Eat Arbyās
3 Likes
I donāt know how this is calculated but hey UVAās up there.
1 Like
Is this football or hoops or both?
1 Like
No sourcing on the post from that account, little bit of a red flag. Also, when I searched the account name, I came across this amusing story:
2 Likes
I had to google aggregating. I guess Iām an aggregator too.
6 Likes
I think you might be closer to a reporter than an aggregator, truly. I donāt think Kleiman (if heās an actual human) talks to sources.
1 Like
HGN youāre definitely more of a reporter.
Kleiman sold his account and itās garbage now. He is pulling this from here: NIL Collectives ā NCAA Revenue Sharing & NIL Estimates 2025
Not sure how reliable it is, but I believe we have money floating around.
1 Like
I skimmed the methodology, my understanding is that the estimate comes from taking 16% of annual booster support for each school:
https://nil-ncaa.com/methodology/
They get the annual booster support figure from this report:
Specifically, from the āContributionsā category, which is defined as:
Contributions: Includes amounts received directly from individuals, corporations, associations, foundations, clubs or other organizations for the operations of the athletics program. Amounts paid in excess of a ticketās value. Contributions include cash, marketable securities and in-kind contributions such as dealer-provided cars for staff use. Also includes revenue from preferential seating.
So our most recent data reported $62 mil in contributions, which was a big jump from the $24 mil it was before (also for some reason 2021 and 2022 have the exact same figures):
16% of that doesnāt quite add up to the number in the NIL table, so I think theyāre doing some sort of backfill calculation that gets them to the total NIL number for P5 schools that is on Opendorse.
TL;DR: lots of assumptions, not a real reported NIL number for each school.
2 Likes
In the sales worldā¦ an aggregator combines solutions sets and offers combined registrations across multiple vendors for the resellers.
1 Like
Iām thinking about walking into my bossā office and making some demands after seeing thisā¦ becauseā¦ why not?
150% raise
1st class flights for all travel
all Fridays offā¦ and Mondays if it is icky outside
foot massages at noon every day
ā¦ updates after the meeting. 
5 Likes
Yea the guranteed pt will be a breaking point for most
5 Likes
Iām trying to understand how the revenue sharing settlement will interact with NIL collectives, and so far I am getting more confused.
Thereās some interesting quotes in this article thatās mostly fretting about how this works:
The role of powerful collectives going forward has not been clearly defined. The NCAA would like to eliminate them post-House. Until then, there is room for that creativity.
Once source familiar with Dybantsaās recruiting said collectives may pay a majority of the $4 million before the July 1 beginning of revenue sharing. That would lessen the hit on the revenue share to complete the deal.
And then more interesting stuff in this article on Texas Techās plans:
In a joint interview Friday, Hocutt and deputy AD Jonathan Botros said Tech will distribute about 74% to football players, 17-18% to menās basketball, 2% to womenās basketball, 1.9% to baseball and smaller percentages to other sports. In dollar amounts, itās about $15.1 million to football, $3.6 million to menās basketball and less than $500,000 each to the other teams.
Assuming the House settlement is approved, NIL offers of $600 or more will face a fair-market-value assessment by an independent clearinghouse. The firm Deloitte has been chosen to fill that role.
I still donāt understand what happens if a booster gives like $10 mil to a program. Does that just fund half of their revenue share fund? Or does it operate outside of that?
4 Likes
I havenāt read much about it yet, but it sorta feels like the NCAA will try to get back into the enforcement game, post-House. We shall see how successful they areā¦
2 Likes
This is UNC-focused nominally, but it gets at a question Iāve been curious about with revenue sharing: will the football-first schools actually see a little downturn with basketball because they end up squeezing their budget to get more to football?
Thereās some bonus juice on the Dybantsa recruitment for those who are interested:
Regardless, Alabama and North Carolina both really wanted Dybantsa and both backed up their years-long courtships by providing paperwork to prove they could match the ~$5 million asking price, sources said. The difference is North Carolina and Alabama had to pull from three pools of money: 1) school NIL collectives, 2) projected revenue sharing from the athletic department for the 2024-25 fiscal year, and 3) significant additional future NIL money that would be paid up front by a marketing firm.
The contrast referenced there is with BYU, who Norlander says can fund the $5 mil fully from their collective.
He also makes the point that the Dybantsa recruitment might be a one-off as he fits into a transitional set of rules with being able to get non-vetted NIL payments before July AND revenue sharing payments after.
1 Like
I donāt really understand the gist of the revenue sharing rules. Would anyone be willing to provide the short and sweet āFor Dummiesā explanation?
2 Likes
Theyāll probably come this April and be buried under a mountain of portal news.
As of now, I think the House settlement hearing is the day after the natty
I donāt think thereās been much āfor dummiesā stuff yet because the details are changing
2 Likes
I donāt understand all the nuances, but my understanding is:
- Schools can share up to a defined payment cap (~$20 mil next season; in general defined as 22% of average power conference school revenue). Institutional NIL payments count as part of this, so donations to an institutional fund count as revenue for this purpose, in addition to traditional revenue sources like sales, sponsorships and ads, media rights.
- Thereās a bunch of back pay money thatās being distributed to athletes who played from 2016-21 (I donāt know why those years); 75% to football, 10-15% to menās bball, 10-15% to everyone else.
- No more scholarship limits, schools have discretion to decide what to do, and scholarships can be full or partial in all sports. There are roster caps sport-by-sport. Scholarships funds donāt count towards the revenue sharing cap (I think). Support services donāt count either.
- Third party NIL does not count towards the cap, but any deal over $600 gets submitted to a clearinghouse and reviewed by Deloitte for fair market value.
This summary was LLM-aided.
3 Likes
I believe the 22% is the average of power 4 revenue and $22m for next year (2m of which is incremental scholarships, leaving $20m in direct payments) for all school. I donāt think itās 22% of a given school.
2 Likes
Ah yeah, thatās a good point, will edit to clarify.
I havenāt been able to clarify, but I believe nil continues outside of the rev share (and not capped) but deals have to be approved by Deloitte as a 3rd party clearing house to ensure they are real sponsorships deals and not pay for play. That feels like itās asking for lawsuits, so I donāt fully understand it.
1 Like