The Utes and other Big 12 institutions have tough decisions to make ahead of a potential revenue-sharing model.
As details emerge from the $2.77 billion antitrust House settlement, which was agreed upon by the Power Four and NCAA on May 23 and is still moving through the courts, there have been more questions than answers. While some issues have more clarity than others, there are still things that some athletic directors can’t answer. The Utes and their athletic program, according to a statement from the university, are ready to embrace the changes coming with the House Settlement and revenue sharing, but there’s so much left for the program to work on behind the scenes.
For Utah, as it gets set to enter the Big 12 this summer, that means finding a seat at the table and remaining a competitive institution in this space is more than necessary, especially as the next round of college realignment looms on the horizon and talks of a potential Power 2 gain steam. According to the Crimson Collective’s Drew Watson, who is the director of development and helps fundraise for the Utes’ collective, everything is on the table. Watson envisions a scenario where Utah’s collective could serve as a third-party marketing agency inside the athletic department at the start of the 2025 fiscal year.
“No donations have come in for sports outside of football, men’s basketball, women’s basketball or gymnastics,” Erin Trenbeath-Murray, the Crimson Collective’s vice president of philanthropy, told The Tribune. “Now that the U. can actively fundraise, I’m anticipating in the next two to three months that they’ll make substantial progress.”
In the Big 12 and other conferences, there are varying ideas as to how, if programs opt into the revenue-sharing model, money will be dispersed. Kansas State’s Taylor notes that he envisions two models: one where Title IX is fully enforced or another where athletes are paid based on the revenue their sport generates.
Jamie Pollard, Iowa State’s athletic director, says that changes will have to be made to everyone’s system of operation in the Big 12, but eliminating and cutting opportunities for non-revenue sports remains at the bottom of his list, too.