes. $20.5 million will go to revenue sharing and $1.5 million to additional scholarships. The great majority of the money will go to football and basketball, probably around 85%.

Wrestling could get somewhere around 5% of the total amount of the revenue sharing or $1.025 million. Sanderson can distribute that money evenly among the starters, or promise a certain amount to a recruit, or base the money on performance, or any other type of distribution that he sees fit to do.

6. Because of the new roster limits Penn State wrestling has lost seven wrestlers on its roster in the past few months to the transfer portal. This was needed to make way for the six new high school recruits and two transfers coming in next season.

Penn State has already shown that they will be much more selective in their recruiting efforts going forward. Penn State will only lose two potential wrestlers after the 25-26 season due to eligibility (Haines and Ono). Only two 2026 high school wrestlers have committed (Jayden James and Sam Herring).

7. The Nittany Lion Wrestling Club is a Regional Training Center and it is a big factor in elite recruits picking Penn State. It is very well funded and it provides funds for Penn State wrestlers outside of the Penn State wrestling program for National and international competitions.

8. Sanderson likes to strategically schedule easier competition before the start of the Big Ten season. With the inevitable disappearance of some wrestling programs that task will be much more difficult.

Only one year for Ono? I thought I read two, and maybe four!

 

[Tom McAndrew]

From the below article from the Daily Collegian (NOTE: These are just estimates):

"Per NIL-NCAA, it’s been estimated that Penn State will spend 91% of that $20.5 million on football and men’s basketball. Men’s hockey comes in third with an estimated $394,839 available to pay its athletes, then wrestling with $310,241.

Women’s hockey and women’s volleyball are expected to receive $83,794 and $79,371 respectively, while women’s basketball is estimated to have $63,218 to pay its athletes. Men’s tennis is set to receive the least amount with just $15,064, an average of $1,674 per player.

Women’s soccer will receive $61,440 with the men getting $39,825. Baseball has $53,323 to use, while softball is estimated to have $47,991. In short, each sport at Penn State is getting some sum of money to share among its athletes."

There's also info on roster limits, the grandfathering of athletes on a team who exceed the number roster spots, and when each university must designate athletes it wants grandfathered in, and the date by which (it depends on which season the sport competes in) each team must have their rosters at or below the roster limit in the settlement. The article is worth a read, to get some insight on how it impacts PSU wrestling, and PSU athletics.

 

[Psalm 1 guy]

Thanks Tom. The article was very informative and answered many questions for me. Some interesting tidbits: "How the revenue sharing allocated to each team [$310,241 for wrestling] is split among the roster is up to the discretion of the program." It will be interesting to see what the coaches do regarding this.

Roster limits​

"While the settlement eliminates scholarship limits, it adds roster limits, meaning each team will have to decrease the number of players on its roster. This change allows any athletes on the team to receive scholarship aid, allowing teams to offer a scholarship to each player up to the roster limits." I wonder how many wrestlers will be getting partial or full scholarship assistance? This would obviously be limited by the funding Kraft is willing to apply directly to the wrestling team, at least that is my assumption.

"Penn State will have until June 15 to fully commit to revenue sharing and will have to “designate” athletes it wants grandfathered in."

The biggest question I have regards this statement, " . . . NIL money, which will now have to be reported through the new NIL Go portal. The portal will be run by Deloitte with the purpose of reviewing all third-party NIL deals worth $600 or more in aggregate to ensure deals are made at fair market value." How "fair market" will be determined will be a huge issue. I saw recently that a pitcher on the Texas Tech softball team had an NIL deal for $1,000,000 this year and just recently another inked another $1,000,000 deal for next season. I really can't see a deal like that cutting it if "fair market value" is the determining factor going forward.

 

[OldAndInTheWay]

From the below article from the Daily Collegian (NOTE: These are just estimates):

"Per NIL-NCAA, it’s been estimated that Penn State will spend 91% of that $20.5 million on football and men’s basketball. Men’s hockey comes in third with an estimated $394,839 available to pay its athletes, then wrestling with $310,241.

Women’s hockey and women’s volleyball are expected to receive $83,794 and $79,371 respectively, while women’s basketball is estimated to have $63,218 to pay its athletes. Men’s tennis is set to receive the least amount with just $15,064, an average of $1,674 per player.

Women’s soccer will receive $61,440 with the men getting $39,825. Baseball has $53,323 to use, while softball is estimated to have $47,991. In short, each sport at Penn State is getting some sum of money to share among its athletes."

There's also info on roster limits, the grandfathering of athletes on a team who exceed the number roster spots, and when each university must designate athletes it wants grandfathered in, and the date by which (it depends on which season the sport competes in) each team must have their rosters at or below the roster limit in the settlement. The article is worth a read, to get some insight on how it impacts PSU wrestling, and PSU athletics.

I think these estimates by the Daily Collegian are way off. Nothing has been announced yet by Penn State what the percentage breakdown of revenue sharing will be. So anything now is just guessing. But we can look to what other colleges have announced. Most colleges are in the 75% range for football. Saying that Penn State will give 91% to its football for revenue sharing is way out of whack. What each sport gets for revenue sharing is totally up to Pat Krafts discretion. And don't forget Kraft has sung the praises of the wrestling program repeatedly and enthusiastically and has said that Cael will get what he wants. I think it's much more realistic to expect wrestling to get 4%-5%.

 

[OldAndInTheWay]

Thanks Tom. The article was very informative and answered many questions for me. Some interesting tidbits: "How the revenue sharing allocated to each team [$310,241 for wrestling] is split among the roster is up to the discretion of the program." It will be interesting to see what the coaches do regarding this.

Roster limits​

"While the settlement eliminates scholarship limits, it adds roster limits, meaning each team will have to decrease the number of players on its roster. This change allows any athletes on the team to receive scholarship aid, allowing teams to offer a scholarship to each player up to the roster limits." I wonder how many wrestlers will be getting partial or full scholarship assistance? This would obviously be limited by the funding Kraft is willing to apply directly to the wrestling team, at least that is my assumption.

"Penn State will have until June 15 to fully commit to revenue sharing and will have to “designate” athletes it wants grandfathered in."

The biggest question I have regards this statement, " . . . NIL money, which will now have to be reported through the new NIL Go portal. The portal will be run by Deloitte with the purpose of reviewing all third-party NIL deals worth $600 or more in aggregate to ensure deals are made at fair market value." How "fair market" will be determined will be a huge issue. I saw recently that a pitcher on the Texas Tech softball team had an NIL deal for $1,000,000 this year and just recently another inked another $1,000,000 deal for next season. I really can't see a deal like that cutting it if "fair market value" is the determining factor going forward.

Determining fair market value is a huge can of worms. There's definitely going to be major lawsuits when NIL deals are negated. As an example, there was a bidding war for the commitment of the recruit Bo Bassett. He was reported to get millions of dollars. That is his fair market value!

 

[Tom McAndrew]

I think these estimates by the Daily Collegian are way off. Nothing has been announced yet by Penn State what the percentage breakdown of revenue sharing will be. So anything now is just guessing. But we can look to what other colleges have announced. Most colleges are in the 75% range for football. Saying that Penn State will give 91% to its football for revenue sharing is way out of whack. What each sport gets for revenue sharing is totally up to Pat Krafts discretion. And don't forget Kraft has sung the praises of the wrestling program repeatedly and enthusiastically and has said that Cael will get what he wants. I think it's much more realistic to expect wrestling to get 4%-5%.

The numbers/percentages listed in the article are definitely estimates. The Daily Collegian article made that clear, and I reiterated that in my comments about the article.

Note the following:

- the article doesn't state, as you indicated, that football will get 91%. It states: "... it’s been estimated that Penn State will spend 91% of that $20.5 million on football and men’s basketball."

 

[Tom McAndrew]

Determining fair market value is a huge can of worms. There's definitely going to be major lawsuits when NIL deals are negated. As an example, there was a bidding war for the commitment of the recruit Bo Bassett. He was reported to get millions of dollars. That is his fair market value!

I don't think (I could be wrong) that the definition or context of "fair market value" that you're using is consistent with its use in the settlement.

Sports Business Journal has, for months, been pretty good in their analysis of the proposed settlement. Below, I'm linking an article of theirs from last month, where they focus on fair market value. In it, they state:

"Specifically, under the proposed settlement, college athletes can continue entering NIL deals both with entities (or individuals) affiliated with their universities and with unaffiliated third parties. Any NIL deal worth more than $600 must be reported to a third-party clearinghouse, which Deloitte will operate. Further, under the settlement, any NIL deal with an affiliated entity must be “for a valid business purpose” with “compensation at rates and terms commensurate with compensation paid to similarly situated individuals with comparable NIL value.” If it is determined that an affiliated NIL deal does not comply with this standard (which some have referred to as the “fair-market-value test”), an athlete may challenge the determination in arbitration."

Assessing the ‘fair market value’ of affiliated NIL deals under the House settlement

The purpose and intent behind the restrictions on affiliated NIL deals is clear: Universities cannot use NIL deals with affiliated entities to circumvent the new revenue-share cap. However, the proposed provisions beg a number of questions.

www.sportsbusinessjournal.com

The NCAA and the universities seem to be moving quickly to implement the provisions of the House settlement. Despite these actions (which are basically required of them), I concur that that there are going to major lawsuits, though I expect them to be in more areas than just negated NIL deals. It will be interesting to see how all of this plays out.

 

[PennState1985]

Determining fair market value is a huge can of worms. There's definitely going to be major lawsuits when NIL deals are negated. As an example, there was a bidding war for the commitment of the recruit Bo Bassett. He was reported to get millions of dollars. That is his fair market value!

That's not what fair market value means in this context.

"Fair market Value (FMV) reflects what a student-athlete's NIL rights would command in a competitive market, considering factors like their popularity, social media following, and potential brand appeal"

Remember, the NIL being given out has to have a quantifiable relationship to value to the business giving out the NIL. If wrestler A and wrestler B have similar value to a given business, then their NIL should be similar. In addition, each sport has a valuation. Fencer A and B are unlikely to command what FB players A and B will get.

So in the context of FMV in sports, Deloitte will fashion some sort of matrix that one must be close to in order to pass muster. At least that's how I read it.

 

[OldAndInTheWay]

That's not what fair market value means in this context.

"Fair market Value (FMV) reflects what a student-athlete's NIL rights would command in a competitive market, considering factors like their popularity, social media following, and potential brand appeal"

Remember, the NIL being given out has to have a quantifiable relationship to value to the business giving out the NIL. If wrestler A and wrestler B have similar value to a given business, then their NIL should be similar. In addition, each sport has a valuation. Fencer A and B are unlikely to command what FB players A and B will get.

So in the context of FMV in sports, Deloitte will fashion some sort of matrix that one must be close to in order to pass muster. At least that's how I read it.

You said above that 'fair market value' reflects what a student athletes NIL rights would command in a competitive market. Isn't that exactly what Bo Bassett did when everyone was bidding for his college commitment? He got very high dollars because his popularity, social media following, and potential brand appeal were great. He got a multi-million dollar contract because that was his value. And it was fair because everyone bid on that value. That is my understanding of fair market value. Why am I wrong?

 

[OldAndInTheWay]

I don't think (I could be wrong) that the definition or context of "fair market value" that you're using is consistent with its use in the settlement.

Sports Business Journal has, for months, been pretty good in their analysis of the proposed settlement. Below, I'm linking an article of theirs from last month, where they focus on fair market value. In it, they state:

"Specifically, under the proposed settlement, college athletes can continue entering NIL deals both with entities (or individuals) affiliated with their universities and with unaffiliated third parties. Any NIL deal worth more than $600 must be reported to a third-party clearinghouse, which Deloitte will operate. Further, under the settlement, any NIL deal with an affiliated entity must be “for a valid business purpose” with “compensation at rates and terms commensurate with compensation paid to similarly situated individuals with comparable NIL value.” If it is determined that an affiliated NIL deal does not comply with this standard (which some have referred to as the “fair-market-value test”), an athlete may challenge the determination in arbitration."

Assessing the ‘fair market value’ of affiliated NIL deals under the House settlement

The purpose and intent behind the restrictions on affiliated NIL deals is clear: Universities cannot use NIL deals with affiliated entities to circumvent the new revenue-share cap. However, the proposed provisions beg a number of questions.

www.sportsbusinessjournal.com

The NCAA and the universities seem to be moving quickly to implement the provisions of the House settlement. Despite these actions (which are basically required of them), I concur that that there are going to major lawsuits, though I expect them to be in more areas than just negated NIL deals. It will be interesting to see how all of this plays out.

I guess everything boils down to someone's definition of what is fair market value. It's like the question, "what is the value of my house"? Well, the value is whatever you can get. Houses sell at a certain price because that's what the buyer considered was the value. People overpay for a house and people underpay for a house. And there is no Real Estate Commission- like there will be with the newly formed College Sports Commission- to tell the buyer what to do.

And then there is the definition of 'valid business purpose'. If I have a contracting business and I want to charge someone $50 an hour for my services, that is valid for my business. And no one can tell me what I can and cannot charge. Why should NIL deals be any different?

I think it is inevitable that Bo Bassett like deals will be denied and will end up in court. Also, I don't understand what is even the purpose of this type of NIL regulation. What is the Sports Commission trying to accomplish? If it is unregulated then what is the downside? What is the upside of strict regulation?

 

[PennState1985]

You said above that 'fair market value' reflects what a student athletes NIL rights would command in a competitive market. Isn't that exactly what Bo Bassett did when everyone was bidding for his college commitment? He got very high dollars because his popularity, social media following, and potential brand appeal were great. He got a multi-million dollar contract because that was his value. And it was fair because everyone bid on that value. That is my understanding of fair market value. Why am I wrong?

This is a very real life example of the use of FMV to control prices/value. You and three other people are bidding on a house worth $500,000. You get overexuberant and bid/win the house at $600,000. However, in comes the appraiser and he/she says the house is only worth $500,000 based on comps. That's FMV, and you'll have to renegotiate the price of the house to be in line with norms. FMV is to keep the landscape fair and equitable for everyone as much as possible. In the context of NIL, that is how it will operate. It is not true that value is what one is willing to pay for it in this context. So that $1M NIL deal that the Texas Tech softball player got is unlikely to pass the FMV test even though the buyer and seller agreed to the price.

 

[OldAndInTheWay]

This is a very real life example of the use of FMV to control prices/value. You and three other people are bidding on a house worth $500,000. You get overexuberant and bid/win the house at $600,000. However, in comes the appraiser and he/she says the house is only worth $500,000 based on comps. That's FMV, and you'll have to renegotiate the price of the house to be in line with norms. FMV is to keep the landscape fair and equitable for everyone as much as possible. In the context of NIL, that is how it will operate. It is not true that value is what one is willing to pay for it in this context. So that $1M NIL deal that the Texas Tech softball player got is unlikely to pass the FMV test even though the buyer and seller agreed to the price.

I understand how NIL approvals will work with the lawsuit settlement. But that doesn't mean it's correct or fair. If I buy a house that comes in under the appraisal value, that should be my problem and my fault. But maybe I want to buy the house at that price for my own reasons, regardless. The value is fair for me if I term it to be fair. Maybe I don't want to renegotiate or I don't care if the appraisal value is low. I want that house at that price. And how is it fair or legal for anyone to tell me that I cannot buy that house at that price? The same should be true for NIL deals. Why should some commission play God and tell me how I can or cannot spend my money or tell me what kind of jobs I can do for what amount of money. Playing God and telling someone that their deal it's not fair market value is what is really not fair. I guess what I'm really saying is it is a near certainty there will be major lawsuits to determine if my type of scenario is legal.

 

[OldAndInTheWay]

I understand how NIL approvals will work with the lawsuit settlement. But that doesn't mean it's correct or fair. If I buy a house that comes in under the appraisal value, that should be my problem and my fault. But maybe I want to buy the house at that price for my own reasons, regardless. Maybe I don't want to renegotiate or I don't care if the appraisal value is low. I want that house at that price. And how is it fair or legal for anyone to tell me that I cannot buy that house at that price? The same should be true for NIL deals. I guess what I'm really saying is it is a near certainty there will be major lawsuits to determine if my type of scenario is legal.

Consider the NFL or any other pro sports League. Do they have a similar type of setup? No they don't. An owner can make an offer to a player at any dollar figure as long as it's kept under the salary cap. There is nothing in pro sports like what will happen in college sports.

 

[Tom McAndrew]

 

[Corby]

No doubt this will be challenged by athletes in court. Title 9 lawsuits will be the biggest challenge to this deal I have a feeling.

 

[Psalm 1 guy]

Penn State, UCLA taking first eight-figure private capital deals with Elevate

Penn State and UCLA are the first two clients for Elevate's College Investment Initiative, signing eight-figure private capital deals.

www.on3.com

 

[Tom McAndrew]

 

[Tom McAndrew]

 

[Wrestleknownothing]

From The Athletic article on the potential return of the bag man:

The new enforcement terms under the House settlement instruct college athletes to declare any third-party NIL deals worth at least $600 into a clearinghouse database. The idea is that the clearinghouse, dubbed “NIL Go” and managed by the accounting firm Deloitte, will serve as a restrictor plate on NIL collectives and pay-for-play, flagging deals that do not reflect a valid business purpose or fall within a reasonable range of compensation. Yahoo Sports reported that at the recent ACC spring meetings, Deloitte officials shared that 70 percent of past deals from NIL collectives would be denied under the new clearinghouse.

But in candid conversations, coaches and recruiting staffers have serious doubts that athletes will declare those deals, or do so accurately. Some have suggested that players are being encouraged not to declare deals at all, but to simply take the money and keep quiet rather than risk the clearinghouse flagging it. And if that’s the case, where do we suspect that money might be coming from?

 

[Corby]

From The Athletic article on the potential return of the bag man:

The new enforcement terms under the House settlement instruct college athletes to declare any third-party NIL deals worth at least $600 into a clearinghouse database. The idea is that the clearinghouse, dubbed “NIL Go” and managed by the accounting firm Deloitte, will serve as a restrictor plate on NIL collectives and pay-for-play, flagging deals that do not reflect a valid business purpose or fall within a reasonable range of compensation. Yahoo Sports reported that at the recent ACC spring meetings, Deloitte officials shared that 70 percent of past deals from NIL collectives would be denied under the new clearinghouse.

But in candid conversations, coaches and recruiting staffers have serious doubts that athletes will declare those deals, or do so accurately. Some have suggested that players are being encouraged not to declare deals at all, but to simply take the money and keep quiet rather than risk the clearinghouse flagging it. And if that’s the case, where do we suspect that money might be coming from?

This whole thing is gonna open up so many lawsuits. Deloitte and NIL GO will be challenged for sure. Title 9 stuff will be a mess. The NCAA might end up being gone before this is all over

 

[Wrestleknownothing]

This whole thing is gonna open up so many lawsuits. Deloitte and NIL GO will be challenged for sure. Title 9 stuff will be a mess. The NCAA might end up being gone before this is all over

There already is an appeal, pre The Athletic::

Eight female athletes filed an appeal of the House v. NCAA settlement Wednesday in a California federal court, arguing that the landmark agreement violates Title IX. The appeal only addresses the back damages portion of the settlement, not the portion that establishes the system of direct revenue sharing with athletes.

 

[Corby]

There already is an appeal, pre The Athletic::

Eight female athletes filed an appeal of the House v. NCAA settlement Wednesday in a California federal court, arguing that the landmark agreement violates Title IX. The appeal only addresses the back damages portion of the settlement, not the portion that establishes the system of direct revenue sharing with athletes.

Wasn't expecting it so soon this is gonna be a mess