- Joined
- May 8, 2002
- Posts
- 741,934
- Reaction score
- 52
Jun. 9—Fernando Lovo's text message to a reporter Friday night read like a coach who just landed a prized recruit.
"Good news. We are ready to roll!"
The University of New Mexico athletics director was more than happy to share the response when asked for reaction to the monumental news that a federal judge approved a class-action settlement allowing for NCAA-member schools to directly compensate athletes, creating a clearinghouse to track payments from collectives to athletes and ordering schools to pay back athletes from the past nine years.
Monday, UNM released an 1,100-word "message" from Lovo to the campus community, and a fairly in-depth FAQ document, explaining his optimism that the Lobos will not merely survive in the new revenue-sharing landscape, but thrive.
"UNM made the strategic decision to adopt this model so we can remain competitive in an ever-evolving environment," Lovo wrote. "It's the right step to preserve the momentum we've built and to ensure continued success across all our programs."
In Las Cruces, New Mexico State University Acting Athletic Director Amber Burdge expressed similar optimism in the Aggies' ability to navigate the new landscape with the goal to "remain competitive within our conference and region, while maintaining a sustainable model that supports all 16 of our Division I programs."
But what does the settlement actually mean for the UNMs and NMSUs of the college sports world?
The House settlement
The House settlement, as it is commonly referred, is U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken's approval of a $2.8 billion antitrust lawsuit. The legal wrangling began about five years ago when Arizona State swimmer Grant House challenged NCAA rules preventing schools from sharing revenue with athletes.
Wilken's ruling opens the floodgates to schools being able to share millions of dollars in athletics revenue with athletes — a move some hope settles the name, image and likeness (NIL) chaos in college sports while others fear it will lead to sports being cut, previously established Title IX opportunities diminishing and from creating even a wider gap between the power programs and the rest of college athletics.
Schools can opt in to participate in the new rules, which allow schools to disperse up to $20.5 million — roughly 23% of the average power conference budget — to athletes in exchange for use of the student's NIL.
While neither UNM nor NMSU were ready on Monday to tell the Journal how much they will be sharing with athletes, neither will be approaching that $20.5 million cap. At both schools, revenue from men's basketball is king while their FBS football programs have not been able to consistently bring in the type of revenue so many other programs have enjoyed.
Still, Lovo believes the model can work for the Lobos.
"UNM made the strategic decision to adopt this model so we can remain competitive in an ever-evolving environment," Lovo wrote in his message to Lobo fans and the campus community. "It's the right step to preserve the momentum we've built and to ensure continued success across all our programs.
"Basketball will be a cornerstone of our revenue-sharing strategy. We know how much pride this community and our entire state take in Lobo basketball — it's a defining part of who we are. At the same time, we are fully committed to elevating our Football program — another critical driver of both revenue and department-wide impact. When basketball and football thrive, every Lobo program benefits."
Both Burdge and UNM Deputy Athletic Director Ryan Berryman on Monday told the Journal this is not a case of "new" money coming into the budget. Both schools must find new revenue streams or move money from other places within their budgets.
"We have not yet finalized the total amount that will be allocated for revenue-sharing in FY26," Burdge wrote in an email to the Journal. "We are reviewing our revenues, budget capacity, and benchmarking against peer institutions to shape our approach."
Who gets paid?
While neither UNM nor NMSU have drafted a list of who specifically will get paid, it's clear men's basketball and football players will be the priority for now as those are the sports that generate revenue or media rights value.
Between that thinking, which is common across the nation, and the settlement expanding scholarship limits for those high-profile sports, there are concerns that smaller, Olympic sports or women's sports that don't tend to generate profits will see scholarship reductions or maybe even get cut.
Decision-makers at both New Mexico schools said there is no plan to reduce scholarships of any sport in the coming year. But both seem keenly aware Title IX challenges may be coming .
Though salaries of employees of public institutions are public record, it's unclear how schools will handle disclosure of athlete payments. Legal challenges, again, are expected there.
And the collectives?
College athletes have been able to receive NIL payments for several years, however these did not come from the schools directly. Independent collectives formed around many schools to raise funds and distribute payments to athletes.
UNM's highly-successful 505 Sports Venture Foundation and NMSU's A Mountain Sports Collective will continue in their efforts and are still allowed to pay athletes, though under the House settlement, any NIL deal worth $600 or more must now be disclosed to a new, quasi-independent College Sports Commission, which will vet all deals.
The commission will scrutinize three things in these deals: the relationship of the person or business paying the athlete and the school they play for; are the athletes being paid for a valid business purpose (appearances, commercials, promotion, etc.); and whether the pay they receive is comparable to what others would get paid for similar work.
Not disclosing a deal to the CSC could result in penalties.
Backpay coming
Maybe the most crucial part of the House settlement, although since it doesn't affect current teams or athletes one not getting quite the same attention, is that the case established $2.8 billion in backpay for former Division I athletes (UNM and NMSU, included) who previously joined the suit and who the judge ruled were not given proper opportunity to earn compensation for their name, image and likeness. The settlement affects players as far back as 2016.
The money comes from NCAA reserves and each school will have money withheld from future NCAA distribution until the money is balanced.
UNM expects about $500,000 to be withheld from the NCAA next fiscal year.
Continue reading...
"Good news. We are ready to roll!"
The University of New Mexico athletics director was more than happy to share the response when asked for reaction to the monumental news that a federal judge approved a class-action settlement allowing for NCAA-member schools to directly compensate athletes, creating a clearinghouse to track payments from collectives to athletes and ordering schools to pay back athletes from the past nine years.
Monday, UNM released an 1,100-word "message" from Lovo to the campus community, and a fairly in-depth FAQ document, explaining his optimism that the Lobos will not merely survive in the new revenue-sharing landscape, but thrive.
"UNM made the strategic decision to adopt this model so we can remain competitive in an ever-evolving environment," Lovo wrote. "It's the right step to preserve the momentum we've built and to ensure continued success across all our programs."
In Las Cruces, New Mexico State University Acting Athletic Director Amber Burdge expressed similar optimism in the Aggies' ability to navigate the new landscape with the goal to "remain competitive within our conference and region, while maintaining a sustainable model that supports all 16 of our Division I programs."
But what does the settlement actually mean for the UNMs and NMSUs of the college sports world?
The House settlement
The House settlement, as it is commonly referred, is U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken's approval of a $2.8 billion antitrust lawsuit. The legal wrangling began about five years ago when Arizona State swimmer Grant House challenged NCAA rules preventing schools from sharing revenue with athletes.
Wilken's ruling opens the floodgates to schools being able to share millions of dollars in athletics revenue with athletes — a move some hope settles the name, image and likeness (NIL) chaos in college sports while others fear it will lead to sports being cut, previously established Title IX opportunities diminishing and from creating even a wider gap between the power programs and the rest of college athletics.
Schools can opt in to participate in the new rules, which allow schools to disperse up to $20.5 million — roughly 23% of the average power conference budget — to athletes in exchange for use of the student's NIL.
While neither UNM nor NMSU were ready on Monday to tell the Journal how much they will be sharing with athletes, neither will be approaching that $20.5 million cap. At both schools, revenue from men's basketball is king while their FBS football programs have not been able to consistently bring in the type of revenue so many other programs have enjoyed.
Still, Lovo believes the model can work for the Lobos.
"UNM made the strategic decision to adopt this model so we can remain competitive in an ever-evolving environment," Lovo wrote in his message to Lobo fans and the campus community. "It's the right step to preserve the momentum we've built and to ensure continued success across all our programs.
"Basketball will be a cornerstone of our revenue-sharing strategy. We know how much pride this community and our entire state take in Lobo basketball — it's a defining part of who we are. At the same time, we are fully committed to elevating our Football program — another critical driver of both revenue and department-wide impact. When basketball and football thrive, every Lobo program benefits."
Both Burdge and UNM Deputy Athletic Director Ryan Berryman on Monday told the Journal this is not a case of "new" money coming into the budget. Both schools must find new revenue streams or move money from other places within their budgets.
"We have not yet finalized the total amount that will be allocated for revenue-sharing in FY26," Burdge wrote in an email to the Journal. "We are reviewing our revenues, budget capacity, and benchmarking against peer institutions to shape our approach."
Who gets paid?
While neither UNM nor NMSU have drafted a list of who specifically will get paid, it's clear men's basketball and football players will be the priority for now as those are the sports that generate revenue or media rights value.
Between that thinking, which is common across the nation, and the settlement expanding scholarship limits for those high-profile sports, there are concerns that smaller, Olympic sports or women's sports that don't tend to generate profits will see scholarship reductions or maybe even get cut.
Decision-makers at both New Mexico schools said there is no plan to reduce scholarships of any sport in the coming year. But both seem keenly aware Title IX challenges may be coming .
Though salaries of employees of public institutions are public record, it's unclear how schools will handle disclosure of athlete payments. Legal challenges, again, are expected there.
And the collectives?
College athletes have been able to receive NIL payments for several years, however these did not come from the schools directly. Independent collectives formed around many schools to raise funds and distribute payments to athletes.
UNM's highly-successful 505 Sports Venture Foundation and NMSU's A Mountain Sports Collective will continue in their efforts and are still allowed to pay athletes, though under the House settlement, any NIL deal worth $600 or more must now be disclosed to a new, quasi-independent College Sports Commission, which will vet all deals.
The commission will scrutinize three things in these deals: the relationship of the person or business paying the athlete and the school they play for; are the athletes being paid for a valid business purpose (appearances, commercials, promotion, etc.); and whether the pay they receive is comparable to what others would get paid for similar work.
Not disclosing a deal to the CSC could result in penalties.
Backpay coming
Maybe the most crucial part of the House settlement, although since it doesn't affect current teams or athletes one not getting quite the same attention, is that the case established $2.8 billion in backpay for former Division I athletes (UNM and NMSU, included) who previously joined the suit and who the judge ruled were not given proper opportunity to earn compensation for their name, image and likeness. The settlement affects players as far back as 2016.
The money comes from NCAA reserves and each school will have money withheld from future NCAA distribution until the money is balanced.
UNM expects about $500,000 to be withheld from the NCAA next fiscal year.
Continue reading...
