Big 12 commissioner doubles down on preference for 5-11 playoff model if CFP expands
Associated Press FRISCO, Texas (AP) — Big 12 Commissioner Brett Yormark is doubling down on his preference to stay with only five automatic qualifiers if the College Football Playoff does expand from 12 to 16 teams as many expect after this season, instead of each of the four power conferences being guaranteed multiple bids. “We […]
FRISCO, Texas (AP) — Big 12 Commissioner Brett Yormark is doubling down on his preference to stay with only five automatic qualifiers if the College Football Playoff does expand from 12 to 16 teams as many expect after this season, instead of each of the four power conferences being guaranteed multiple bids.
“We have the responsibility to do what’s right for college football … not what’s right for one or two or more conferences,” Yormark said Tuesday at Big 12 football media days. “I think 5-11 is fair. Earn it on the field, assuming we want to expand. I love the current format, but if we’re going to expand, let’s do it in a way that’s fair and equitable and gives everyone a chance.”
While the Southeastern Conference and Big Ten will have more of a say on the playoff format starting in 2026, when ESPN’s $7.8 billion contract kicks in, Yormark believes the 5-11 format would be good for now and in the future. He said ACC Commissioner Jim Phillips feels the same way, and is expected to express that during his league’s media days in two weeks.
“We do not need a professional model because we are not the NFL,” Yormark said. “We are college football and we must act like it.”
In the 12-team format still in place for this season, the five highest-ranked conference champions are guaranteed spots in the playoff. The difference this year is that the top four highest-ranked champions are no longer guaranteed the top four seeds that come with first-round byes.
Among potential 16-team formats would be four automatic qualifiers from both the SEC and Big Ten, and two each for the Big 12 and ACC. The Big 12 last season had only conference champion Arizona State make the playoff last season.
“We want to earn it on the field,” Yormark said. “It might not be the best solution today for the Big 12, given your comments about (automatic qualifiers), but long term, knowing the progress we’re making, the investments we’re making, it’s the right format for us.”
Yormark, who is going into his fourth year as Big 12 commissioner, believes that the landmark NCAA House settlement will have a positive impact for all conferences, especially if the College Sports Commission works the way it is intended in enforcing the rules in the remade system.
“It will. I have a lot of faith in Bryan Seely,” Yormark said of the former Major League Baseball executive named CEO of the new CSC. “It should create a level playing field, and I’m not giving that up.”
The Big 12 was already in transition and still at 10 teams when Yormark arrived in 2022. BYU, Cincinnati, Houston and UCF joined the league the following year.
Texas and Oklahoma, who won football national championships while in the Big 12, completed their long-planned move to the SEC last year. That is when Pac-12 schools Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado and Utah came into what is now a 16-team Big 12.
“I think parity matters, and I think ultimately over time, and that’s hopefully sooner than later, there’ll be a couple of our schools that will emerge, you know, as elite schools that are always part of the conversations at the highest levels. And that’s what we’re working towards,” Yormark said. “But it starts with parity and being competitive top to bottom. And I think we’re there.”
___
AP college football: https://apnews.com/hub/college-football
What does Trump’s college sports executive order mean? Breaking down the impact
“President Donald J. Trump Saves College Sports.” If only it were that simple. The 176th executive order President Donald Trump signed in the past seven months was announced Thursday with an audaciously headlined statement from the White House. We don’t know how this will play out long term. But these are the key facts surrounding […]
“President Donald J. Trump Saves College Sports.” If only it were that simple.
The 176th executive order President Donald Trump signed in the past seven months was announced Thursday with an audaciously headlined statement from the White House.
We don’t know how this will play out long term. But these are the key facts surrounding the executive order and the questions that need to be answered.
What’s happened in college sports that brought it to the federal government?
The NCAA has been under attack on numerous legal fronts for more than a decade, particularly when it comes to paying athletes. Its policy for decades was strict amateurism — any compensation athletes received beyond their scholarships would render them ineligible.
The model began cracking through a series of antitrust cases brought by former athletes, most notably Alston vs. NCAA in 2021. The Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that schools must be allowed to provide additional academic awards. By then, states began passing legislation allowing athletes to earn money from their name, image and likeness — i.e., endorsement deals — in direct opposition to the NCAA’s longstanding ban.
On July 1, 2021, the NCAA relented and began allowing NIL payments, which touched off another antitrust case, House v. NCAA. A class of former athletes sued for back pay for missing out on NIL opportunities. The defendants agreed to a $2.8 billion settlement, part of which allows schools to pay athletes directly for the first time, up to $20.5 million. A judge approved the settlement on June 6, 2025.
But the lack of an organized NIL system has led to chaos, with boosters exploiting the lack of enforcement. And with other legal challenges forcing the NCAA to eliminate its longstanding rules about transfers, athletes now routinely hop from one school to another in search of their next payday.
Desperate for regulation, college sports leaders have been lobbying Congress for help in the form of a federal law for years, but not until recently has there been any significant movement on a bill.
What are the key takeaways of the executive order?
The order essentially makes recommendations for how college athletic departments should operate and directs several government agencies to weigh in on issues that will shape the future of college sports. It also delivers the NCAA and conferences much of what it has been lobbying for on Capitol Hill.
However, the order’s ability to turn ideas into action is questionable.
The order:
Gives a nod to protecting women’s and Olympic sports by setting benchmarks for scholarships and opportunities based on the amount of money an athletic department makes.
Bans “pay-for-play” to athletes by schools, a bedrock principle of the NCAA and college sports that leaders are still clinging to. The order does try to carve out exceptions for endorsement and sponsorship deals with third-party businesses.
Calls on the Secretary of Labor and the National Labor Relations Board to clarify the employment status of student-athletes. Under a Republican administration, that likely decreases the chances athletes would have the right to organize.
Directs the Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission to find ways to hand rule-making power back to the NCAA, conferences and other college sports governing bodies and away from courts and state legislatures.
Who benefits from this?
Considering how much it falls in line with what college sports leaders have been asking for, it would be difficult to call it athlete-friendly.
Yes, it tries to protect non-revenue programs and force schools to fund a wide range of teams for athletes to participate in college sports, but limiting compensation by regulating NIL compensation and banning pay-for-play has been at the root of problems for decades.
“Looks like an NCAA press release,” said Marc Edelman, professor of sports law at Baruch College and antitrust expert who has been a critic of NCAA policies.
Several ideas for student-athlete compensation have emerged over the years to help regulate the market, from collective bargaining agreements to defining student-athletes as university employees. Though how much athletes actually want those things is hard to say; with more than 190,000 athletes competing in Division I sports, gauging consensus is tricky.
Will this actually change anything?
In the short term: no.
In the long term: maybe.
The biggest possible downside of the executive order is that it could create more uncertainty for college sports through policies that may or may not hold.
“It very much depends on how this gets enforced moving forward, and whether it gets enforced moving forward,” said Sam Ehrlich, assistant professor at Boise State’s College of Business and Economics. “Maybe this could just end up being just a statement that goes absolutely nowhere.”
What can the executive order do?
It’s not so much what an executive order can do as what it can’t. It can’t make a law, it can’t provide an antitrust exemption and it can’t override state laws. Congress can do that. And that’s what college sports need.
Any policies that come from an executive order can be challenged in court and reversed by the next administration, which means college sports continues to operate under a blanket of uncertainty when it comes to defining the relationship between schools and athletes.
That’s exactly what college sports leaders are trying to stop.
What power does the government have in these situations?
The executive branch does not have the authority to provide straightforward solutions to college sports’ problems, most importantly some form of antitrust exemption. That has to come from Congress, and will require bipartisan support.
The president’s involvement could prioritize the issues in a way that motivates lawmakers to build on recent momentum in the Republican-controlled House, where a college sports bill made it out of committee for the first time earlier this week. Or maybe pervasive political divisiveness makes Democrats recoil from the idea of giving the president a symbolic victory.
While the complicated problems facing college sports now are not quite a matter of life and death, it remains to be seen if presidential involvement makes finding solutions easier or harder.
What is The SCORE Act?
The SCORE Act is a House bill that would provide the NCAA and conferences some antitrust protection, preempt state laws related to NIL compensation and bolster the terms of the House settlement.
The SCORE Act made it through two Republican-led House committees on partisan lines earlier this week. No college sports bill has ever gotten so far. When Congress returns for the fall session, the bill could go to the House floor for a vote and it will probably pass. That’s meaningful and a positive sign for many in college sports after years of inaction by lawmakers.
The bill has little support from Democrats in the House and stands very little chance of making it through the Senate, where seven Democrats would have to vote with Republicans to get the 60 votes necessary to pass.
What divides Republicans and Democrats?
The debate over college sports legislation on Capitol Hill is akin to a labor dispute.
Republicans, who currently control both chambers and the White House, are focused on ways to shield the NCAA and college sports conferences from litigation and state laws that make it impossible for them to effectively govern national competition.
Democrats are demanding greater protections for the workers (the athletes) and are hesitant to provide the antitrust protections college sports leaders have been lobbying for.
The NCAA and conferences want a law that would prevent college athletes from being deemed employees. Democrats want that option left open, along with athletes’ rights to organize and maybe even join unions.
Senator Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) released a statement Friday that read: “The many challenges facing college sports are important and complex. The Executive Order recognizes the importance of preserving Olympic sports, women’s sports, and maintaining competitiveness for big and small schools alike. I’m disappointed that the President abandoned his earlier plan for a commission to examine all the issues facing college sports. We need a sustainable future for college sports, not a future dominated by the biggest and wealthiest schools who can write their own rules without accountability.”
What precedents are there involving federal legislation and higher education in sports?
The president’s EO is the most significant and direct entry by the executive branch into college athletics since President Theodore Roosevelt’s calls for safety reforms in football led to the creation of the NCAA in 1906.
President Lyndon B. Johnson’s executive order, signed in 1967, led to the passage of the federal Title IX gender discrimination law, which has been credited with paving the way for an explosion of opportunities for women in college sports.
What does this mean for the NCAA?
The NCAA as a governing body is ceding power to conferences and the newly formed College Sports Commission. However, it played a pivotal role in lobbying for federal legislation and has been much better received by lawmakers since former Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker took over as NCAA president two years ago.
The NCAA’s future will ultimately be determined by college sports stakeholders, not politicians.
Why is the president getting involved?
The White House’s announcement hailed Trump’s long-held interest in college athletics, including preserving Olympic and women’s sports amid the changing landscape. Until now, Trump’s engagement with higher education has been adversarial, threatening federal funding and litigation against schools for Title IX violations or allegations of antisemitism and discrimination through the promotion of diversity at universities.
Trump came away from a meeting with former Alabama football coach Nick Saban in May motivated to get involved. The formation of a presidential commission led by Saban and billionaire oil businessman Cody Campbell, a former Texas Tech football player and current board chair, was considered then put on hold as lawmakers worked on legislative solutions.
— Stewart Mandel and Justin Williams contributed reporting.
(Photo: Brendan Smialowski / AFP via Getty Images)
Men’s swimming and diving one of spring 2025 scholar all-America teams
Story Links
Spring 2025 CSCAA Scholar All-America Teams Release
The Hamilton College men’s swimming and diving team were recognized as a College Swimming & Diving Coaches Association of America (CSCAA) Scholar All-America Team for the 2025 spring semester on Wednesday, July 2 […]
The Hamilton College men’s swimming and diving team were recognized as a College Swimming & Diving Coaches Association of America (CSCAA) Scholar All-America Team for the 2025 spring semester on Wednesday, July 2 when the organization released its list.
Teams were required to achieve a grade point average of 3.00 or better during the semester in order to earn the prestigious honor. The Continentals posted a 3.50 GPA and picked up the award for the eighth straight semester under Head Coach John Geissinger.
A dozen members of the men’s team made the 2025 New England Small College Athletic Conference Winter All-Academic Team, which honors sophomores, juniors, and seniors in good academic standing in their sport maintaining a cumulative grade point average of 3.50 or higher.
Paul Finebaum names Texas school as ‘most corrupt program’ in CFB history
During ACC media days, SMU Mustangs head coach Rhett Lashlee made some controverisal comments about the SEC being a top heavy conference. “The SEC has had the same six schools win the championship since 1964,” said Lashlee. “Not a single one has been different since 1964. That’s top-heavy to me. That’s not depth.” Advertisement Lashlee’s […]
During ACC media days, SMU Mustangs head coach Rhett Lashlee made some controverisal comments about the SEC being a top heavy conference.
“The SEC has had the same six schools win the championship since 1964,” said Lashlee. “Not a single one has been different since 1964. That’s top-heavy to me. That’s not depth.”
Advertisement
Lashlee’s comments are trending topic in today’s college football world. Many fans and members of the media disagree with Lashlee. It is undeniable that the SEC is the top conference in college football. The SEC recruits the best and has produced the most NFL draft picks of any conference for 19 straight years. Current members of the SEC have won 14 of the last 20 national championships even though the Big Ten has won two straight national titles.
We frankly don’t even understand Lashlee’s argument. Eight different members of the current SEC (includes Oklahoma and Texas) have won national championships since 2000. During the same time period, only three different ACC teams won national championships.
In response, ESPN’s Paul Finebaum has a couple of words for the Mustangs’ head coach.
“In 1987, they (SMU) shut down their football program,” said Finebaum in response to Lashlee. “When he is making fun of the SEC of winning national championships. SMU is the most corrupt program in the history of college football.”
Advertisement
What Finebaum is talking about with the year 1987 is the SMU program was shut down due to paying players to play for their team in previous years during the 1980’s when it was prohibited. SMU faced the death penalty (did not play any games in 1987) and it took the Mustangs years to recover.
In the new era of college football with name, image and likeness (NIL), Texas programs are among the most aggressive in the country with NIL money. Texas Tech, Texas and Texas A&M have all spent massive amounts of NIL funds to secure top recruits. However, SMU should not be forgotten in the NIL era. The Mustangs took advantage of their move to the ACC and made the College Football Playoff during the first year of the 12-team era.
The comments will most likely be a reason for comparing the ACC to other Power Four conferences, including the SEC, to see which conferences are performing the best this upcoming season.
Paul Finebaum names college football’s most corrupt program
Follow UGAWire for more college football coverage on Instagram or Threads!
Advertisement
This article originally appeared on UGA Wire: Paul Finebaum names Texas program as ‘most corrupt’ in CFB history
University of North Dakota Fighting Hawks Men’s Hockey Unveils Quartet of New Uniforms – SportsLogos.Net News
It might be the middle of summer, but the University of North Dakota Fighting Hawks men’s hockey team is ready to take on the new season in new threads. The Fighting Hawks unveiled four new uniforms on their social media channels on Thursday, July 24. They include two white jerseys, one green jersey and one […]
It might be the middle of summer, but the University of North Dakota Fighting Hawks men’s hockey team is ready to take on the new season in new threads.
The Fighting Hawks unveiled four new uniforms on their social media channels on Thursday, July 24. They include two white jerseys, one green jersey and one black jersey. The new jerseys coincide with a change in suppliers, from adidas to CCM.
The green jersey and one white jersey feature “NORTH DAKOTA” on the front in an arched serif block front with a black drop shadow. These jerseys also have broad stripes on the waist and elbows — green on the white jersey and black on the green jersey — flanked with contrasting stripes. Both have the National Collegiate Hockey Conference logo on the right shoulder.
Courtesy North Dakota Men’s Hockey / Facebook
The other two jerseys, one white and one black, feature a beveled “NODAK” wordmark with a black outline running diagonally across the front. The white jersey — which replaces a similar NODAK alternate jersey from 2025-26 — has two green stripes running around the waist and elbows, while the black jersey only has green, white and black striping on the sleeves. On these jerseys, the NCHC shield moves to the back collar.
Courtesy North Dakota Men’s Hockey / FacebookThe Fighting Hawks’ 2024-25 white NODAK alternate jersey. (Courtesy University of North Dakota Fighting Hawks)
All four jerseys have block font names and numbers on the back and sleeves. The white jerseys have green names and numbers with black outlines, while the green jersey has white numbers outlined in black. The black jersey has white numbers with green outlines.
Courtesy @UNDmhockey / Twitter
All the jerseys have the Fighting Hawks’ primary logo on the shoulders.
SportsLogos.net files
Last year, aside from the white NODAK alternate, the Fighting Hawks wore jerseys with “NORTH” arched above and “DAKOTA” arched below the player’s number on the front. The white and green jerseys had shoulder yokes and three stripes around the arms and waist, while the black jersey only had stripes around the arms in the same pattern as the new black NODAK alternate.
Courtesy University of North Dakota Fighting Hawks
North Dakota opens its 2025-26 regular season with a home-and-home series against the University of St. Thomas Tommies on October 10 and 12.
UNC joins changing times in college sports under House settlement
To compete in the new world of college athletics, the University of Northern Colorado will need creativity, strategy and the involvement of the local community, athletic director Darren Dunn said this month. In early June, the chaotic college sports landscape changed again. A federal judge in California finalized the settlement of a 5-year-old antitrust lawsuit […]
To compete in the new world of college athletics, the University of Northern Colorado will need creativity, strategy and the involvement of the local community, athletic director Darren Dunn said this month.
In early June, the chaotic college sports landscape changed again. A federal judge in California finalized the settlement of a 5-year-old antitrust lawsuit between six former Division I student-athletes and the NCAA — allowing schools to begin directly paying athletes as of July 1.
Over the past four years, Division I college athletes had been permitted to earn money through sponsorships, endorsements, social media and other business arrangements — but not through the schools themselves. In addition to allowing direct pay from schools, the settlement will change how these NIL payments are regulated.
UNC decided to opt into the terms of the settlement.
“It’s a massive change in our world,” Dunn said. “It is a significant milestone in college athletics, and it means a lot more work for our staff — staying up with trends, providing opportunities for our student-athletes and to keep winning. Quite frankly, that’s what this is about.”
University of Colorado men’s basketball coach Tad Boyle, left, stands with University of Northern Colorado athletic director Darren Dunn during Boyle’s induction into the UNC Athletics Hall of Fame on Friday, Sept. 13, 2024 at the University Center at UNC in Greeley. Boyle, a Greeley native, coached UNC from 2006-10 in his first Division I head coaching job, turning around the program as it transitioned from Division II. (Woody Myers/University of Northern Colorado).
The House v. NCAA settlement includes nearly $2.6 billion in back pay over the next 10 years to all Division I athletes who competed in college sports from 2016 to 2024. This money in part will come from the NCAA by withholding a variety of fund payments annually made to schools and conferences.
At UNC, this will equal a loss of about $310,000 per year for the next decade. The Big Sky Conference, of which UNC is a full member, will lose about $2.7 million per year over the length of the payout from the 10 full-member schools’ reductions and the conference office, according to deputy commissioner Dan Satter.
“You always want a seat at the table and a chance to voice your perspective,” Satter said. “To not have that and to have financial repercussions that are disproportionate to the athletes impacted (in the Big Sky Conference) and reflected in the settlement is certainly frustrating.”
The defendants in the lawsuit were the NCAA and what were once the five major, or power, conferences: the Pac-12 Conference, the Big Ten Conference, the Big 12 Conference, the Southeastern Conference and the Atlantic Coast Conference.
The plaintiffs, the six former Division I student-athletes, represented the three classes of the settlement according to the 76-page agreement: Grant House, Sedona Price, Tymir Oliver, Nya Harrison, DeWayne Carter and Nicholas Solomon.
University of Northern Colorado guard London Gamble dribbles in front of teammate Tatum West during a women’s basketball summer practice at UNC in Greeley. (UNC Athletics)
The settlement classes consisted of football and men’s basketball; women’s basketball; and the additional sports class. The classes in the settlement are differentiated based on the athletes’ earning potential in the sports.
The settlement money will be split into two funds: $1.976 billion for NIL claims and $600 million for the additional compensation claims, according to the agreement.
Inside the NIL claims money is $71.5 million for video game usage or injury for football and men’s basketball; $1.815 billion for broadcast usage for football and men’s and women’s basketball; and $89.5 million for third-party injury for all three classes who received NIL payments after July 2021.
The $600 million for the additional compensation is comprised of $570 million to the Power 5 football and men’s basketball athletes and $30 million for the additional sports athletes.
University of Northern Colorado men’s basketball player Zach Bloch dribbles the ball during a 2025 summer workout at Bank of Colorado in Greeley. Bloch, a graduate student and guard, will play a fifth season with the Bears in the 2025-26 season. (UNC Athletics).
All schools in the defendant conferences were bound by all of the terms of the settlement. Schools in other Division I conferences were only bound to the settlement if they opted into the terms. No representatives of Division I schools outside of the Power 5 Conferences were involved in the settlement, according to Satter.
He said the conference is encouraged by its place in college athletics because the Big Sky appeals to what attracted fans to the sports.
“We’re going to be more and more what people fell in love with about college athletics, and we’re going to have more of what is a traditional model as opposed to the FBS (Football Bowl Subdivision) level and certainly the Power 4,” Satter said.
UNC head football coach Ed Lamb said the impact of the opt-in won’t be significant for the Bears’ program. Lamb said it was important for him to know university leadership from President Andy Feinstein to Dunn and himself were in “alignment to do everything we can do to be competitive.”
Lamb also said he wanted to know the university leaders were interested in continuing to play at the Football Championship Subdivision level and that the Big Sky Conference is the right place for UNC.
“And I feel that from the people who run the university,” Lamb said.
Lamb said the biggest revenue stream he can control is trying to win games. The coach soon begins his third season with the Bears, and the team has won once in 23 games the past two seasons. Preseason practices begin Monday.
“It’s going to produce more butts in the seats and ticket sales,” Lamb said of winning. “When there’s a winning football program, student enrollment tends to increase. Those are the things I’ve got to keep my focus on.”
The University of Northern Colorado football team going through a practice at UNC fields in Greeley. (UNC Athletics)
UNC men’s basketball coach Steve Smiley also said he was glad the university opted into the terms of the settlement.
For a while, UNC officials had hesitations about going along with the terms. The sticking point for the university was a component of the settlement impacting roster sizes. The settlement does away with scholarship limits. Roster limits are in place for schools that opt in, but this mandate comes with a grandfather clause.
Until discussions and negotiations between the sides working out the settlement were held, there was a possibility schools opting into the settlement would have been required to cut roster spots. Schools that opt in don’t have to decrease roster sizes at this point.
At UNC and other Big Sky Conference schools, the matter of roster sizes was a concern because of a loss of enrollment revenue. That was not a direction UNC wanted to go. The university has been working for several years to improve its financial stability through higher enrollment.
Dunn said UNC teams would’ve lost about 50 roster spots under the previous version of the settlement. This equals about $1 million in enrollment revenue, he said.
“Losing head count is not a good thing,” Smiley added, also noting his team is set for the 2025-26 season and the impacts of House will be factored into plans for future seasons. “In my circles and talking to people, it appears it will give the most flexibility in operating in the future. And I think that’s a good thing. There was not a downside with our department, knowing we didn’t have to lose student-athletes.”
UNC decided to opt into the settlement for a couple of other reasons, Dunn said. For one, the university wants to participate at the highest level of Division I athletics. The university also wants to provide additional resources to athletes. How UNC compensates athletes remains in the discussion and planning phases. This is where UNC’s interest in being more creative and strategic becomes a focus.
University of Northern Colorado junior Krista Francia runs down a Sacramento State runner for an out during a 2025 Big Sky Conference game at Gloria Rodriguez Field in Greeley. (Jim Rydbom/Staff Photographer)
Dunn said the university had not made any NIL payments to student-athletes as of July 18. This does not include payments from the Bear Pride Collective, summer school scholarships or Alston academic awards.
Dunn said the university will have to self-generate revenue to pay athletes, and there are a few ways this can be accomplished. Among the simplest of these options are finding sponsorships, fundraising and game guarantees. Game guarantees are when a larger school, such as the University of Colorado, pays a sum of money to a smaller school such as UNC to play at the bigger’s school’s home site.
This will happen in 2028 and 2031 when the Bears football team returns to Folsom Field in Boulder for games against the Buffs. UNC will receive a total of $1.05 million for the two games. UNC football will receive $825,000 for two games against Wyoming in 2026 and 2030, according to FBSchedules.com earlier this month.
The women’s basketball team last year played a guaranteed game at Brigham Young University. These games can generate anywhere from a few thousand dollars to $50,000, Dunn said.
This is the type of money that could go toward paying athletes under House. Dunn said he’s also heard of other schools putting a fee on tickets to generate additional revenue.
In a statement on House v. NCAA, UNC said this new era will require unprecedented collaboration with the athletic department, alumni and the Greeley community.
“For us to continue to be competitive in this environment, we’re going to have to get more people involved,” Dunn said this month. “There are a lot of people who live in the area who are not alumni. There are a lot of businesses that are successful here. I think the better we are, the better we can promote Greeley and the better we can promote the Weld County area.”
The Bear Pride Collective was established in 2023, after athletes were allowed to begin receiving NIL payments. The collective works through a third-party organization to facilitate NIL opportunities or transactions between UNC student-athletes and fans, donors and businesses, the university said at the time.
University of Northern Colorado wrestler Andrew Alirez shows love for the Bank of Colorado crowd in February 2025 during his last home match in Greeley. (Jim Rydbom/Staff Photographer)
The collective is not officially affiliated with the UNC Athletic Department. Though it’s recommended by UNC to support its student-athletes, the collective is a separate entity. At the time the Bear Pride Collective was established, it was run by an Atlanta-based company called Student Athlete NIL.
As of now, Dunn does not see a change in how the Bear Pride Collective operates, he said. The collective is another option for donors to give to UNC athletes. A representative from the Bear Pride Collective couldn’t be reached for comment about its role under the House settlement terms.
“I think at some point down the road, there might be less options, but right now, I see it as a benefit,” Dunn said.
Under the House settlement, booster collectives may pay student-athletes for NIL as long as all of the payments are for valid business purposes, according to Ropes & Gray. All NIL transactions with a total value of $600 or more must be reported to the newly created College Sports Commission. The commission was set up to oversee the new system under the settlement.
Another term of the settlement stipulates schools may share revenue with athletes at an annual capped amount of $20.5 million per school for this year. The cap is expected to increase by about $1 million each year after 2025-26 to an estimated $32.9 million in 2034-35.
UNC won’t give athletes $20 million, but the university will do “the best we can with the resources we have,” Dunn said.
Steve Sarkisian reveals whether Nick Saban would return to coaching
The college football world has been abuzz for the past two weeks over the possibility of Nick Saban potentially returning to coaching. That possibility was first raised by Greg McElroy on ESPN. It has since taken on a life of its own. FOX Sports’ Colin Cowherd dumped more fuel on the fire recently when he […]
The college football world has been abuzz for the past two weeks over the possibility of Nick Saban potentially returning to coaching. That possibility was first raised by Greg McElroy on ESPN.
It has since taken on a life of its own. FOX Sports’ Colin Cowherd dumped more fuel on the fire recently when he suggested that a pairing with Arch Manning at the professional level might be enough to lure Saban out of retirement.
Cowherd had Texas coach Steve Sarkisian on The Herd with Colin Cowherd on Thursday and broached the topic. He put Sarkisian on the spot, asking if he could see Nick Saban taking the jump back to the NFL.
“You already have him in Cleveland!” Sarkisian said with a laugh. “I heard you yesterday, you already have him in Cleveland, he’s coaching Arch. I only have Arch for one year? Shoot, I thought I was going to have him for two.”
After the two had a good laugh over that, Sarkisian attempted to tackle the question of Saban getting back into coaching a little more seriously. He has worked with Saban in the past, so he presumably has a better pulse on the head man than most.
“I don’t know. Hey, he is a great coach and I loved my time working for Nick,” Sarkisian said. “I mean he really is a fantastic coach. I think he feels really comfortable to me. He’s really good on TV, I think he enjoys what he gets to do. He’s playing a ton of golf, which he loves doing. I’m sure Miss Terry loves having him at home. So I don’t know. That’s obviously a personal thing as he grows.”
Saban has indeed quickly become a staple of ESPN’s College GameDay since retiring from his post at Alabama. He’s got some natural ability and his knowledge of the game is unparalleled.
As ESPN officially retires Lee Corso from the show this fall, it stands to reason that developing an heir of sorts is a priority. Could Nick Saban be that guy?
Well, the NFL calling would certainly throw a wrench into that. And Sarkisian didn’t completely rule that possibility out.
“I know he’s one of, if not the most competitive person I’ve ever been around, so I’m sure those competitive juices get flowing pretty good,” Sarkisian said. “But, man, he looks like he’s having a lot of fun doing television. He looks relaxed. He’s great for our sport. I know people are tuning in to hear his insight on all this stuff.”