Why Revenue Sharing Is a Bad Deal (opinion)
Briefly

The NCAA historically restricted student athletes from profiting from their name, image, or likeness, which many felt was overly restrictive. However, a recent court-approved settlement allows athletes to receive a share of $2.8 billion, marking a significant change in NCAA policies. Institutions can now share up to $20.5 million annually with student athletes. Despite this progress, concerns exist that this shift could harm college sports by professionalizing athletes, affecting academic missions, and limiting benefits primarily to football and men’s basketball players only.
The NCAA's amateurism policies have long prohibited student athletes from profiting off their name, image or likeness, denying them earnings like other college students.
The recent approval of a $2.8 billion athlete compensation settlement marks a significant shift, allowing revenue sharing with current student athletes across major conferences.
While top athletes may benefit financially from new revenue models, the majority will see limited gains, with most revenue distributed heavily towards football and men's basketball.
The transition to paying college athletes may professionalize the sports environment, potentially compromising the academic mission of institutions and affecting other student athletes.
Read at Inside Higher Ed | Higher Education News, Events and Jobs
[
|
]