Treat all athletes the same...?

Give them 48% of all revenue generated by their sport (scholarship values included in that formula).

As the Knight Commission suggests in a recent study, the big boys in FBS will have revenues on average, well over $200M a year. Some already do. Most of that is Football-Related-Revenue (FRR).

I'm not an attorney, so I'll defer to you and others.

But could "equal opportunity" or "fair treatment" be constructed to mean that ND football players would, if a Marvin Miller ever materializes, be able to get 48% of ND's soon-to-be $175M of FRR, and ND softball players would be able to get 48% of their SRR?

I don't know what the answer will be, but it's an open

question. I'm linking a roundtable on the topic.

Click here for link at https://lead1association.com/professionalization-of-college-

If i wanted a panel of “experts” to conclude Title IX

applies to student athletes who are deemed employees, then I would compose it of people with their backgrounds. My (non lawyer) opinion is the opposite and I think it is common sense that Title IX was never intended to include any class of people deemed employees. Those student athletes not deemed employees will still fall under Title IX.

What?

"Title IX was never intended to include any class of people deemed employees."

You realize Title IX covers a lot more than athletics, right? The notion that Title IX doesn't cover employees is . . . not close.

Oops you are so right but then so is jt below.

Hopefully there is a path that doesn’t destroy most Olympic sports at Universities. Paying football & basketball players the market value they deserve will significantly reduce the money available for those other sports.

oh, I'm sure one could find the money for those other sports

for example, perhaps trimming some of the bloated AD staff could free up some money.

it doesn't cover equity as it relates to salaries

correct me if I'm wrong, but the salary structure of employees doesn't have to balance out, does it? Do we need a female employee making north of 3 million dollars per year to balance out our AD? How about balancing out what we pay Freeman (which is more than that)?

The title 9 argument is and always has been a red herring.

of course *