Yeah I don't see how Ohio or anyone in the G5 keeps pace with this.

I have no idea where this will end up, but the elephant in the room is the Title IX implications for everyone involved. If implemented in any form, there will still be outside NIL groups etc to pay the athletes in the revenue sports. If you look at the numbers being thrown around for individual players, there’s no chance that the schools will share that much with the female sports. In its present form, there’s no title IX constraints.

I’ve also got to think this will lead to large numbers of varsity sports dropped, both male and female.

If enacted, the realities of big time sports will be codified and the MAC’s of the world will drop a level or two, they can’t keep up with the money being made and spent by the big boys. Major changes are coming, hold onto your hats.

I'm not convinced Title IX is a barrier here. At least one that will be upheld by the courts. I think a lot of people are making a mistake of viewing everything through the lens of how the NCAA currently operates, and their existing regulations, but failing to truly grasp how rapidly things are changing, and the extent of the changes the NCAA will have to implement to maintain any role in the multi-billion dollar business of big college sports.

Title IX very specifically applies to educational benefits. It was relevant to athletic scholarships because scholarships were the defining characteristic of student athletes. It seems very likely to me that NIL money wouldn't be considered by the courts to be an educational benefit. It is very directly tied to an individual's value to the University as an athlete, and seems to have nothing to do with education.

Yes, that is what the NCAA is proposing. But again, people are making (in my opinion) an error by thinking too narrowly about the future state of college sports, and assuming that what exists now will exist in 3 years.

The subtext of this proposal is that the NCAA is clinging onto the cash cow of major college athletics for dear life. They're making this proposal to try and become the governing body for NIL money, but there's no clear incentive for the major programs to accept that. The biggest barrier to this proposal being accepted is the P5 programs themselves, who may not have any interest in running this through the NCAA. After all, the line is blurring an awful lot here between amateur and pro. What value does the NCAA offer the University of Texas in this framework?

Title IX illustrates my above point very clearly. If you run NILs through the NCAA you bolster the legal case that NIL money is an educational benefit that must be shared equally amongst men's and women's sports.

On the other hand, if NILs are run by outside orgs -- as they are now -- there's no guarantee that courts view them as an educational benefit and rule that "the windfall" has to be shared. Logically, it makes no sense that NIL money -- which is based on the value of an individual athlete's name, image, and likeness -- would be of equal value for the Heisman Trophy winner and a woman's volleyball player.

The NCAA wants desperately to be in a position to govern the NIL because otherwise they're on the outside looking in. I'm not sure the biggest athletic programs are well served by that.