logo
Paying players, private equity, roster limits: What House settlement means for Purdue

Paying players, private equity, roster limits: What House settlement means for Purdue

Purdue athletic director Mike Bobinski has publicly welcomed the revenue sharing era of college sports as a way to even the playing field and stabilize a volatile name, image and likeness market.
When judge Claudia Wilken gave final approval to terms of the House vs. NCAA settlement last week, Bobinski's letter to the Purdue community stressed the competitive upside — and the financial urgency — for the Boilermakers.
The initial $20.5 million which can be shared — and which Bobinski has said Purdue will fully utilize — is not the only added expense. Bobinski said Purdue will increase the number of athletic scholarships awarded in some sports. He asked for expanded support for the John Purdue Club, the primary athletics fundraising organization. He also urged contributions to athletics through the university's "Victories & Heroes: Your Campaign for Purdue" initiative.
"This moment requires all of us — alumni, fans, donor and friends — to step up and be bold," Bobinski wrote. "… Your support is not just appreciated — it is absolutely essential."
Here's what we know about what the settlement term means for Purdue, and how it is moving forward.
Bobinski stated early and often Purdue will participate fully in revenue sharing. That $20.5 million obligation would have equated to 15.2% of the athletic department's income for the 2023-24 fiscal year based on its annual report to the NCAA. (Figures for 2024-25 are not yet available.)
Additionally, the NCAA's agreement to pay $2.6 billion in back pay damages to former athletes come out of its annual distributions to member schools. Purdue expects to receive about $1.2 million per year less from the NCAA for the next decade. It received $4.47 million in 2023-24.
Dating back to the hire of Barry Odom in December, both Bobinski and President Mung Chiang have suggested a change to the university's financial relationship with athletics will help close the budget gap.
Per records compiled by the USA Today Network in partnership with the Knight-Newhouse College Athletics Database, Purdue was one of 11 Division I athletic programs from the more than 230 public schools in the 2023 fiscal year which either received no revenue from its university (eight) or returned any revenue it received (three).
Among the ways the university could help athletics would be to take on debt obligations. Purdue listed $14.5 million in "debt service, leases or rental fees" on its 2023-24 NCAA financial report. Direct overhead and administrative expenses — things like facilities maintenance, security, insurance and utilities — accounted for almost $13 million in expenses.
An announcement on the specific details will come. Whatever the solution, belt-tightening alone won't get an already lean athletic department to its $20.5 million goal.
It remains to be seen how transparent Purdue will be about which sports receive what percentage of the revenue-sharing pool. However, based on reports from around the country, estimates have power conference schools allotting 70% to 75% to football and 15% to 20% to men's basketball. The sports which by far bring in the most money will receive the lion's share.
Not much will change for Purdue's marquee sports. Odom said he expects to operate on the traditional 85-scholarship limit within the new roster limit of 105. Walk-ons can make up that gap.
Men's basketball can use up to 15 scholarships, but don't expect coach Matt Painter to fill up that allotment often, if at all. Keeping 13 players satisfied with their roles in any given year is difficult enough.
Also, teams have the option of grandfathering in current athletes who would otherwise put them over those roster limits. This most likely applies to walk-ons who will be allowed to keep their spot until their career is over.
Bobinski's mention of adding scholarships might impact the non-full scholarship sports, which is everything outside of football, men's and women's basketball and volleyball.
Baseball used to be limited to 11.7 scholarships, distributed at the coach's discretion, on a roster three or four times that numberr. Going forward, teams are not beholden to those scholarship limits. However, they cannot exceed newly established roster limits.
Baseball, for instance, can have up to 34 players on its roster. Purrdue's roster from this past season included 44 names. In most other sports, based on rosters posted on the athletics website, Purdue operated below or near the new limits. It has known this new structure was coming for months.
Within the Big Ten, the impact will likely vary from school to school. In purely speculative example, historic wrestling powers Iowa and Penn State could offer more scholarships in that sport than most schools.
Athletes can still earn income beyond their revenue share cut through those avenues currently associated with NIL: endorsements, brand campaigns, online influencing, etc.
In his letter, Bobinski announced the formation of Boiler BrandWorks. Described as an "in-house student-athlete marketing and brand-building unit," this new arm of the athletic department will help athletes find and develop NIL deals with local and national businesses.
'Not everybody is marketable.' Purdue coach Matt Painter welcomes 'balance' House settlement brings
Per the university's athletics careers website, it is hiring a director of NIL strategy and athlete marketing who will oversee Boiler BrandWorks.
Even with revenue share, programs will need to show they can maximize the earnings potential of their most marketable athletes. (Think Zach Edey, Braden Smith or football quarterbacks.) This new administrator and department are responsible for making that happen.
The 501c3 non-profit collective associated with the athletic department continues to operate. It was involved with the finalization of deal such as those struck by returning and incoming men's basketball players and football's two dozen-plus spring transfer portal additions.
Last winter, though, Bobinski predicted the end of the philanthropic model of NIL fundraising. Schools will no longer need to hook players up with deals attached to charitable organizations or activities.
However, a 501c6 entity known as Boiler Up Inc. also operates in conjunction with Boilermaker Alliance. The main difference between the two types of non-profits is Boiler Up Inc. can raise money through memberships or fundraising without any charitable endeavors.
This setup or something similar is fairly common at power conference athletic programs. In recent months, more collectives have begun sunsetting their 501c3 to focus on their other platform — some of which are for-profit LLCs. IU's Hoosiers For Good announced last December it would cease operations early this year.
Purdue could keep some version of the current collective to facilitate fundraising beyond the John Purdue Club and the new, in-house marketing arm.
College athletic programs across the country have begun to partner with private equity firms, or are exploring the idea. These firms would not take a stake in the athletic program. Rather, they would offer a private source of credit paid back over time.
Finance bump: Indiana, Purdue received roughly $62 million of Big Ten's $928 million in revenue. What it means
Such a relationship could make sense for Purdue if it directly led to a long-term revenue enhancement. For example, taking private credit to fund an important facility or resource enhancement without asking for the money from the university.
However, Purdue prides itself on fiscal responsibility. It typically does not lead the pack in creative ways to spend money it does not have. This could be a realistic opportunity in time, depending on how the market evolves.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

What is 2025 College World Series schedule? When NCAA baseball tournament starts, teams, bracket
What is 2025 College World Series schedule? When NCAA baseball tournament starts, teams, bracket

Indianapolis Star

time2 hours ago

  • Indianapolis Star

What is 2025 College World Series schedule? When NCAA baseball tournament starts, teams, bracket

The College World Series tournament bracket set for Charles Schwab Field Omaha, as 8 NCAA men's Division I baseball teams compete for best in the land. Here's a look at the College World Series bracket, tournament dates, teams and how the College World Series works: The College World Series begins at 2 p.m. ET, Friday, June 13, 2025. Visit for a complete schedule of times and games. Most games will be televised on ESPN. Game 2 of the College World Series championship will air on ABC. The 2025 College World Series bracket pairings for the first round are listed below. A schedule of game times for each matchup: Visit for a full, printable College World Series bracket showing every game. Printable bracket times are Central Time. The 8 super regional winners meet for the College World Series in Omaha, Nebraska, and are split into two double-elimination brackets with four teams each, according to The winners of the two College World Series double-elimination brackets meet in a best-of-three championship series to decide the College World Series champion. For 2025 College World Series ticket information, visit Here are the top 16 seeds of the NCAA men's baseball tournament. Records are from the time of selection:

Trump's ‘big beautiful bill' to make wealthy even richer and punish poor
Trump's ‘big beautiful bill' to make wealthy even richer and punish poor

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Trump's ‘big beautiful bill' to make wealthy even richer and punish poor

Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' will hand thousands of dollars to the rich and leave poorer Americans worse off, a US spending watchdog has warned. The top 10pc of households will get a windfall of $12,000 (£8,800) per year from the Bill's tax cuts, while the bottom 10pc will see a net loss of $1,600 per year because of benefits cuts, according to analysis by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). This means the richest people in America will get a cash boost worth 2.3pc of income while the poorest households will see losses worth 3.9pc. Mr Trump's 'One Big, Beautiful Bill Act', as the legislation is known, was narrowly passed by House Republicans last month and is currently under scrutiny by the Senate. The president has set a July 4 deadline for a final version of the Bill. The Bill has come under heavy fire for driving up America's debt burden just as economists are sounding alarm bells over the sustainability of the US debt pile. Earlier this month, Mr Trump's former 'first buddy' Elon Musk slammed the Bill as a 'disgusting abomination' that he said would saddle America with 'crushing' debt. The US lost its last triple-A credit rating in May after a downgrade from influential credit agency Moody's. According to the CBO, the measures outlined in the Bill will add $2.4 trillion to the US deficit over the next decade. The Bill includes tax cuts worth $3.7 trillion over the next 10 years – primarily through extending the income tax cuts Mr Trump introduced in 2017 which are due to expire at the end of this year – alongside $1.3 trillion in spending cuts. The bulk of the spending cuts will come through reductions in Medicaid, which funds health insurance for low-income families, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Snap), which provides food stamps for the poorest in America. This means that although households will technically benefit from the tax cuts, the benefits for the lowest earners will be far-outweighed by the cost of their lost benefits. Around 16m Americans are expected to lose their health insurance as a result of the Bill. In a letter to Democrat lawmakers, who had requested the analysis, Phillip Swagel, the CBO director, said: 'The changes would not be evenly distributed among households. 'The agency estimates that in general, resources would decrease for households toward the bottom of the income distribution, whereas resources would increase for households in the middle and top of the income distribution.' Households in the middle of the income distribution would gain just $500 per year, or 0.5pc of their annual income. Speaking on Thursday, Mr Trump said the Bill was 'one of the most important pieces of legislation ever signed, ever approved, so it's going to be something very special.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

With Baumgartner in audience, Trump signs bill blocking Washington's electric vehicle mandate; state sues in response
With Baumgartner in audience, Trump signs bill blocking Washington's electric vehicle mandate; state sues in response

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

With Baumgartner in audience, Trump signs bill blocking Washington's electric vehicle mandate; state sues in response

Jun. 12—WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump on Thursday signed legislation into law that blocks Washington and other states from following California's lead in phasing out gas-powered vehicles. Rep. Michael Baumgartner of Spokane was among dozens of Republican lawmakers invited to the White House for the occasion, which the president used to riff on a variety of topics in addition to the bill. Between calling Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell "a numbskull" and highlighting his own popularity on TikTok, Trump celebrated the revocation of Biden-era waivers from the Environmental Protection Agency that let California impose stricter vehicle emissions standards than the federal government. After the Biden administration allowed California to ban the sale of gas-powered cars starting in 2035, Washington followed suit in 2022, requiring that all new cars sold in the state be either fully electric or plug-in hybrids. A total of 17 states has adopted similar rules that the newly signed law revokes. "The automakers didn't know what to do, because they're really building cars for two countries," Trump said. "When you have 17 states, you're building cars for two countries." In an interview before the bill-signing ceremony, Baumgartner said the California regulation and its progeny would have been devastating to the U.S. economy. "There does not exist the ability to magically create electric semi-trucks that move nearly 70% of the goods that Americans consume, so it would have been crippling to our economy if this rule was left in place," he said. "You can't run semi-trucks across America on unicorn laughter and aspirational dreams of environmental extremists." To revoke the waivers, the EPA issued under a previous administration, lawmakers invoked the Congressional Review Act, which allowed them to skirt the 60-vote supermajority required to pass most bills in the Senate. They did so despite the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office and the Senate parliamentarian, the chamber's neutral adviser on rules, both informing senators that the EPA waivers didn't count as the executive-branch rules for which the act applies. Despite near-unanimous opposition from Democratic senators, the bill revoking California's waivers received significant bipartisan support in the House, plus a single Democratic senator, Michigan's Elissa Slotkin. Trump was surprised on Thursday when a GOP lawmaker in the room told him 35 House Democrats had voted in favor. One of them was Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of southwest Washington, who runs an auto repair shop with her husband and has been a frequent critic of her party's push to speed a transition to electric vehicles. Shortly after Thursday's ceremony concluded, Washington state Attorney General Nick Brown and California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced a joint lawsuit with nine other states challenging the elimination of California's waiver. The suit alleges that the resolution violates the separation of powers, the Take Care Clause and multiple federal statutes, including the Congressional Review Act and Administrative Procedure Act. In the lawsuit, the plaintiff states allege that the Congressional Review Act has "never before been used in any context that resembles this one. It has certainly never been used, as it was here, to negate particular state laws." The lawsuit seeks to have the resolution declared unlawful and to require the federal government to implement the Clean Air Act consistent with the granted waivers. "Transportation is the single greatest contributor to greenhouse gas pollution in Washington, and our residents understand the transition to zero-emission vehicles is critical in the fight against climate change," Brown said in a statement Thursday. "This is the Trump administration's latest unlawful attempt to derail Washington's and the nation's transition to a clean future." At the White House, Trump railed against Democrats' efforts to use state and federal laws to phase out gas-powered vehicles — the country's biggest single source of greenhouse gas emissions — and speed the adoption of wind, solar and other low-carbon energy sources. "They're making you buy stuff that doesn't work," the president said. "You should be given the option to buy the electric car, by a gasoline-powered car, buy a hybrid. Probably not hydrogen, because hydrogen has the tendency that when it blows up, you're gonzo. It's over." After the room broke out in laughter at that line, Trump turned to Rep. Steve Scalise and said, "It'll make your accident look like peanuts," apparently referring to the 2017 shooting that left the Louisiana Republican in critical condition. Washington state officials have taken steps in recent days to prepare for the new federal law. In a June 6 memo, the Washington State Department of Ecology notified vehicle manufacturers that it would temporarily pause compliance requirements for some vehicle categories. "This recent federal action introduces new uncertainty for states, manufacturers, and consumers at a time when both businesses and consumers are making real progress in reducing the transportation sector's greenhouse gas emissions," Ecology Director Casey Sixkiller said in a statement June 6. "It undermines states' rights, negatively impacts public health, and puts U.S. automakers at a competitive disadvantage in a global market that is rapidly transitioning to zero-emission vehicle technology." Sixkiller added that the agency would work with legislators, industry partners, local governments and other states to "stay on track and ensure continued progress toward our climate and public health goals." After the federal bill cleared the Senate in late May, Gov. Bob Ferguson said in a statement that the action was "brazenly out of step with the law, science, and public will." "For more than 50 years, states have possessed the ability to adopt stronger vehicle emissions standards to protect public health. Washington has exercised that right, along with 17 other states, resulting in cleaner air and healthier communities," Ferguson said. "Despite this retreat from public health by the federal government, I'm committed to ensuring Washington moves forward on building a healthier, cleaner future." Thursday's bill signing drew praise of the Washington Trucking Association, which said it remains committed to working with Washington lawmakers and the Department of Ecology on a "workable path to electrification." "California's EV trucking mandates have been a disaster for states like Washington, and have caused real harm to the trucking industry, a key link in our trade-dependent state's supply chain network," the association's president and CEO, Sheri Call, said in a statement. "Washington state does not have the infrastructure in place to properly institute such a sweeping mandate like this, and the technology has not advanced enough yet to support the trucking industry's rapid transition to clean energy. Our neighbors in Oregon recently opted out of these mandates for these same reasons." Vicki Giles Fabré, vice president of the Washington State Auto Dealers Association, said that Washington's franchised new car and truck dealers have "made substantial investments in electrification and remain committed to selling electric and hybrid vehicles." "The Washington State Auto Dealers Association intends to work with state policymakers to find solutions that incentivize increased adoption of these vehicles, while also supporting the needs of franchised dealers, their employees, and the customers they serve," Fabré said in a statement Wednesday. According to Sixkiller, one in five new vehicles sold today runs on zero-emission technology. "We're not going to slow down that progress. Washingtonians already experience the impacts of climate change every year, from drought and wildfire to flooding and sea-level rise," Sixkiller said in a statement following the Attorney General's lawsuit. "As our Attorney General's Office fights to protect our state's rights, we'll continue working with the Legislature, industry partners, local governments, and other states to continue our progress on clean transportation. At a time of great uncertainty, that's a promise we can keep." Orion Donovan Smith's work is funded in part by members of the Spokane community via the Community Journalism and Civic Engagement Fund. This story can be republished by other organizations for free under a Creative Commons license. For more information on this, please contact our newspaper's managing editor.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store