Rev Share vs NIL

[Nate C]

can someone help me understand the difference here? I thought they would work together with players getting some rev share plus NIL but i keep hearing about players supposedly taking cuts. Did our NIL budget decrease or are players demanding more? @Bobby Burton @Jeff Howe

[Chris Simons]

I believe rev share is a finite pie that has to be distributed among the players whereas NIL has a higher ceiling and is tied to some type of endorsement, etc. 

[Jeff Howe]

12 minutes ago, Chris Simons said:

I believe rev share is a finite pie that has to be distributed among the players whereas NIL has a higher ceiling and is tied to some type of endorsement, etc. 

Essentially, yes. This is the case.

[Okcool]

16 minutes ago, Chris Simons said:

I believe rev share is a finite pie that has to be distributed among the players whereas NIL has a higher ceiling and is tied to some type of endorsement, etc. 

Yes. Arch can offer a pay cut from the $20.5M since he has NIL deals with Vuori, Red Bull, Warby Parker, etc. that more than supplement what he would get from the rev share.

[Rocky P]

REV SHARE - PAID BY SCHOOL
NIL - PAID BY 3rd parties

think of salary vs endorsements...at least that is how it is suppose to work...i think

[Chris Simons]

1 minute ago, Rocky P said:

REV SHARE - PAID BY SCHOOL
NIL - PAID BY 3rd parties

think of salary vs endorsements...at least that is how it is suppose to work...i think

This.

[All Gas No Brakes]

I think the other posters hit it on the head. Another thing about rev share, it’s a pool of money that’s supposed to be distributed across all student athletes in all sports. The number is around 20 million per school. And each school can determine what percentage of the pie that each sport will get. So in other words, not all football programs have the exact same amount of rev share money to distribute amongst their players. But each school has the same amount of rev share to distribute among all its student athletes.

[Hornio]

3 minutes ago, All Gas No Brakes said:

I think the other posters hit it on the head. Another thing about rev share, it’s a pool of money that’s supposed to be distributed across all student athletes in all sports. The number is around 20 million per school. And each school can determine what percentage of the pie that each sport will get. So in other words, not all football programs have the exact same amount of rev share money to distribute amongst their players. But each school has the same amount of rev share to distribute among all its student athletes.

This is my understanding.  And there's a clearinghouse that is supposed to approve the NIL deals and ensure that they are representative of actual value the player deserves for the marketing he's providing - is that right?  The clearinghouse is not involved in the RevShare though?  

I wonder how many of these NIL deals will be rejected by the clearinghouse (or when that process happens)?

[Rocky P]

1 minute ago, Hornio said:

This is my understanding.  And there's a clearinghouse that is supposed to approve the NIL deals and ensure that they are representative of actual value the player deserves for the marketing he's providing - is that right?  The clearinghouse is not involved in the RevShare though?  

I wonder how many of these NIL deals will be rejected by the clearinghouse (or when that process happens)?

They are approving them all. They have no teeth.

[whereiend]

The NCAA made various rules that intend to limit the use of NIL as pay for play. NIL deals are supposed to go through a clearinghouse that confirms they are legit market rate deals and not just pay for play.

It's very unlikely that these will ever be successfully enforced, but unfortunately it appears that UT has made it a priority to follow these dumb rules anyway while other schools are clearly not.

Luckily we have enough legit corporate NIL to almost overcome this, but everything is 10x harder than it should be.

Edited 11 hours ago by whereiend

[Rocky P]

11 minutes ago, whereiend said:

The NCAA made various rules that intend to limit the use of NIL as pay for play. NIL deals are supposed to go through a clearinghouse that confirms they are legit market rate deals and not just pay for play.

It's very unlikely that these will ever be successfully enforced, but unfortunately it appears that UT has made it a priority to follow these dumb rules anyway while other schools are clearly not.

Luckily we have enough legit corporate NIL to almost overcome this, but everything is 10x harder than it should be.

we aren't getting outbid though.  We are just losing to players that are going back to their school for loyalty or wanting to stay closer to home.  

[HDub1995]

I will make a more detailed post later. 
 

Essentially rev share is money coming directly from school to player. Each school has a “cap” amount they can distribute across all of their programs, around $20.5 million. Football gets a large chunk of that. 
 

NIL can come from third parties. This is where schools are trying to get creative. A new entity, called the College Sports Commission, was created to enforce NIL. All NIL deals over a certain threshold (believe $600) have to be reported to the CSC. The CSC then evaluates the deal to see if it’s fair. They ask questions like “does it have a valid business purpose” and “is the money aspect of this deal fair in regards to the market.” Then they approve or deny the deal. They have denied a good amount of deals, which is where you’re starting to see some differences. Some schools are essentially daring the CSC to try and enforce the rules, others are not. 

[whereiend]

37 minutes ago, Rocky P said:

we aren't getting outbid though.  We are just losing to players that are going back to their school for loyalty or wanting to stay closer to home.  

I meant as far as the portal losses go, we are being particularly stingy with the rev share allotments, because we have limited ability to execute above the cap NIL deals the way other schools are. (See LSU's offer to Sorsby).

Edited 10 hours ago by whereiend

[Rocky P]

Just now, whereiend said:

I meant as far as the portal losses go, we are being particularly stingy with the rev share allotments, because we have limited ability to execute above the cap NIL days the way other schools are. (See LSU's offer to Sorsby).

We don't need a qb.  We bid more than Michigan for the LT - he went back to michigan.  We bid more than OSU for the LB - He went there to be closer to home and be coached by patricia (probably grew up a patriots fan being from connecticut).  We bid more for Brown - he never actually entered the portal.  You can't say we are being stingy when we are outbidding and loyalty means more.   Higher end talent isn't as concerned about $$ because they are gonna play on Sundays. 

 

[Califashorn75]

Caitlin Clark is a multi millionaire based on endorsements.  

[Jordan91]

10 hours ago, whereiend said:

The NCAA made various rules that intend to limit the use of NIL as pay for play. NIL deals are supposed to go through a clearinghouse that confirms they are legit market rate deals and not just pay for play.

It's very unlikely that these will ever be successfully enforced, but unfortunately it appears that UT has made it a priority to follow these dumb rules anyway while other schools are clearly not.

Luckily we have enough legit corporate NIL to almost overcome this, but everything is 10x harder than it should be.

This. And nobody is going to take away national title from teams that pay no attention to it.