NIL has changed the game in every sense — but Title IX remains largely untouched

[u/BloomLegalNetwork]

https://www.nola.com/opinions/guest_columns/politics-higher-education/article_1a93438e-78cd-4b0f-ada0-f3e2f20cacb6.html

n my op-ed for NOLA.com, I argue it’s time to consider an update: keeping the protections that boosted women’s basketball and beyond, while making room for men’s programs that have been cut in the SEC and elsewhere.

[u/AutoModerator]

Reminder: Be Civil and follow the Rules. If you see something that violates these rules, please report it and we'll look into it.

Jokes, memes, etc. are subject to removal and may result in bans. This is your one and only warning.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/ContrarianPurdueFan]

The obvious solution to this specific problem would be to cleave football away from the university altogether, but that'll never happen. D1 college football and basketball are really minor professional leagues.

But the system is broken in even more fundamental ways. Athletic scholarships go to students who already have privilege and are getting paid to do a job that isn't commensurate with the value they being to the school.

[u/MexicanMata → u/ContrarianPurdueFan]

Some of these kids' parents are spending stupid amount of money on personal trainers and stuff, way more than they would have spent paying for college

[u/Dukester10071]

Literally the point of title IX is to have equal numbers of mens and womens athletes. The reason theres no mens soccer programs in the SEC is because they have football teams that have like 70 mens athletes and so they need more womens sports to counteract that. If they add back mens soccer, wrestling, and everything else that you argue - they would need to add more womens sports (and thus more scholarships etc) in order to be compliant with Title IX. At 99% of schools no programs other than football and mens basketball are profitable, so it really doesnt make sense to keep all these programs (and then yeah also have to add more womens sports as well to be compliant and not sued).

Just in a practical sense, no NIL fund is going to fund mens soccer and also womens rowing or whatever is added to counteract that enough to make it worth it enough to add back. The vast majority of NIL deals are for football and mens basketball because as I mentioned that is where the money is and that is what makes profit. They dont care about sports like that because it doesnt bring in money.

[u/HOU-1836 → u/Dukester10071]

I think now football is down to 105 man teams where it used to be like 135…which if we’re being frank is fucking stupid high. For reference, an NFL roster at the beginning of preseason is 90 and is cut down to 53 and a 14 man practice squad.

[u/G00dSh0tJans0n → u/HOU-1836]

Yeah but with NFL everyone is expected to play or be ready to play. I can make allowances for schools since there's no JV teams that you have to develop underclassmen so you have redshirts and such, but I agree 135 is way too many.

[u/BloomLegalNetwork → u/Dukester10071]

You’re 100% right on how Title IX has been interpreted in practice — football’s huge roster numbers tilt the equation, and that’s why SEC schools cut men’s programs in the first place. I don’t disagree that it’s complicated, or that football/basketball drive the revenue engine.

But that’s also why I think it’s worth asking whether the formula itself needs to evolve. NIL has shown us that money can flow in new ways — collectives and boosters are stepping in where schools never could before. Why not build a model where restoring a men’s program also requires parallel investment into women’s programs, instead of just writing it off as impossible because of football?

To me, the answer isn’t always “football is too big, so everything else has to shrink.” We can be more creative — especially in states and conferences where interest in sports like soccer and wrestling is strong.

Go Terps.

[u/Dukester10071 → u/BloomLegalNetwork]

The thing is NIL investment is not by the University, its by private individuals and businesses. If it was public funds, then I totally see where regulation should be evenly distributed to be compliant with Title IX. But if I'm a rich guy and want to donate $1 million to the football team, why should I not be allowed to do that? That's what all these court cases have been about - allow the free market to dictate how people pay and receive money. I don't think it makes sense to regulate, in a legal setting, where people can and can't spend their money. It's like saying I spend money buying uniforms for my local high school football team, that shouldn't be allowed because I would then be required to buy uniforms for womens basketball and gymnastics or whatever.

For what its worth, definitely an interesting viewpoint - not trying to tell you your argument holds no water. I'm just thinking about it from a logistical sense and I don't think it makes sense or would even be legal to regulate something like that.

Go Terps!

[u/G00dSh0tJans0n → u/BloomLegalNetwork]

You're not really going to be able to tell boosters etc. where to put their money. You can require x number of scholarships to be equal, but in the age of NIL, scholarships money for men's basketball or football teams is just chump change.

Maybe the power conference teams might just do away with scholarships for football and just have the players be paid via NIL/boosters.

[u/Barnhard]

Not really any point in updating it when it’ll become irrelevant, in terms of equal numbers, in a few years anyway when the athletes are employees.

[u/iamsplendid]

Oh, look. An op-ed that doesn't propose a single goshdarn change. What's your plan for evolution?

"Money is flowing into college sports." Nope, money is flowing into college football. There's no money for the Title-IX-mandated women's programs as it is, much less all these new men's programs you're proposing.

I don't know what things are like in your world, but the next step for ADs across the country isn't expansion of their programs, it's contraction.

Good luck with your evolution, but it ain't happening. Under the current administration, the most likely next Title IX change will be to abolish it. Even then you won't see men's soccer in the SEC. You just won't see any women's sports besides volleyball, basketball, and softball. The rest will all be cut.