At a time when a growing number of leading industry voices – including Michigan
football coach Jim Harbaugh and Oklahoma
Athletic Director Joe Castiglione – are publicly endorsing a revenue-sharing model, the broader ecosystem is just starting to get its arms around what such a model would entail.
"There are complexities, unlike professional sports that have a revenue-sharing model," SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey told On3. "Whether it is appreciated or not, we have Title IX law, Title IX policy, Title IX interpretation, lawsuits that spin-off of Title IX requirements that must be considered in that."
A potential revenue-sharing construct is generating increasing industry discussion for multiple reasons: In the landmark House antitrust lawsuit, the NCAA
and power conferences could be on the hook for some $4.2 billion in damages owed to thousands of athletes in retroactive NIL
pay and – importantly – in shares of broadcast rights revenue.
Secondly, sources tell On3 that it is exceedingly difficult to say with a straight face that athletes on the field don't deserve a slice of the revenue pie when an expanded College Football Playoff is expected to generate some $1.4 billion annually in new revenue.
A revenue-sharing structure – which can be entirely separate from a potential employee model – could be implemented right now, athlete advocates tell On3.
In fact, the outspoken Harbaugh said this week he would take less money for athletes to be able to receive a share of compensation.
And the veteran Castiglione told On3: "I support establishing a new structure that allows for us to rightly share some revenue with student-athletes. That has to be part of our path forward. However, I also recognize that path takes us to an unknown reality with unpredictable economic implications for our departments, dramatically impacting how we can support a broad-based athletics program."
Stressing the complexities of a revenue-sharing model, Sankey noted that there is currently a vast array of benefits provided to college athletes, all of which "flow in a very positive way."
"When you start to change that model, rather than just being a headline or a talking point, we all have a responsibility to dig in to understand what that actually means for the support structures provided now, how those can become taxable events, how those affect the flow of financial aid directly to an individual," Sankey said.
"And again, we're talking about a broad array of programs. So just saying it's about 50 or 60 athletics departments, I've not seen legislation that narrows it to that reality. We have to think more broadly than just a few dozen programs." – Eric Prisbell |