Title IX strikes again

[UKnCincy]

The article I read pertained to revenue sharing, not NIL. In fact, it specified that it was not addressing monies from third-parties, but revenue sharing paid directly to players from the school.

I’ve read the actual memo. It’s specific to NIL.

https://www.ed.gov/media/document/ocr-factsheet-benefits-student-athletes

 

[UKnCincy]

I understand how the law works. Its a sh1t law to begin with because it punishes success by forcing quotas. Its an early dei initiative that needs scrapped with the rest of the nonsense.

Students should not be negatively impacted on any level, whether it be scholarship, nil or otherwise, because viewers or attendees prefer watching one sport or athlete over another.

The entire thing, including mindset, needs razed to the ground.

No one says you have to like Title IX. But if you understand the law, then you should neither be surprised or outraged by this most recent guidance. It’s pretty much what you’d expect given how Title IX has been handled over the past 45 years or so.

It essentially says that if a school is going to allocate some budget towards paying student athletes for use of their NIL (such as using athletes in university commercials), then those licensing dollars need to be split proportionally across men and women athletes in aggregate.

It’s not that shocking that the DOE would take that stance, so there’s really no reason for people to view this as outrageous. Folks don’t have to agree it with it, but it’s easy to see how the DOE would view this approach as being consistent with the law.