\r\n\r\n“Title IX says nothing about how revenue-generating athletics programs should allocate compensation among student athletes,” the agency said. “The claim that Title IX forces schools and colleges to distribute student-athlete revenues proportionately based on gender equity considerations is sweeping and would require clear legal authority to support it. That does not exist.”\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nFor more on the White House's stance and the effect it could have on college sports, read the full story from Amanda Christovich here.\r\n\r\n"}},"postID":167791,"postFormat":"standard"}; dataLayer.push( dataLayer_content ); \r\n\r\nBut the Trump-controlled Dept. of Ed said that the agency didn’t have the legal backing to mandate equitable payments.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n“Title IX says nothing about how revenue-generating athletics programs should allocate compensation among student athletes,” the agency said. “The claim that Title IX forces schools and colleges to distribute student-athlete revenues proportionately based on gender equity considerations is sweeping and would require clear legal authority to support it. That does not exist.”\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nFor more on the White House's stance and the effect it could have on college sports, read the full story from Amanda Christovich here.\r\n\r\n"}},"postID":167791,"postFormat":"standard"}; dataLayer.push( dataLayer_content ); \r\n\r\nThe guidance most notably had said that revenue-sharing payments stemming from the House v. NCAA settlement would have to be proportionate for men’s and women’s sports athletes, as the agency had classified them as a form of financial aid. The department decided to release the guidance before the settlement was approved because a number of athletic departments had announced plans to give the lion share of the payments to football and men’s basketball players, a source had previously told Front Office Sports. Many schools have said they plan to award 75% of total revenue-sharing allocations to their football players. The guidance was also cited in an objection to the House v. NCAA settlement, which said the settlement’s terms violated Title IX.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nBut the Trump-controlled Dept. of Ed said that the agency didn’t have the legal backing to mandate equitable payments.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n“Title IX says nothing about how revenue-generating athletics programs should allocate compensation among student athletes,” the agency said. “The claim that Title IX forces schools and colleges to distribute student-athlete revenues proportionately based on gender equity considerations is sweeping and would require clear legal authority to support it. That does not exist.”\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nFor more on the White House's stance and the effect it could have on college sports, read the full story from Amanda Christovich here.\r\n\r\n"}},"postID":167791,"postFormat":"standard"}; dataLayer.push( dataLayer_content ); \r\n\r\nThe agency took down the NIL guidance Tuesday, but did not confirm the policy had been rescinded until Wednesday morning. It’s one of several Biden-era directives related to Title IX that the Trump administration has quickly reversed.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nThe guidance most notably had said that revenue-sharing payments stemming from the House v. NCAA settlement would have to be proportionate for men’s and women’s sports athletes, as the agency had classified them as a form of financial aid. The department decided to release the guidance before the settlement was approved because a number of athletic departments had announced plans to give the lion share of the payments to football and men’s basketball players, a source had previously told Front Office Sports. Many schools have said they plan to award 75% of total revenue-sharing allocations to their football players. The guidance was also cited in an objection to the House v. NCAA settlement, which said the settlement’s terms violated Title IX.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nBut the Trump-controlled Dept. of Ed said that the agency didn’t have the legal backing to mandate equitable payments.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n“Title IX says nothing about how revenue-generating athletics programs should allocate compensation among student athletes,” the agency said. “The claim that Title IX forces schools and colleges to distribute student-athlete revenues proportionately based on gender equity considerations is sweeping and would require clear legal authority to support it. That does not exist.”\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nFor more on the White House's stance and the effect it could have on college sports, read the full story from Amanda Christovich here.\r\n\r\n"}},"postID":167791,"postFormat":"standard"}; dataLayer.push( dataLayer_content ); \r\n\r\n“The NIL guidance, rammed through by the Biden Administration in its final days, is overly burdensome, profoundly unfair, and it goes well beyond what agency guidance is intended to achieve,” the agency said in a statement Wednesday.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nThe agency took down the NIL guidance Tuesday, but did not confirm the policy had been rescinded until Wednesday morning. It’s one of several Biden-era directives related to Title IX that the Trump administration has quickly reversed.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nThe guidance most notably had said that revenue-sharing payments stemming from the House v. NCAA settlement would have to be proportionate for men’s and women’s sports athletes, as the agency had classified them as a form of financial aid. The department decided to release the guidance before the settlement was approved because a number of athletic departments had announced plans to give the lion share of the payments to football and men’s basketball players, a source had previously told Front Office Sports. Many schools have said they plan to award 75% of total revenue-sharing allocations to their football players. The guidance was also cited in an objection to the House v. NCAA settlement, which said the settlement’s terms violated Title IX.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nBut the Trump-controlled Dept. of Ed said that the agency didn’t have the legal backing to mandate equitable payments.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n“Title IX says nothing about how revenue-generating athletics programs should allocate compensation among student athletes,” the agency said. “The claim that Title IX forces schools and colleges to distribute student-athlete revenues proportionately based on gender equity considerations is sweeping and would require clear legal authority to support it. That does not exist.”\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nFor more on the White House's stance and the effect it could have on college sports, read the full story from Amanda Christovich here.\r\n\r\n"}},"postID":167791,"postFormat":"standard"}; dataLayer.push( dataLayer_content ); \r\n\r\nThe Biden administration had issued the guidance in its final days, citing Title IX—the statute that prohibits discrimination in schools “on the basis of sex” and has come to also require equity in sports. Republicans quickly signaled they would move to reverse the guidance once President Donald Trump returned to office.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n“The NIL guidance, rammed through by the Biden Administration in its final days, is overly burdensome, profoundly unfair, and it goes well beyond what agency guidance is intended to achieve,” the agency said in a statement Wednesday.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nThe agency took down the NIL guidance Tuesday, but did not confirm the policy had been rescinded until Wednesday morning. It’s one of several Biden-era directives related to Title IX that the Trump administration has quickly reversed.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nThe guidance most notably had said that revenue-sharing payments stemming from the House v. NCAA settlement would have to be proportionate for men’s and women’s sports athletes, as the agency had classified them as a form of financial aid. The department decided to release the guidance before the settlement was approved because a number of athletic departments had announced plans to give the lion share of the payments to football and men’s basketball players, a source had previously told Front Office Sports. Many schools have said they plan to award 75% of total revenue-sharing allocations to their football players. The guidance was also cited in an objection to the House v. NCAA settlement, which said the settlement’s terms violated Title IX.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nBut the Trump-controlled Dept. of Ed said that the agency didn’t have the legal backing to mandate equitable payments.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n“Title IX says nothing about how revenue-generating athletics programs should allocate compensation among student athletes,” the agency said. “The claim that Title IX forces schools and colleges to distribute student-athlete revenues proportionately based on gender equity considerations is sweeping and would require clear legal authority to support it. That does not exist.”\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nFor more on the White House's stance and the effect it could have on college sports, read the full story from Amanda Christovich here.\r\n\r\n"}},"postID":167791,"postFormat":"standard"}; dataLayer.push( dataLayer_content ); \r\n\r\nThe Department of Education is rescinding weeks-old guidance mandating that NIL (name, image, and likeness) resources from athletic departments and revenue sharing payments be \"proportionate\" between men’s and women’s sports.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nThe Biden administration had issued the guidance in its final days, citing Title IX—the statute that prohibits discrimination in schools “on the basis of sex” and has come to also require equity in sports. Republicans quickly signaled they would move to reverse the guidance once President Donald Trump returned to office.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n“The NIL guidance, rammed through by the Biden Administration in its final days, is overly burdensome, profoundly unfair, and it goes well beyond what agency guidance is intended to achieve,” the agency said in a statement Wednesday.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nThe agency took down the NIL guidance Tuesday, but did not confirm the policy had been rescinded until Wednesday morning. It’s one of several Biden-era directives related to Title IX that the Trump administration has quickly reversed.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nThe guidance most notably had said that revenue-sharing payments stemming from the House v. NCAA settlement would have to be proportionate for men’s and women’s sports athletes, as the agency had classified them as a form of financial aid. The department decided to release the guidance before the settlement was approved because a number of athletic departments had announced plans to give the lion share of the payments to football and men’s basketball players, a source had previously told Front Office Sports. Many schools have said they plan to award 75% of total revenue-sharing allocations to their football players. The guidance was also cited in an objection to the House v. NCAA settlement, which said the settlement’s terms violated Title IX.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nBut the Trump-controlled Dept. of Ed said that the agency didn’t have the legal backing to mandate equitable payments.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n“Title IX says nothing about how revenue-generating athletics programs should allocate compensation among student athletes,” the agency said. “The claim that Title IX forces schools and colleges to distribute student-athlete revenues proportionately based on gender equity considerations is sweeping and would require clear legal authority to support it. That does not exist.”\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nFor more on the White House's stance and the effect it could have on college sports, read the full story from Amanda Christovich here.\r\n\r\n"}},"postID":167791,"postFormat":"standard"}; dataLayer.push( dataLayer_content );

Subscribe To Our Daily Newsletters

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.