This is another example of decisions being made for athletes without their involvement in the process.
It’s always been this way. It’s not their system, and they are participants in a system they are fortunate enough exists in the first place. But they wanted to get paid, and here they are getting paid. Be careful what you ask for (for those left out in the cold).
Politically, just can’t see fees bankrolling athletes, especially outside the P4. And there will be some schools at that level, like Rutgers - with its large AD deficit - where the imposition of additional subsidies would most certainly be an issue among the general student body, parents, faculty, taxpayers, etc.
Agreed. This is a class action lawsuit OR a legislative beat down waiting to happen.
The schools that depend on subsidies like us CANNOT revenue share.
There is no revenue to share. Period.
And if those charts were correct. That most of the P4 also depend on subsidies then why the hell is this happening?
Increases in revenue should have been used to reduce subsidies.
Again. If the actual revenue money gets mixed in with student fee money into one big pot, it’s just egregious.
How can that be justified?
Average coaching salaries are going to have to come down in this new environment.
From Dellenger’s piece above: 
Seems like this whole thing is going to be tied up in perpetual litigation. House is settling nothing, except that lawyers will come out on top every time. Geez!
And a noted sports lawyer agrees:
Rent a player.
This clearing house thing sound like planned economy communism.
This must fail.
Boise has it goin on, no reason to worry about them plenty of $$ in that town…… that city is now a suburb of LA & San Fran!
Will be interesting if that approach works or if it’s even deemed legal.
Pretty rich considering he is THE poster boy for breaking contracts!