The new agency in charge of regulating name, image, likeness deals in college sports sent a letter to schools Thursday saying it had rejected deals between players and donor-backed collectives formed over the past several years to funnel money to athletes or their schools.

Those arrangements hold no “valid business purpose,” the memo said, and don’t adhere to rules that call for outside NIL deals to be between players and companies that provide goods or services to the general public for profit.

The letter to Division I athletic directors could be the next step in shuttering today’s version of the collective, groups that are closely affiliated with schools and that, in the early days of NIL after July 2021, proved the most efficient way for schools to indirectly cut deals with players.

Since then, the landscape has changed yet again with the $2.8 billion House settlement that allows schools to pay the players directly as of July 1.

Already, collectives affiliated with Colorado, Alabama, Notre Dame, Georgia and others have announced they’re shutting down. Georgia, Ohio State and Illinois are among those that have announced plans with Learfield, a media and technology company with decades of licensing and other experience across college athletics, to help arrange NIL deals.

Outside deals between athlete and sponsor are still permitted, but any worth $600 or more have to be vetted by a clearinghouse called NIL Go that was established by the new College Sports Commission and is being run by the auditing group Deloitte.

In its letter to the ADs, the CSC said more than 1,500 deals have been cleared since NIL Go launched on June 11, “ranging in value from three figures to seven figures.” More than 12,000 athletes and 1,100 institutional users have registered to use the system.

But the bulk of the letter explained that many deals could not be cleared because they did not conform to an NCAA rule that sets a “valid business purpose” standard for deals to be approved.

The letter explained that if a collective reaches a deal with an athlete to appear on behalf of the collective, which charges an admission fee, the standard is not met because the purpose of the event is to raise money to pay athletes, not to provide goods or services available to the general public for profit.

The same would apply to a deal an athlete makes to sell merchandise to raise money to pay that player because the purpose of “selling merchandise is to raise money to pay that student-athlete and potentially other student-athletes at a particular school or schools, which is not a valid business purpose” according to the NCAA rule.

Sports attorney Darren Heitner, who deals in NIL, said the guidance “could disproportionately burden collectives that are already committed to spending money on players for multiple years to come.”

“If a pattern of rejections results from collective deals submitted to Deloitte, it may invite legal scrutiny under antitrust principles,” he said.

On a separate track, some college sports leaders, including the NCAA, are seeking a limited form of antitrust protection from Congress.

The letter said a NIL deal could be approved if, for instance, the businesses paying the players had a broader purpose than simply acting as a collective. The letter uses a golf course or apparel company as examples.

“In other words, NIL collectives may act as marketing agencies that match student-athletes with businesses that have a valid business purpose and seek to use the student’s NIL to promote their businesses,” the letter said.

5 things we learned at Big 12 Media Days: Deion’s Deion, and Texas Tech has people talking

Plus, you can take the player out of TXHSFB but you can’t take TXHSFB out of the player.

Kaidon Salter, Julian Lewis share thoughts on starting QB battle at Colorado

Salter, a former Cedar Hill standout, and Lewis are looking to take over a spot previously held by Shedeur Sanders.

Deion Sanders’ Big 12 Media Day was everything that sets him apart from his peers

Sanders was the last coach to take the stage in Frisco — and that was no accident.

Find more college sports coverage from The Dallas Morning News here.

Texas Tech has won double-digit games just one time in the last 48 seasons, but it is trying to change that pattern of mediocrity in the name, image and likeness era of college football.

And its approach has certainly turned heads.

On Thursday, David Ubben, Justin Williams and Chris Vannini of The Athletic relayed quotes from other Big 12 coaches regarding the Red Raiders’ supposed big spending in the NIL era. There was a combination of jealousy, frustration and skepticism regarding how effective it will be, but one coach said Texas Tech’s roster is making 10 times more than his team’s players.

“I don’t know what to believe,” the coach said. “I don’t even know how it’s possible. Those are big numbers. There will be a lot of young men taking pay cuts when they get done playing college football.”

Six coaches expressed regret they don’t have similar financial support from their programs with one directly saying, “good for them, I’m jealous.”

However, another highlighted how “tough” the pressure will be to win with this approach while another coach saw the entire ordeal as “ridiculous” and potentially problematic down the line.

“They’re not just outbidding, they’re outbidding (other teams) by 3X,” the coach said. “Wild, but it will be interesting. If the players are good kids, about the right things and about winning, I think it’ll go great. If they’re about themselves, the first time adversity hits will define them.”

Texas Tech went 8-5 last season under head coach Joey McGuire and ended its campaign with a Liberty Bowl loss to Arkansas. That type of season is traditionally a solid one for a program that hasn’t won double-digit games since 2008 and is often overshadowed by Texas and Texas A&M within its own state, but the NIL approach will change the expectations.

The Red Raiders are a solid 27th in the country in 247Sports’ composite rankings for the 2026 recruiting class with time to improve. 

And they turned heads recently when they landed the commitment of 5-star offensive tackle Felix Ojo. ESPN’s Eli Lederman reported Texas Tech gave him a fully guaranteed three-year, $5.1 million contract as part of the recruitment.

If those are the type of figures the Red Raiders are doling out to land the nation’s best recruits, he won’t be the last elite prospect they end up with in 2026 or beyond.

That could translate to winning in the near future.

The new agency in charge of regulating name, image, likeness deals in college sports sent a letter to schools Thursday saying it had rejected deals between players and donor-backed collectives formed over the past several years to funnel money to athletes or their schools.

Those arrangements hold no “valid business purpose,” the memo said, and don’t adhere to rules that call for outside NIL deals to be between players and companies that provide goods or services to the general public for profit.

The letter to Division I athletic directors could be the next step in shuttering today’s version of the collective, groups that are closely affiliated with schools and that, in the early days of NIL after July 2021, proved the most efficient way for schools to indirectly cut deals with players.

Since then, the landscape has changed yet again with the $2.8 billion House settlement that allows schools to pay the players directly as of July 1.

Already, collectives affiliated with Colorado, Alabama, Notre Dame, Georgia and others have announced they’re shutting down. Georgia, Ohio State and Illinois are among those that have announced plans with Learfield, a media and technology company with decades of licensing and other experience across college athletics, to help arrange NIL deals.

Outside deals between athlete and sponsor are still permitted, but any worth $600 or more have to be vetted by a clearinghouse called NIL Go that was established by the new College Sports Commission and is being run by the auditing group Deloitte.

In its letter to the ADs, the CSC said more than 1,500 deals have been cleared since NIL Go launched on June 11, “ranging in value from three figures to seven figures.” More than 12,000 athletes and 1,100 institutional users have registered to use the system.

But the bulk of the letter explained that many deals could not be cleared because they did not conform to an NCAA rule that sets a “valid business purpose” standard for deals to be approved.

The letter explained that if a collective reaches a deal with an athlete to appear on behalf of the collective, which charges an admission fee, the standard is not met because the purpose of the event is to raise money to pay athletes, not to provide goods or services available to the general public for profit.

The same would apply to a deal an athlete makes to sell merchandise to raise money to pay that player because the purpose of “selling merchandise is to raise money to pay that student-athlete and potentially other student-athletes at a particular school or schools, which is not a valid business purpose” according to the NCAA rule.

Sports attorney Darren Heitner, who deals in NIL, said the guidance “could disproportionately burden collectives that are already committed to spending money on players for multiple years to come.”

“If a pattern of rejections results from collective deals submitted to Deloitte, it may invite legal scrutiny under antitrust principles,” he said.

On a separate track, some college sports leaders, including the NCAA, are seeking a limited form of antitrust protection from Congress.

The letter said a NIL deal could be approved if, for instance, the businesses paying the players had a broader purpose than simply acting as a collective. The letter uses a golf course or apparel company as examples.

“In other words, NIL collectives may act as marketing agencies that match student-athletes with businesses that have a valid business purpose and seek to use the student’s NIL to promote their businesses,” the letter said.

Before name, image and likeness brought huge payouts to college athletes, coaches panicked over its potential impact in the locker rooms. They thought pocket watching would be the rule of thumb and it would cause division on the team over how much individuals were making.

There were tales here and there of jealousy over deals tearing teams apart. Steve Alford said Nevada’s basketball team fell victim last season. Overall, the coaches were wrong about this one.

Advertisement

I bring that up because, as of Tuesday, colleges and universities can officially begin paying their athletes directly as part of the House v. NCAA settlement. There will be more players with deals that rival professional sports contracts.

It wasn’t a problem when it was just NIL, and it won’t be a problem with college athletes essentially getting salaries now.

Just ask Kentucky basketball players. Who’s making what isn’t a topic that is ever really broached in their locker room.

“If I’m being honest, we really don’t talk about it because it’s a weird conversation to have,” UK guard Otega Oweh said. “Like, ‘Oh, yeah, how much you making?’ It’s kind of strange, so we just stay away from that topic. Keep the hoops, the hoops.”

Advertisement

Unless some regulation is passed to get transparency and there is public reporting of team roster salaries, then it will be a guessing game for the athletes, too.

Players hear the same things the general public does when it comes to individual salaries and how much a school is reportedly paying its roster. Oweh said he heard the rumors that UK was paying $20 million for its 2024-25 basketball squad.

“I feel like it could be,” Oweh said. “A lot of other teams I’m seeing, like, similar things. So it could be, I really don’t know.”

Give the players some credit here. Every player in every sport has been through enough practices, enough drills and through enough game scenarios to know exactly who they’d want to make a play that will decide the game’s outcome.

Advertisement

There is an unspoken hierarchy. And the payments will reflect that reality. The disparity between who makes what is only going to get worse now with revenue sharing in play.

For those lucky enough to play professionally in their sport, this is simply the beginning of what life looks like in the real world.

Denzel Aberdeen transferred to UK after being a key reserve on Florida’s national championship run last season. He said comparing incomes wasn’t a problem for the Gators, and he hasn’t found any issues now that he’s with the Wildcats.

“We know what we came in for, we came in to play basketball,” Aberdeen said. “It ain’t really about the other stuff.”

Advertisement

That’s certainly not to say that it’ll never happen.

There will be cases where who is making what money will cause division in the locker room. But those occurrences will happen no more than players bickering over the starting lineup or who gets what plays called for them or the timeless tale of bickering over a love interest, which has been known to throw a monkey wrench in many a championship contender.

The bigger stories from NIL payments came over unfulfilled NIL promises including UNLV starting quarterback Matt Sluka, who transferred midseason because the school didn’t deliver on a verbal agreement. Or former Tennessee quarterback Nico Iamaleava reportedly asking for a pay increase to $8 million before leaving for UCLA.

The players handled making NIL money with maturity. Expect them to do the same with more money pouring in from the House settlement.

Advertisement

Reach sports columnist C.L. Brown at clbrown1@gannett.com, follow him on X at @CLBrownHoops and subscribe to his newsletter at profile.courier-journal.com/newsletters/cl-browns-latest to make sure you never miss one of his columns.

This story was updated to add a video.  

This article originally appeared on Louisville Courier Journal: Kentucky basketball can handle NCAA revenue sharing: House settlement

The FGCU women’s soccer team released its 2025 schedule on Thursday, July 3, which features a mix of Southeastern Conference (SEC) opponents and cross-state rivals. The schedule consists of 20 matches, with 10 home games and 10 away games, unlike its male counterpart.

The Eagles will kick off their 2025 season with a pair of exhibition matches. FGCU will play Miami in Coral Gables on Aug. 3. This will be the eighth all-time meeting between the two teams, with the Hurricanes holding a 4-2-1 advantage in the series. In an exhibition match last year, both teams ended in a 0-0 draw at Pickering Field at the FGCU Soccer Complex. FGCU rounds out exhibition play against Miami-Dade College on Aug. 8.

The season begins with a two-game homestand against Cal State Fullerton and Webber International on Aug. 14 and Aug. 17, respectively. Both games set up the first of three SEC matchups this season. The Eagles will host LSU on Aug. 21, in what will be the first-ever matchup between the two programs. The Tigers finished the 2024 season with a 9-9-3 record, which earned them an at-large bid to the NCAA Tournament. This will be the second consecutive season in which FGCU hosts an SEC opponent.

From there, the Eagles will embark on their longest road trip of the season, spanning four matches. FGCU will play Florida rivals FAU and FIU on Aug. 28 and Sept. 4. Then, the Jim Blankenship-led team will face the SEC duo of Florida and Auburn on the road. They will complete the second leg of a home-and-home series against the Gators on Sept. 4. FGCU has played against Florida eight times and has yet to beat them. The best result occurred last season, which was a 0-0 draw at Pickering Field.

Then, FGCU will travel to Auburn, Alabama, to face off against Auburn on Sept. 7. The Tigers are coming off an impressive season, posting a 13-4-4 record with an appearance in the 2024 NCAA Tournament’s second round. This will be the second matchup against the Tigers in program history, the first being a 1-0 defeat in the first round of the 2014 NCAA Tournament.

The Eagles return to Pickering Field on Sept. 11 to wrap up their non-conference slate against the Grambling State Tigers.

FGCU aims to repeat its strong season in the ASUN, where it went 9-1-1, earning the top seed in the ASUN tournament. The Eagles fell to Eastern Kentucky in the semifinals of the tournament, 2-1, in extra time. They begin their conference slate with three straight road games against  Stetson on Sept. 21, Queens on Sept. 25 and West Georgia on Sept. 28. The Eagles outscored each university by a combined 15 goals last season.

The Eagles then return home for a two-match homestand against cross-state rivals Jacksonville and North Florida on Oct. 2 and Oct. 5, respectively. A two-match road trip against the Dolphins and the Ospreys follows on Oct. 9 and Oct. 12, respectively. FGCU swept both games against JU and UNF last season.     

Following the road trip, FGCU wraps up its regular season with a three-match homestand. The Eagles will host West Georgia on Oct. 16, Queens on Oct. 19 and Stetson on Oct. 25 at Pickering Field.

After coming up short in the 2024 ASUN Tournament, the Eagles eye redemption with key All-ASUN players: Erika Zschuppe, Kendal Gargiula, and Lauren Dwyer, returning for a run at the title.