NASHVILLE, Tenn. — The Department of Education has issued a directive clarifying that colleges compensating athletes directly for their name, image, and likeness (NIL) deals may violate Title IX, raising concerns amid the evolving landscape of college sports.
A nine-page document from the department’s Office for Civil Rights stated that NIL income should be classified similarly to athletic financial aid, such as scholarships. This perspective, if upheld, could significantly impact the strategies many institutions are planning for the upcoming academic year, particularly if there are no changes following the election of President Trump.
As part of a significant legal resolution expected to gain approval in the coming spring, universities may just start directly compensating athletes through a revenue-sharing system that could allocate approximately $20.5 million each to athletes from larger programs.
Many institutions have indicated that the majority of these funds will predominantly support football and men’s basketball players. According to the recent guidance, this would breach Title IX regulations.
The memo clearly stipulates, “When a school provides athletic financial assistance in forms other than scholarships or grants, including compensation for the use of a student-athlete’s NIL, such assistance also must be made proportionately available to male and female athletes.”
Title IX, enacted in 1972, mandates that financial support for athletics must reflect the gender makeup of the student-athlete population. It also emphasizes the necessity of equal opportunities for participation in sports based on gender distribution.
Despite the complexities, NCAA board chair Linda Livingstone mentioned that the organization has not been providing specific guidance on Title IX compliance to its member schools.
Livingstone, who presides over Baylor University, remarked, “We’re going to have to get back to our schools and see what the implications are.”
Illinois athletic director Josh Whitman noted the rapid changes occurring within the college sports framework, stating, “The world has changed over and over again just in the last six months.”
He further elaborated, “We’ve been building plans on top of plans for some time now, and this is the most recent illustration of where we’re going to take the guidance under advisement and figure out what, if any, adjustments we need to incorporate into our strategies.”
The memo’s stance on how funds from third-party collectives affiliated with schools will be regarded remains somewhat ambiguous. It mentions that such payments, though commonplace, would not fall under financial aid.
Nonetheless, it warns, “it is possible that NIL agreements between student-athletes and third parties will create similar disparities and therefore trigger a school’s Title IX obligations.”
David Ridpath, a former president of the Drake Group, which monitors NCAA practices, expressed that the memo was anticipated and aligns with existing laws.
“There was always a question of how Title IX applies to NIL,” he noted. “Now there is just more guidance. It’s essentially just following the law virtually the way it’s always been written.”
While the government possesses the authority to penalize schools breaching Title IX regulations, enforcement usually occurs when athletes litigate against schools, alleging violations of the law.
Currently, there is an ongoing lawsuit involving over two dozen female athletes against the University of Oregon. Their attorney, Arthur Bryant, indicated that the recent memo supports their case.
“It makes clear our approach in the Title IX lawsuit is correct and strengthens our case,” Bryant stated. “It also signals that the proposed settlement in House v. NCAA should not be approved.”
