OT: Dept of Ed and Title IX
- Thread starter baseball31ne
- Start date
Have half the football team identify as women.
Easy, have Trump kill the Department of Education on day 1
Actually this^^^^ needs to happen!!
I have no desire to waste time reading up on any of this so I'll choose to stay ignorant. I don't care how one sh*t show should work with other sh*t shows.
But my reaction to all of this is I thought NIL collectives are unconnected to universities? Second thing, if the Supreme Court which ultimately set this all in motion says athletes should get "their due", then surely those same corrupt jackasses aren't going to also rule that a female on the bowling team deserves her/his/their fair share from the NIL money faucet. Right? Every athlete gets the bonus salary that the market warrants. So Dylan Raiola gets seven figures and the female bowler gets some coupons to Great Clips.
In that analogy, the bowler gets to give great clips coupons to the school. Most collegiate sports "lose" money for the school.
Not going to happen anymore
last sentence made me spit out my coffee I laughed so hard, bravo.
I will take this a step further. My daughter is a junior at UNL with a double major in microbiology and biochemistry. She was smart enough to get a regents scholarship, but still has to pay for books and housing. Her emphasis is in biomedical research. Some of the work that she is doing could result in millions of dollars in the university's pocket. She will receive zero cut of that.
Last edited:
The House v. NCAA settlement provides for up to $22.5M in athletic revenue sharing per school. It's not NIL as it comes directly from the schools.
Killing the Department of Education doesn't do anything to Title IX. It's a law. Eliminating the Department of Education would shift enforcement to the Department of Justice, and it's likely Trump's DOJ wouldn't enforce much, so it sets up even more chaos. They might try to repeal the Civil Rights Act or Amendments but I doubt that happens.
Is that $22.5M pay for play or a share of broadcast revenue?
You, and whoever gave this opinion (that has no bearing), are assuming that it is the former. I think you can see a blanket assumption like that is not well thought out, is not consistent with how the courts are moving and framed by the preliminary settlement, nor has it faced any scrutiny or legal challenges.
At best, there is a long, legal process by a committed agency pushing the Title IX equal pay before it would have any bearing. Not an opinion from a lame-duck administration on it's way out the door in a week. And even if that happened, the conferences could just make these payments directly to players as they aren't subject to Title IX.
It's a share of athletic department revenue, which obviously has more than one source. I agree the latest opinion is from a DOE that is part of a lame duck administration and I don't think it has much bearing on how Title IX will be enforced for the next 4 years. Civil lawsuits pursued by individuals or groups of individuals (class actions) will be the driving force, as they have been since Sam Keller. Trump's DOJ can choose to not enforce, but that won't save schools from Title IX actions as long as the law exists.
I lol at people saying stuff like this without having any idea what the DOE does or how killing it would be detrimental to students across America. It goes way beyond test scores and supposed sex change operations happening in nurses' offices. LOL
Our nation operated fine without it for a long time. It’s a collection of bureaucratic waste.
Formerly, the US government guaranteed student loans that were lended to students by private banks. When Barack Obama was in office, he ended that program and had the DOE directly lend money to students. Do you know why so many students have loans for worthless degrees? It’s because the Government directly funds them. No private bank is going to finance a loan for a major that has no job prospects.
I know a decent amount about this subject, though I know not to claim myself as an expert. At the end of the day you are taking the DOE funding and giving it to states who will use those dollars more efficiently. The states would certainly have to hire overhead. No doubt about that
I have no problem replacing the DOE with something better but killing it on day 1 with no plan or process in place would be detrimental to american students. This goes way way beyond college funding.
The problem with states governing their own education is in the comparisons for scholarship dollars and funding from state to state. Many of the states, especially deep red states, lean heavily on federal funding and without it would fall even farther behind. The students who need it most would be the most hurt by its loss.
I guess you would have to explain to me what you mean by "operated just fine without it". Keep in mind that it was formed in 1979 as a transition from the HEW (health, education and welfare 1953) department, in and effort to streamline and make education a priority in our country.
Similar threads
