ur79&peanuts
Bench player
If Mark Cuban can put Indiana Football on the map, why can’t PQ get it done here?
Mark Cuban bank rolling Indiana Football
- Thread starter ur79&peanuts
- Start date
Here is the citation. Indiana has a 1981 graduate Mark Cuban.If Mark Cuban can put Indiana Football on the map, why can’t PQ get it done here?
Indiana poised for sustained success behind Mark Cuban donations, Curt Cignetti's brash approach
Indiana football is poised to thrive in the new era of college football
www.cbssports.com
Last edited:
Didn't UR join the Patriot League, because the league rejected NIL payments for football?
I also thought UR decided to opt into the house settlement only for basketball and for no other sport.
As an institution, UR made the decision to limit its bankroll of football. Is that correct or not?
Presumably, Paul was part of those conversations.
I also thought UR decided to opt into the house settlement only for basketball and for no other sport.
As an institution, UR made the decision to limit its bankroll of football. Is that correct or not?
Presumably, Paul was part of those conversations.
ur79&peanuts
Bench player
Thanks for posting this article, that is where I found the information. Also it said his fortune is estimated to be 6billion. But I admired his reason for donating due to Cignette’s hard work and coming up through the ranks to achieve success
Spider17
Starter
They won’t receive money from UR directly with house settlement. NIL is still available for football players as it is for all other student athletes at any sport at UR.
ur79&peanuts
Bench player
If I am understanding what took place in the NCAA, the opt in was for Direct payments from a school to players. NIL money is seperate and only has to be reported on a player by player situation. We have plenty of legal professionals on the board so maybe someone can clarify the difference in direct payments by schools and NIL money for players b?
I asked Chat Gpt about NIL and direct payments. Here was my inquiry...
When a University makes direct payments to a football player, would the school enter into an agreement with that player requiring him to accept certain conditions?
My take is that by opting into the House Settlement, the University can enter into contracts with its men's basketball players that force the players to refund payments if they leave.
Because the UR football program has opted out of this, we have lost this protection.
When a University makes direct payments to a football player, would the school enter into an agreement with that player requiring him to accept certain conditions?
My take is that by opting into the House Settlement, the University can enter into contracts with its men's basketball players that force the players to refund payments if they leave.
Because the UR football program has opted out of this, we have lost this protection.
Last edited:
Here was its response... I have highlighted key points in bold.
Good question. The answer is: yes — in most scenarios, if a university elects to make direct payments to a football player (or other student-athlete), the school would almost certainly use a formal agreement (contract) with the athlete that sets out conditions for payment. But the exact structure depends a great deal on how the payments are characterized. Below is a detailed analysis — including where facts remain uncertain or unsettled under current law and practice.
Even though formal agreements are likely and widely expected, several contextual and legal caveats create uncertainty as to exactly what form those agreements will take — and whether they will resemble traditional employment contracts.
If a university enters into a direct-payment contract with a football player, typical provisions (or likely provisions) would include:
Because this compensation model — with direct payments from universities to athletes — is very recent (post-settlement 2025), several issues remain open or in flux:
With the approval of the House settlement and the transition to a direct-payment / revenue-sharing model, it is almost certain that universities will use formal written agreements with student-athletes to govern payments. Such agreements will likely employ contract language similar to independent-contractor or revenue-sharing deals — specifying duties, conditions, rights, and contingencies.
However, because the model is newly implemented, there is no single standard contract form, and significant legal and practical uncertainties remain, especially around institution-specific practices, compliance, classification, and potential future litigation.
If you like, I can track down and share some actual sample agreements or term-sheets (redacted where public) from schools that have publicly disclosed them — that may give you insight into what real-world contracts look like under this new regime. Do you want me to attempt that?
Good question. The answer is: yes — in most scenarios, if a university elects to make direct payments to a football player (or other student-athlete), the school would almost certainly use a formal agreement (contract) with the athlete that sets out conditions for payment. But the exact structure depends a great deal on how the payments are characterized. Below is a detailed analysis — including where facts remain uncertain or unsettled under current law and practice.
Why a contract or agreement is likely
• Payments come with terms under the new model
- Under the recently approved House v. NCAA settlement — effective for the 2025–26 academic year for institutions that opt in — member schools are explicitly permitted to make “direct payments” to student-athletes. (Ropes & Gray)
- Those payments are not unconditional gifts: the settlement replaces certain prior NCAA scholarship-and-aid rules with a revenue-sharing pool, capped per school (initially about $20.5 million per year) which the institution must allocate across its athletes. (Yahoo Sports)
- As a result, institutions must track and manage those payments consistently, which in practice means formalizing them via written agreements or contracts — to clarify who qualifies, on what basis, and under what conditions payments are made (e.g., participation, roster status, academic eligibility). Legal commentators have described such agreements as resembling independent-contractor or revenue-sharing pacts. (Bloomberg Law)
• Compliance, transparency, and regulatory requirements
- As part of the settlement, institutions and athletes must comply with reporting and oversight rules. For example, third-party NIL (Name, Image, Likeness) agreements must be disclosed to the institution’s compliance office, and larger deals will be reviewed. (Wright State University Athletics)
- Given these oversight obligations, a contract with the athlete clarifies expectations, obligations, rights (and sometimes limitations), protecting both the school and the athlete from future disputes, regulatory scrutiny, or misunderstandings.
• Conditionality on enrollment, eligibility, duties, etc.
- Legal commentary suggests many of the draft or emerging agreements placed by universities include requirements such as continuing enrollment at the institution, maintaining academic standards, remaining on the roster, and fulfilling team-related duties (e.g., attending practices, games, media events). (Bloomberg Law)
- This is practical: direct payments tied to performance, participation, or institutional revenue require frameworks that closely resemble contracts describing deliverables (on both sides) — much like an independent-contractor or revenue-sharing agreement rather than a one-time grant.
But classification (not as “employees”) and variability complicates the picture
Even though formal agreements are likely and widely expected, several contextual and legal caveats create uncertainty as to exactly what form those agreements will take — and whether they will resemble traditional employment contracts.
- Under the settlement and the revised regulatory framework by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), student-athletes remain classified as non-employees; the compensation is structured as revenue-sharing or NIL-related payment rather than a “salary” for employment. (CBS Sports)
- Because they are not employees, these contracts are often characterized as analogous to “independent contractor” or “marketing / licensing / revenue-share” agreements — meaning the school maintains more flexibility, and the athlete may lack certain employment-related protections (e.g., unionization, collective bargaining). (Bloomberg Law)
- The exact terms will likely vary significantly from one school to another (or even from athlete to athlete), depending on the distribution of the revenue-share pool, institutional policies, sport, roster status, and whether the athlete also is receiving third-party NIL compensation or benefits. There is no single “standard form” contract across all institutions as of yet.
What such an agreement likely would include
If a university enters into a direct-payment contract with a football player, typical provisions (or likely provisions) would include:
- The amount of compensation and method/timing of payment (e.g., quarterly, annually, lump sum)
- Conditions for payment such as: being enrolled and in good academic standing; being on the active roster; maintaining eligibility under NCAA and institutional rules; participation in games, practices, or team events (or at least not being dismissed)
- Restrictions on transfers or buyout clauses (if the athlete transfers, there may be repayment or reduced payment obligations) — some reports of early deals mention “liquidated damages” or “buyout” provisions akin to those found in employee‐contracts. (Reuters)
- Compliance with institutional, NCAA, and third-party NIL/promotion compliance rules (e.g., reporting, disclosure of third-party endorsements, conflicts of interest)
- Non-employment language to preserve the classification of the athlete as non-employee (so as not to trigger wage, labor, benefits laws)
Legal / Practical Uncertainties
Because this compensation model — with direct payments from universities to athletes — is very recent (post-settlement 2025), several issues remain open or in flux:
- Standardization: There is no uniform template; schools are free to design their own contracts, so terms likely will vary widely.
- Regulatory and oversight risk: Because payments are new, compliance frameworks (for NCAA plus oversight body from the settlement, such as the College Sports Commission) remain under development. This raises risk for inconsistent application or disputes over enforcement. (Debevoise)
- Employment-status litigation risk: Even though contracts are drafted to treat athletes as contractors or licensees, critics foresee potential legal challenges arguing that the substantial control and compensation could support treating athletes as employees under labor laws, which could lead to unionization or wage-labor litigation. (Bloomberg Law)
- Equity and Title IX issues: Because schools will distribute a capped pool of money, the way institutions allocate funds among sports and between men’s and women’s athletics must satisfy gender-equity obligations — which could shape contract terms and allocation policies. (Ropes & Gray)
Conclusion — What Can Be Said With Certainty (And What Cannot)
With the approval of the House settlement and the transition to a direct-payment / revenue-sharing model, it is almost certain that universities will use formal written agreements with student-athletes to govern payments. Such agreements will likely employ contract language similar to independent-contractor or revenue-sharing deals — specifying duties, conditions, rights, and contingencies.
However, because the model is newly implemented, there is no single standard contract form, and significant legal and practical uncertainties remain, especially around institution-specific practices, compliance, classification, and potential future litigation.
If you like, I can track down and share some actual sample agreements or term-sheets (redacted where public) from schools that have publicly disclosed them — that may give you insight into what real-world contracts look like under this new regime. Do you want me to attempt that?
Last edited:
Only so much money can be donated to each sport. I’d rather PQ put his money towards lacrosse where we are a top 10 team in the nation and compete against everyone. So many times I have had people ask me if Richmond even has a football team since we aren’t DI.If Mark Cuban can put Indiana Football on the map, why can’t PQ get it done here?
ur79&peanuts
Bench player
Let me know when the lacrosse team wins a National Championship 
