According to numerous sources, colleges and universities are conducting risk assessments and budgeting accordingly, anticipating lawsuits over Title IX legislation. As the Power Four conferences look to profit-share up to $20 million with student-athletes, they have a difficult and potentially costly decision to make. Either equitably split the revenue spoils with their male and female athletes or allocate the money to revenue-producing sports (or a mix of the two options). The same goes for in-house generated NIL (Name, Image & Likeness) funds.

Lawsuits are sure to follow.

While this is largely a Power Four issue, DU must carefully navigate the minefield as it seeks to bolster priority sports such as hockey, gymnastics, lacrosse, and soccer. 

The fact that gender-equity claims can be brought against schools that unequally distribute revenue among men and women who participate in sports does not necessarily mean those cases would succeed in court, according to legal experts. The relationship between Title IX and colleges engaging in revenue-sharing and direct NIL payments is uncharted legal territory.

DU opted in on the NCAA settlement and is likely to be watching closely from the sidelines.

There is no case precedent for revenue sharing, and the first cases are likely to be decided later this year. Look for a host of targeted cases by student-athletes against individual schools to determine precedent, but it is likely to take years to determine a final, legally acceptable formula.

This lack of clarity opens the door for DU’s women’s teams (and other so-called secondary sports) in the short term. If the Power Four are primarily focused on revenue sharing for football and men’s basketball while defending a flurry of lawsuits, there may be an opportunity for DU in sports like gymnastics, women’s lacrosse, and women’s soccer to break through the chaos.

On the other hand, if the Power Four split their revenue evenly across their teams, a growing financial gap between the P4 and mid-majors could develop, even in so-called secondary sports. However, expect counter suits from revenue sport athletes (football and basketball) claiming their rightful share of the athletic department revenue. It could take years to resolve before a standard formula meets legal challenge.

DU Hockey fans, for their part, can get an early glimpse of what this new world is going to look like with fellow NCHC member Arizona State (Big XII). The same applies to DU gymnastics, affiliate members of the Big XII who have signed off on the NCAA revenue settlement.

These programs will also benefit from NIL (Name, Image & Likeness) dollars for their student-athletes. However, a clearinghouse is being established to make sure athletes are not paid inflated rates for their services. This, too, is likely to face legal challenges from student-athletes. Either way, donor fatigue combined with revenue sharing may reduce donor willingness to shell out even more money to student-athletes.