Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
On 6/7/2025 at 9:43 AM, Fondren & Main said:

Uncle DeLoitte thinks they can regulate college football?

IMG_3333.gif.ba040fed928c77fe21636e1abe82238d.gif

Maybe DeLoitte saw an opportunity to fleece College Football. They will just approve most everything and charge a ton doing it.

Posted
On 6/5/2025 at 10:42 AM, immamac said:

I remember posting that surly wasn't gonna get involved with any NIL cuz it was too messy...little did I know that no one else was gonna fucking step up and we did Burnt Ends and kicked off what would eventually become Horns With Heart and The Pancake Factory.

Surly: What starts here changes the CFB world. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Texas Tech introduces comprehensive plan to lead in revenue share era

resize.thumb.webp.1cf8570c9e97dfc3167962d4504a76e0.webp

Quote

LUBBOCK, Texas – Texas Tech will usher in a new era of intercollegiate athletics this July with a comprehensive plan that further demonstrates its commitment to competing at the highest levels and its investment in its student-athletes.

As Texas Tech enters a new era of college athletics, the Red Raider Club will integrate the Matador Club under its umbrella. The Matador Club name reflects bold and forward-thinking support for Texas Tech's student-athletes. The Matador Club had previously served as the official NIL collective of the athletics department the last three-plus years, positioning Texas Tech as a national leader in supporting its student-athletes through NIL.

By integrating the Matador Club under its banner, the Red Raider Club will lead the effort to provide annual funding for revenue sharing, student-athlete scholarships and a comprehensive range of programs that elevate the student-athlete experience – both on and off the field. This transformation represents a commitment to adapt, to lead and to invest in championship-caliber programs and student-athletes.

"As we transition to a new model, know that we are ready," Director of Athletics Kirby Hocutt said. "Over the past year, we have studied various impacts of the House settlement on our department and have been ready for this new era in college athletics. Texas Tech will continue to be a leader nationally in this era. Our donors and supporters will have the ability to impact our success like never before, but it will take all of us. Gifts to the Red Raider Club – both small and large – help provide opportunities to the best prospective student-athletes and provide the necessary resources to build championship rosters like we are experiencing right now with many of our programs."

As part of the NCAA House settlement finalized this past Friday, Texas Tech is now permitted to share up to $20.5 million of its departmental-generated revenue directly with student-athletes beginning in the 2025–26 academic year. To support this transformational change, the Red Raider Club will be responsible for generating $14 million annually to help fund Texas Tech Athletics' new revenue-sharing model. This funding will also support student-athlete scholarships, academic resources, professional development, leadership programming, nutritional offerings and more. The remaining portion of the revenue-sharing commitment will be supported by University investment and additional athletics-generated revenue streams.

Inheriting The Matador Club will assist in this effort, providing donors one primary organization to contribute either on an annual basis or via monthly payments. Current members of The Matador Club will be able to continue monthly payments without disruption as part of the merger.  

"The Red Raider Club is proud to be preparing for the next era of college athletics. We will be leaders in this space and will provide our fans and donors innovative opportunities to support our student-athletes" said Andrea Tirey, Senior Associate Athletics Director. "By bringing the Matador Club under our umbrella as the revenue share fund of the Red Raider Club, we're giving fans and donors a single, unified place to give — one that directly impacts the recruitment and retention of our student-athletes and helps us build championship-caliber student-athletes and teams. We are incredibly grateful to everyone who continues to step up, at every level, and invest in our future."

In addition to the Matador Club and Red Raider Club merger, Texas Tech has implemented the following in preparation for the July 1 implementation of the House Settlement. The Red Raider Club will share further information this summer on several new steps it is taking to enhance its fundraising operation to reach new goals.

Creation of Revenue Share Administration Unit: Texas Tech has created a dedicated Revenue Share Administration unit within the Internal Affairs and Compliance area of the athletics department. This team will be responsible for the execution of university NIL agreements with student-athletes, the monitoring of the annual revenue share cap and third-party NIL reporting. These efforts will be led by Justin Opperman, a longtime member of the athletics department and attorney. Opperman most recently served as the Associate Athletics Director for Compliance up until accepting this new position.

Partnership with AthletiQ: As college athletics shifts from a collective-focused NIL model to a university-led revenue share structure, Texas Tech has partnered with AthletiQ Media to help lead the way into this next chapter. AthletiQ Media, a brand of Primitive – a digital marketing firm - has been instrumental in the creation, execution, fundraising and management of The Matador Club. AthletiQ Media will now expand its role to support Texas Tech Athletics in maximizing outreach, driving donor engagement and building sustainable funding models under the new revenue share framework. Through targeted storytelling, innovative digital campaigns, and NIL-specific donor tiering strategies, AthletiQ Media will help Texas Tech stay ahead of the ever-evolving college sports landscape and continue to build championship-level programs on and off the field.

Red Raider NIL Exchange: Texas Tech launched this fall the Red Raider Exchange NIL marketplace through an expanded partnership with Teamworks and INFLCR. The marketplace is a student-athlete NIL business registry, custom-designed for businesses, donors, alumni and any others interested in connecting with student-athletes. Registered businesses can search, filter and initiate conversations with Texas Tech student-athletes to discuss an NIL deal. Once the NIL deal between a registered business and student-athlete is completed, the business will use the Red Raider Exchange to create a transaction that will produce a direct payment to the student-athlete and automate a disclosure to Texas Tech Athletics for NCAA compliance purposes.

Financial Literacy Education: Texas Tech will provide additional financial literacy education to its student-athletes through various courses and programs following the implementation of the House Settlement. This expansion of programming will fall under the J.T. and Margaret Talkington Department for Student-Athlete Development and will include both fundamental curriculum to all Texas Tech student-athletes as well as advanced financial strategies for certain high-earners.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

So in order to pay out the $20.5 million in House money, they need to raise $14 million in new funding, and then existing AD revenue and/cost cutting will provide the remaining $6.5 million?

Posted

Chris Vannini: In new bills, Congress’ most direct plan yet to empower NCAA on post-House rules takes shape

image.thumb.jpeg.5afbb03ae83bcf78a5d4063933c6ed5d.jpeg

Quote

With the House v. NCAA settlement now finalized and approved, a new push within Congress will attempt to turn it into law and give the NCAA and conferences more power to enforce their rules.

A discussion draft of a bill obtained by The Athletic outlines an upcoming proposal in the House of Representatives’ Committee on Energy and Commerce that would codify most of the federal support the NCAA has lobbied for in recent years. Although previous congressional efforts haven’t gained much steam, college sports leaders hope the settlement will finally provide the spark for something to get done. The Republican-led committee would work hand-in-hand with two other House committees for a three-pronged approach this week that would do the following:

  • Fully deputize the Collegiate Sports Commission (or another entity) to enforce the settlement rules, such as requiring athletes disclose third-party name, image and likeness deals worth more than $600 and allow the prohibition of compensation that is not considered fair market value
  • Allow an entity to establish a revenue-sharing cap; the one instituted by the settlement begins at around $20 million for the 2025-26 academic year
  • Pre-empt state NIL laws with this national NIL law
  • Allow the NCAA, conferences or another entity to establish and enforce rules around transfers, eligibility length and the paying of recruits
  • Declare that college athletes are not employees
  • Require athlete agents to register with an entity such as the CSC or NCAA

A House subcommittee is scheduled to discuss the draft, dubbed the SCORE Act and sponsored by Florida Republican and subcommittee chair Gus Bilirakis, at a Thursday hearing. To support it, the House’s Judiciary Committee is expected to discuss a bill for antitrust protections around these items, while the House’s Education and Workforce Committee will work to codify that athletes are not employees. The Washington Post first reported on the committee drafts.

“This discussion draft comes at a time of historic transition for college athletics,” the ACC, Big 12, Big Ten, Pac-12 and SEC said in a joint statement to The Athletic. “In the absence of federal standards, student-athletes and schools have been forced to navigate a fractured regulatory framework for too long. Following the historic House settlement, this draft legislation represents a very encouraging step toward delivering the national clarity and accountability that college athletics desperately needs. We urge lawmakers to build on this momentum and deliver the national solution that athletes, coaches, and schools deserve.”

The main Energy and Commerce bill, if passed, would also codify several athlete protections Democrats have asked for, requiring schools to provide injury care for athletes for at least two years after graduation, catastrophic injury insurance and additional mental health services and give “autonomous” authority to team physicians and trainers over player health and return-to-play decisions. It would also make law that schools cannot pull scholarships or aid over performance or injury. Many of these benefits are already allowed or required by the NCAA.

Republican and college sports officials who spoke to The Athletic on the condition of anonymity said they hope those athlete protections are enough to get some Democrats on board. Democratic representative Lori Trahan of Massachusetts, a former Georgetown volleyball player who is on the Energy and Commerce Committee, released a statement on Saturday expressing concern that congressional action could choke off gains made by athletes.

Thus far, congressional attempts on a college sports bill have not gone far, despite full Republican control of the legislative branch to streamline the process. One Democratic congressman who spoke to The Athletic questioned whether the full House would have time for the issue amid other more pressing topics. A bipartisan group of senators led by Ted Cruz (R-Texas) have spent months working on a potential bill. President Trump has considered creating a presidential commission on college sports. SEC commissioner Greg Sankey and Notre Dame athletic director Pete Bevacqua played golf with Trump on Sunday.

“I don’t think this is about drawing lines between Democrats and Republicans or the House and Senate,” Sankey said Monday. “I think this is an opportunity for our governmental leaders, our political leaders, to come together around solutions to support our Olympic development program, to support college football and every one of our sports that flows off of that, including those that are labeled as non-revenue sports, to provide additional support for women’s sports.”

The finalization of the House settlement could be the inflection point for something to get done. NCAA president Charlie Baker has said that college sports needed to put together a plan to take to Congress. That has now happened. “The big message from the federal government is you have to do everything you possibly can on your own, then come talk to us,” Baker said last September on a panel alongside Nick Saban.

In a letter Baker sent to members of Congress over the weekend obtained by The Athletic, the NCAA president pointed to the House settlement as needed progress, while asking for help on establishing antitrust protections, pre-empting state laws and keeping athletes from being employees.

“The progress we’ve made, especially with the House settlement, represents a significant step forward,” Baker wrote. “And, in the narrow areas where we lack the authority needed to address outstanding issues, we look forward to working with you and your staff to advance solutions that will ensure that college sports continue to provide fair opportunities to all student-athletes, for generations to come.”

College sports leaders have said the House settlement wouldn’t fix all their problems, that it was only a first step. Now the focus moves to accomplishing step two, convincing Congress that it’s done enough to get something made into federal law.

 

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
28 minutes ago, Yesh said:

So in order to pay out the $20.5 million in House money, they need to raise $14 million in new funding, and then existing AD revenue and/cost cutting will provide the remaining $6.5 million?

Pretty sure it's 20.5 from the athletic director budget, the 14.5 is additional fundraising they want to have on top of that, and then 20 million in revenue sharing that will be handled by the university for their total NIL budget of 55 million. 

Posted
1 hour ago, SydneyCarton said:

Pretty sure it's 20.5 from the athletic director budget, the 14.5 is additional fundraising they want to have on top of that, and then 20 million in revenue sharing that will be handled by the university for their total NIL budget of 55 million. 

what? 20.5M is cap from revshare. 

Posted
8 minutes ago, immamac said:

what? 20.5M is cap from revshare. 

I dunno, I'm just trying to math into their 55 million number. And this paragraph:

As part of the NCAA House settlement finalized this past Friday, Texas Tech is now permitted to share up to $20.5 million of its departmental-generated revenue directly with student-athletes beginning in the 2025–26 academic year. To support this transformational change, the Red Raider Club will be responsible for generating $14 million annually to help fund Texas Tech Athletics' new revenue-sharing model. This funding will also support student-athlete scholarships, academic resources, professional development, leadership programming, nutritional offerings and more. The remaining portion of the revenue-sharing commitment will be supported by University investment and additional athletics-generated revenue streams.

Posted
10 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Why was $599 and under chosen as no need to report amount? 

Not sure but to pay your player $5M without reporting, all you have to do is break it down into 8,348 smaller deals.  Simple.

Posted
4 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

 

 

Easily forecastable. 
 
Will there be an injunction stopping schools from proceeding with ADs cutting checks to players? Even after some have written contracts?

Posted
On 6/10/2025 at 10:58 AM, satyanash said:

“I don’t think this is about drawing lines between Democrats and Republicans or the House and Senate,” Sankey said Monday.

Animated GIF

  • Haha 1
Posted
On 6/10/2025 at 9:00 AM, Bodacious Bevo said:

We're paying $40M for football alone so that seems very reasonable to me /s

Don't be dumb. The $40 million is just for the guys that had their heart set on aggy, but Sark overpaid for even though Elko wasn't really that interested in them. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
57 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

 

 

Got to think this is to stop the clearing house organization ending booster deals? Canaday and other deals like it can’t and won’t be legit in that committees eyes. Title IX seems to be the vehicle they use to find standing with the goal of stopping so they can still draw those upper end payments.

Posted
17 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

women do no deserve the same split in pay that men's sports get, period. 

welp the law says otherwise.  that women do yes deserve the same split in pay.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Moderator said:

welp the law says otherwise.  that women do yes deserve the same split in pay.

We will see.  IIRC from my sports law class taught at Texas 20+ years agio, the interpretation of Title IX that provided for equal scholarship opportunities was an opinion issued by the Jimmy Carter administration.  And any subsequent administration can undo that with a stroke of a pen.

I don't really care how it is split.  As it would only apply to the $20MM revenue sharing coming from the ADs and not from corporate NIL or collectives.  Don't see it mattering much so long as everyone has to do the same thing.

Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

This is the most on-brand post ever made in this forum. 

So you agree a softball player deserves the same revenue split as a football player. They don't. Do you also think WNBA players deserved to be paid like their male counterparts? 

Edited by BurntOrange&White
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, Not a Sock said:

Deserves got nothing todo with it. 

Maybe when their sport pays for the entire athletic department they can have an argument.

 

Athletic revenue is not public tax dollars, title ix can fuck off with their gross overstep that was already smacked down by DOE.

Edited by BurntOrange&White
  • Haha 1
Posted
21 hours ago, Dondrysdale1 said:

Got to think this is to stop the clearing house organization ending booster deals? Canaday and other deals like it can’t and won’t be legit in that committees eyes. Title IX seems to be the vehicle they use to find standing with the goal of stopping so they can still draw those upper end payments.

No. Title IX is only about compensation coming from the school, not private funds. The plaintiffs are arguing the $20.5 million House settlement amount from the schools to athletes must be split equally between genders, just like athletic scholarships, otherwise it violates Title IX. It's not settled whether rev share from athletics would have to be treated the same as scholarships under Title IX because this has never happened before, but the current law around Title IX would indicate it probably would be treated the same. However, the Title IX interpretation could always be overturned entirely, or a judge who doesn't like the Title IX rulings could easily find a reason why this should be treated differently than scholarships. My guess is the latter will happen. I'd be very surprised if this case results in requiring equal split of the rev share, but it's certainly a possible outcome. 

On top of that, it's pretty much a guarantee that this clearinghouse for NIL contracts will generate lawsuits as soon as they turn down an NIL contract for an athlete. So while the House Settlement has been finalized, it's  still all up in the air until the legal challenges that are coming get decided.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

So you agree a softball player deserves the same revenue split as a football player. They don't. Do you also think WNBA players deserved to be paid like their male counterparts? 

I took one position in the post you quoted, and that position has nothing to do with any of the cheap nonsense you responded with in this post. 

If you're interested in a gender debate about sports revenue, you should start a thread about that. I won't be there to participate, but I'm sure you will find many moths willing to fly into that flame. Either way, the Title IX court case is certainly news for this thread. Your predictable position on the subject, less so. A full blown, boring-ass discussion on it? Right. 

Posted
6 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

I took one position in the post you quoted, and that position has nothing to do with any of the cheap nonsense you responded with in this post. 

If you're interested in a gender debate about sports revenue, you should start a thread about that. I won't be there to participate, but I'm sure you will find many moths willing to fly into that flame. Either way, the Title IX court case is certainly news for this thread. Your predictable position on the subject, less so. A full blown, boring-ass discussion on it? Right. 

My point is literally what will be argued in court so if it makes you feel better to talk down to me about that point then so be it but I'm not wrong about that point and seems like every athletic department in the country doesn't see it that way.

Posted
16 minutes ago, Burt Macklin said:

However, the Title IX interpretation could always be overturned entirely, or a judge who doesn't like the Title IX rulings could easily find a reason why this should be treated differently than scholarships. My guess is the latter will happen. I'd be very surprised if this case results in requiring equal split of the rev share, but it's certainly a possible outcome. 

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with your guess, but it just makes it clear to me that it's going to get messy. The reinterpretation of Title IX depending on the political climate could be used as a lever to influence the schools. This is a long way of saying... Arch's footwork looked great in those social media videos!

Posted

There are three primary ways the House settlement is being challenged. One is antitrust. The other is Title IX. The third is athlete employment status. All three are extremely sticky, with no clear resolution. 

There is potential relief from federal legislation or some kind of executive order, but it's unclear what form it would take. There's a decent chance it would make the whole thing worse in some ways. And certainly it would be challenged in court as well. And that's assuming something gets passed, which I have serious doubts about. 

Not to mention the settlement agreement is going to be challenged by athletic programs and their boosters as well, in a pursuit to find workarounds to field better teams. 

Posted
6 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

My point is literally what will be argued in court so if it makes you feel better to talk down to me about that point then so be it but I'm not wrong about that point and seems like every athletic department in the country doesn't see it that way.

Your point is like a dull pencil, there's isn't one. 

Posted
On 6/10/2025 at 8:58 AM, satyanash said:

Chris Vannini: In new bills, Congress’ most direct plan yet to empower NCAA on post-House rules takes shape

image.thumb.jpeg.5afbb03ae83bcf78a5d4063933c6ed5d.jpeg

 

fuck that shit

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...