Iowa/Swarm Split?

[isucy86]

That's doesn't make sense.

If I want to hire an athlete to endorse my business (even if I never actually have them endorse it and just pay them) there is nothing that requires me to give the same opportunity to a FB player and a tennis palyer.

This notion that Collectives are an extension of the University is a stretch.

But could they be considered an extension if Iowa gives it's donor list without asking fair compensation in return? I expect schools get paid for making their alumni or student lists available to 3rd parties to sell their goods or services (eg credit card companies, auto insurance, etc.).

What if Iowa makes university employees like Ferentz, Blunder or McCaffrey available as spokespeople for the collective and those three high level university employees are not-paid by the Collective?

It could be the UofI isn't comfortable with Mr. Swarm being associated with Iowa's AD. I have no idea if he is an ethical person or not.

 

[AuH2O]

If an AD put anything like that in writing they deserve to be fired on the spot.


How is a Collective giving money to certain athletes different than the Gridiron Club giving money to football?

I suspect it would be fine, but an AD or collective could step in it by influencing donors or steering them to collectives. I suppose something like that could apply to Gridiron Club or similar, but it would have to be pretty explicit. Also a difference in GC is still for FB operations, which are way higher, and they can make that case even under title IX.

If it’s basically pay to play, I don’t think the higher operation cost loophole will hold water. It isn’t going to be accepted as a ‘necessary’ operations cost difference to pay football players while not paying female athletes.

That, combined with an AD directing funds from the AD to an NIL collective that can go to pay to play while avoiding title IX requirements might be problematic.

The fact that at Iowa there has been open talk about donor realignment suggests this is happening. Whether a civil suit would be successful on those grounds, who knows. But it’s not as simple as “the collectives aren’t subject to title IX.”

 

[Cyclone06]

I’d bet the Ferentz’s shut down any NIL collab. Can’t run the risk of their money bypassing the AD and missing their pocket in favor of the players. They’re just really good people ya know.

 

[SEIOWA CLONE]

Equal share? Women sports and men's tennis lose money. It wouldn't be fair to give women athletes or olympic athletes an equal amount of money.

Fair to whom? The athletes playing those sports would say that they have worked just as hard as those in the money-making sports, and it's not their fault that their sports do not make money.

I am not saying those athletes desire it, nor entitled to it, but to think that they are going to just sit back and watch other athletes make 100's of thousands to millions and they make little, or nothing is fantasy. They would have nothing to lose in that case, so they will sue to try and get a better deal.

Until the NCAA sets up some guidelines here, every school is on their own, it will not be like that forever, something has to be done to reign this in, or college athletics as they currently designed will not survive.

 

[GoldCy]

If an AD put anything like that in writing they deserve to be fired on the spot.


How is a Collective giving money to certain athletes different than the Gridiron Club giving money to football?

Gridiron donations are slight of hand in regards to title IX. It still goes into the pot and has to be offset to satisfy it. Just a way to get extra money donated.

 

[CY88CE11]

Fair to whom? The athletes playing those sports would say that they have worked just as hard as those in the money-making sports, and it's not their fault that their sports do not make money.

I am not saying those athletes desire it, nor entitled to it, but to think that they are going to just sit back and watch other athletes make 100's of thousands to millions and they make little, or nothing is fantasy. They would have nothing to lose in that case, so they will sue to try and get a better deal.

Until the NCAA sets up some guidelines here, every school is on their own, it will not be like that forever, something has to be done to reign this in, or college athletics as they currently designed will not survive.

A mechanic works just as hard as (or harder than) an engineer, but that doesn't mean the market dictates they make as much.

 

[cykadelic2]

How is a Collective giving money to certain athletes different than the Gridiron Club giving money to football?

You named one difference. Collective is NIL. Gridiron Club is not.

And since the Swarm Collective is currently restricted to FB, MBB and WBB only with the stated goal to pay each one of those athletes regardless of NIL marketability (i.e. pay for play), the TOE AD presumably has to completely disassociate itself from Swarm due to Title IX reasons.

 

[Nader_uggghhh]

I like that in typical Barta fashion all of the fans immediately take Swarm's side. This is supposedly about title ix but who's to say that Iowa just doesn't like Swarm's leadership? No one asked Brad Heinrichs to head Swarm, he just did it "because someone had to." Go listen to any of his interviews and you'll see a stark contrast with WeWill. Brent, Georges, Sage, all heavily invested in ISU before NIL. Brad is just some rich dude who wants to be affiliated with Iowa.

 

[Cycsk]

I like that in typical Barta fashion all of the fans immediately take Swarm's side. This is supposedly about title ix but who's to say that Iowa just doesn't like Swarm's leadership? No one asked Brad Heinrichs to head Swarm, he just did it "because someone had to." Go listen to any of his interviews and you'll see a stark contrast with WeWill. Brent, Georges, Sage, all heavily invested in ISU before NIL. Brad is just some rich dude who wants to be affiliated with Iowa.

Wow, if true, that fits the sentiment expressed in the initial post. And the contrast with the We Will Collective is indeed stark.

 

[intrepid27]

There may be another factor at play. Maybe Barta doesn't want to share donor list because he fears (rightfully so IMO) that if donors give to SWARM then, some money may not get donated to the athdepartment directly.

I've wondered this since NIL started. It will have a negative impact on other donations that typically go directly to athletic departments.

 

[ripvdub]

There may be another factor at play. Maybe Barta doesn't want to share donor list because he fears (rightfully so IMO) that if donors give to SWARM then, some money may not get donated to the athdepartment directly.

I've wondered this since NIL started. It will have a negative impact on other donations that typically go directly to athletic departments.

With TV money sky rocketing for the B1G it should more than offset that.

 

[SCNCY]

There may be another factor at play. Maybe Barta doesn't want to share donor list because he fears (rightfully so IMO) that if donors give to SWARM then, some money may not get donated to the athdepartment directly.

I've wondered this since NIL started. It will have a negative impact on other donations that typically go directly to athletic departments.

With TV money sky rocketing for the B1G it should more than offset that.

Your still going to have donations for seating selection via ticket sales. What will probably happen is you won’t see donations for major capital improvements as new TV deals can cover debt financing for said projects. Donations that used to go to capital improvements will probably move towards NIL.

 

[isucy86]

After posting about the Swarm yesterday, I checked out their website. They do claim to be a 501c and their mission seems aligned with the original intent of NIL.

However, if I were leading the IRS, I would be auditing these Collectives. Not sure how paying a recruit like Proctor to attend Iowa is compatible with what SwarmIowa lists as their mission on their website. I would also be curious what they wrote as their mission on their IRS application to obtain 501c status.

It might also be interesting if the IRS reviewed the contracts between the Collectives and the athletes.

And follow the money. Where payments to athletes up front before "work" was done. And was "work" done.

Not sure how much money across the country has been donated to 501c status collectives. But my guess is the IRS might become interested if they feel it is sizeable lost tax revenue.

 

[CascadeClone]

It’s certainly understandable that U of I, and specifically GarBar , could be a little gun shy about running afoul of Title IX laws. The timing is pretty strange though.

Why? They certainly have never cared about it in the past, and have the lost court cases to prove it.

 

[CascadeClone]

If Swarm explicitly won't provide funding to athletes in non-rev sports, TOE has to distance themselves from them.

Why? What do you base this on?

 

[jmb]

You're missing the point. Any NCAA AD under Title IX oversight like TOE's cannot affiliate with any collective (not individual businesses) that refuses to fund NIL opportunities for non rev athletes.

Now we are getting at the crux of the problem and why lawsuits in re title ix will prevail.

 

[cykadelic2]

Why? What do you base this on?

From the following link: https://hawkfanatic.com/2022/12/24/...-unnecessary-resistance-from-unlikely-source/

The Iowa Swarm Collective operates separate from the Iowa Athletic Department, and it has two-prong approach in which every football, men’s basketball and women’s basketball player receives a stipend in exchange for required appearances and services to nonprofit organizations, while there is also an .LLC where UI student-athletes get paid by local businesses for doing promotional services.

If this is how Swarm operates where they serve solely FB, MBB and WBB athletes, then IMO the TOE AD cannot directly associate with them due to Title IX implications. And implying "every FB, MBB and WBB player" suggests a pay for play recruiting inducement. Swarm is certainly within their rights to focus only on FB, MBB and WBB athletes but if they want TOE AD cooperation with mailing lists, marketing, etc., then Swarm needs to be available for all TOE athletes in similar fashion to how WWC is available for all ISU athletes (according to the WWC website).

 

[Kinch]

A mechanic works just as hard as (or harder than) an engineer, but that doesn't mean the market dictates they make as much.

College sports is not a market, according to Title 9.

 

[ISU22CY]

Equal share? Women sports and men's tennis lose money. It wouldn't be fair to give women athletes or olympic athletes an equal amount of money.

Not saying anything against other Olympic sports but the wrestling program with the CRTC fundraising has done a fantastic job this year. Knowing that the collectives are focused on those money-making sports (which makes 100% sense) the CRTC really pushed hard to hone in on donors that love wrestling and reaching out to them to get onboard.

 

[Kinch]

After posting about the Swarm yesterday, I checked out their website. They do claim to be a 501c and their mission seems aligned with the original intent of NIL.

However, if I were leading the IRS, I would be auditing these Collectives. Not sure how paying a recruit like Proctor to attend Iowa is compatible with what SwarmIowa lists as their mission on their website. I would also be curious what they wrote as their mission on their IRS application to obtain 501c status.

It might also be interesting if the IRS reviewed the contracts between the Collectives and the athletes.

And follow the money. Where payments to athletes up front before "work" was done. And was "work" done.

Not sure how much money across the country has been donated to 501c status collectives. But my guess is the IRS might become interested if they feel it is sizeable lost tax revenue.

Totally agree with this post. I think the iRS will let the collectives operate a couple of years then start peeling back the layers. I would also suspect the department of education do the same. I think in five years, you could see a much different landscape in the collectives than is the case right now.