Iowa bball NIL
- Thread starter wilson reborn
- Start date
Are they allowed to use some of the $20.5 revenue sharing yet that schools get? Breakdown most men’s b-ball programs add estimated 4-5 million.
That would be part of the overall budget. Multiple revenue/donor streams is going to be the complete budget
Sounds like some donors really stepped up. We don’t have Mark Cubans, but seems like a few donors really helped out.
Iowalaw made a huge donation so Ben could compete with Darian DeVries.
I knew Iowalaw would come through with a big donation. God bless you Iowalaw!
There was Much more than $3.5M last year!!! That would have only covered Alvaro & Stirtz....
We supposedly have $10M this year. But if Tavion Banks can come back and re-join the team, Ben will get what he needs for Tavion... Guarantee it!!!
From everything I've read, Bennett got $1.7M and Alvaro $1.3M. Hausen $700K. Could be Profit Sharing $2M to $2.5, additional NIL of $3.5M. Maybe $6M total. I still think they had less than $10M this year. Coleman wouldn't have been that high. McKeever is the big ticket guy.
If the NCCA doesn’t come up with some type of CAP like professional sports, I think we’re in trouble. How the hell are we going to continue to compete with the blue bloods or ones who got $$$ if these schools keep pushing the market price UP? The price of these rosters will continue to go UP… as well as each individual player. It should’ve been a crime when Fran was working with 2.5 mil lol my god the average mid-major has that.By all accounts, we have $12-$13 mil in the bank for this year for NIL roster payments.
I believe the approximately $3.5 million number being thrown around was what the University used for the NIL allocation. Now the broadcasting entities(Learfield) are negotiating payments to players. Instead of paying X amount to the University there is some work arounds that some can be funneled to the players. (something along those lines according to Heinrichs). Swarm is 3rd on the totem pole but still important. It has also been stated that the March Madness run brought in more money for Swarm earmarked for bball in that short few week window of our elite 8 run than the entire previous year. While we are not flush with cash Brad said we are probably in the top quarter of B1G NIL hoops money. (don't quote me on this). Football is top half. Which could sound disappointing but as Brad said. Look at the B1G. Ohio St, Penn St, Oregon, Michigan, USC, etc. Being in the top half is just fine.
That concerns me also. I keep saying - this whole thing is just getting started. 5-10 years from now, who knows what this whole thing is going to look like if some guardrails aren't put on it. There's only so much a lot of people are going to want to contribute on an annual basis.
A cap won't work. Then it will be back to the way it used to be. Under the table payments and such. They need to allow one free transfer and then you have to sit out a year or soemthing. If a big money program takes another schools player there needs to be some sort of financial contribution from the big money program to the smaller money programs NIL fund. Something similar to what Major League Baseball does. (Who most certainly needs a salary cap and a salary minimum)
we need to be able to sign players to long term contracts, along with buyouts. Jay Bilas does a really nice job explaining all the reasoning here. For the people who don’t know Jay is a lawyer former Duke almost Hawkeye and ESPN college basketball analyst.
I like that idea. I think eventually signing players to long term contracts with buyouts and maybe in some cases a player sitting out a year if he transfers more than 1 time.
The NCAA tried to do that. It was taken to court and they realized they were going to lose so we have what we have now.
It was not athletes or even a University that took them to court over their transfer rules. It was the states. Tennessee and Virginia filed the suit. It was joined by many other states from across the political spectrum. Even D.C. joined the suit against the NCAA transfer rules.
And if the players you ink are no good your program goes dormant until they graduate.
I completely agree that the key to some degree of stability is to reform the transfer eligibility rules.
The obstacle to reform is the US Supreme Court. A global framework which passes constitutional scrutiny is needed. It seems inevitable that Congress will get involved.
I’m in favor of reinstating the one year rule with an exception allowed for transfer to a lower division. No “hardship” exemptions.
Hausen getting $700k to mainly ride the bench really boggles my mind! Either they thought he would be a major contributor or they were willing to get an expensive insurance policy type player in case of injury.
I searched to see if there were any NIL state tax laws is use. The below shocked me. Iowa is behind.
Key NIL Tax Exemption Developments (As of April 2026):
Key NIL Tax Exemption Developments (As of April 2026):
- Arkansas: Became the first state in May 2025 to exempt NIL earnings paid by universities from its 3.9% income tax.
- Mississippi: The House passed a bill in March 2026, HB 4014, to exempt NIL income to help schools compete with neighboring states.
- Active Legislation: Other states, including Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and South Carolina, have introduced similar proposals to eliminate taxes on NIL income.
- Proposed Income Tax Elimination: Missouri voters will decide later in 2026 on a constitutional amendment to allow lawmakers to eliminate the state income tax entirely by replacing it with expanded sales tax.
It has been a good learning experience to discover how many people are in favor of a monopolistic business model.
So get good Coaches who can evaluate recruits and develop them. Same as it's always been.
Or perhaps Iowa is ahead. Why in the world should these college athletes — who are now very wealthy individuals, I might add — be given such a lucrative tax break?
The NCAA is a membership association made up of the schools themselves, and a lot of power now sits with conferences, media networks, state NIL laws, courts, and athlete markets. The NCAA is losing control not because it is an all-powerful monopoly, but because its old amateurism model is being challenged by the schools, athletes, courts, and the market. So the better claim is not “the NCAA is a monopoly,” but “the NCAA has used centralized rules to restrict athlete compensation,” which is a narrower and more accurate argument.
Right. Monopoly implies exclusive control and that does not describe the current NCAA.
It is always refreshing that we have posters here that know the law better than the 9 Supreme Court justices that voted 9-0.
From the decision:
"Even assuming the NCAA is a joint venture, though, it is a joint venture with monopoly power in the relevant market."
Its like everyone posts what they think it should be and have never bothered to read the court decisions.
I don’t think you’re understanding…Is it ok for people to disagree with you, right? Good grief. Why is everything a personal attack with you?
You’re leaning too hard on that quote and overstating what the Court actually said. In NCAA v. Alston, the Court didn’t rule that the NCAA is a literal monopoly in the broad sense people are using here. That line is part of a narrower antitrust analysis, where the Court assumes or describes “market power” in a defined market so it can evaluate specific restrictions on athlete compensation. That’s very different from declaring the NCAA an illegal monopoly overall. Courts often use that kind of language as a legal framework, not a blanket label. So citing that sentence as proof the NCAA is a monopoly skips the context and stretches the holding beyond what the decision actually says.
Appreciate all the good legal analysis on how the courts are wrecking college basketball. But the original question was how Hawks got from $3.5 million to $10 million in one year. I think JedHawk77 answered that question.