Greg Sankey discusses issues surrounding revenue sharing, how Title IX factors in

Greg Sankey shared some engrossing thoughts on the issues surrounding revenue sharing at SEC Media Days in Nashville.

Joining On3’s JD PicKell on The Hard Count live and in-person, Sankey gave his opinion on the matter, including how Title IX factors into the equation.

“Well, the State of California, through its assembly, introduced and I think they advanced the bill to the Senate, that contemplated revenue sharing, so that’s really the one specific description of a model,” started the SEC Commissioner. “I think the question is really incomplete, because it doesn’t consider that unlike professional sports, we’re subject to Title IX requirements. That’s a reality. The California bill allocated. a very different level of revenue to three sports: football, men’s basketball and women’s basketball by percentage, which in its face appeared to be a violation of Title IX requirements.

“The State can’t pass a law, and include laws that say nothing about this law should be construed as a violation of Title IX. That’s not the way this works.”

In addition to revenue sharing issues and Title IX, Sankey also made sure to mention that you have to factor in employment law when discussing the topic, and the changes to the current structure that would have to be made.

“There’s also important issues around employment law that have to be considered,” added Sankey. “Our student-athletes are not asking us to be employees. In fact, they’ve been very clear that they don’t want to be. There are implications from that, that are not all roses and sunshine for them.

“I think what has to be understood too, is just this notion of redirecting revenue by some mandate or law will alter greatly the student-athlete experience that’s now provided. So medical care, mental wellness care, academic support, nutritional support, travel. The ability to accommodate student-athletes who are moving around for different needs, be it internships, a career exploration. We’re in the summertime, where our programs are sending groups of student-athletes abroad, both for competitive purposes, service purposes separate from competition, and learning purposes. All of those things are impacted when we change the economics of college sports.”

Finally, the SEC Commissioner made it a point to highlight how Olympic sports would be changed, as they simply don’t bring in the same amount of money as sports like football and men’s basketball.

“Lastly, I think it’s important to note that our colleges and universities provide the foundation for our Olympic movement and Olympic success,” Sankey said. “If you change significantly the economics of college sports, you change our Olympic development, our Olympic training and our Olympic sport model. That has like, big picture implications on the medal podiums.

“So I understand the question, I understand the motivation for some in California, I just think it’s been a really incomplete dialogue on realities that actually are the assets, the benefits that are currently present now in college sports. It would be significantly affected if we went down that road.”

Alas, it’s evident there’s more of the mountain to climb when it comes to revenue sharing, at least in Greg Sankey’s vision.