mthoopsfan
Well-known member
"NIL money is fundamentally different from financial aid. To treat the two the same would be stretching Title IX beyond its intended scope. That said, colleges still bear responsibility for ensuring that male and female athletes have equal opportunities to cash in.
The [Biden] administration originally argued that NIL money facilitated by schools should be distributed in proportion to male and female athletes, much like scholarships and financial aid. That argument, while rooted in a genuine desire to ensure gender equality in college sports, was legally weak. Title IX is designed to ensure that schools provide equal opportunities for male and female athletes, not to regulate individual earnings in a free market.
And the very nature of NIL means that the compensation comes from third parties — brands, businesses and booster collectives — not from the schools themselves.
This leaves female athletes in a position where market forces, rather than federal law, determine their earning potential. The reality is that NIL earnings are overwhelmingly dominated by male athletes, particularly those in revenue-generating sports. The top earners are almost exclusively football and men’s basketball players, with a handful of female athletes — such as LSU’s Angel Reese or former UConn star Paige Bueckers — breaking through. This isn’t necessarily because female athletes aren’t marketable; rather, it’s a reflection of which sports drive the most attention, media coverage and commercial interest.
Does this mean schools have no responsibility to address the disparity? Absolutely not. Colleges need to step up in a major way to ensure that female athletes have the same opportunities as their male counterparts to capitalize on NIL deals.
The Department of Education made the right call in ruling that Title IX does not apply to NIL payments, but colleges still have a moral obligation to ensure that every athlete — male or female — has an equal shot at success in this new financial landscape."
Why Title IX doesn’t apply in lucrative college sports deals
Where does this leave female athletes? Unfortunately, it leaves them in a position where market forces, rather than federal law, determine their earning potential.
Read in The Hill: https://apple.news/AItK3UnuLQd6DoFeZAa8-OA
The [Biden] administration originally argued that NIL money facilitated by schools should be distributed in proportion to male and female athletes, much like scholarships and financial aid. That argument, while rooted in a genuine desire to ensure gender equality in college sports, was legally weak. Title IX is designed to ensure that schools provide equal opportunities for male and female athletes, not to regulate individual earnings in a free market.
And the very nature of NIL means that the compensation comes from third parties — brands, businesses and booster collectives — not from the schools themselves.
This leaves female athletes in a position where market forces, rather than federal law, determine their earning potential. The reality is that NIL earnings are overwhelmingly dominated by male athletes, particularly those in revenue-generating sports. The top earners are almost exclusively football and men’s basketball players, with a handful of female athletes — such as LSU’s Angel Reese or former UConn star Paige Bueckers — breaking through. This isn’t necessarily because female athletes aren’t marketable; rather, it’s a reflection of which sports drive the most attention, media coverage and commercial interest.
Does this mean schools have no responsibility to address the disparity? Absolutely not. Colleges need to step up in a major way to ensure that female athletes have the same opportunities as their male counterparts to capitalize on NIL deals.
The Department of Education made the right call in ruling that Title IX does not apply to NIL payments, but colleges still have a moral obligation to ensure that every athlete — male or female — has an equal shot at success in this new financial landscape."
Why Title IX doesn’t apply in lucrative college sports deals
Where does this leave female athletes? Unfortunately, it leaves them in a position where market forces, rather than federal law, determine their earning potential.
Read in The Hill: https://apple.news/AItK3UnuLQd6DoFeZAa8-OA
