On his thoughts on the House case

Well, first, thanks for having us. Always great to be with you and talking to our fans. This is part of what we want to do is really constantly update our fans on what's going on not only in house but what's going on in our house, in athletics and with our student-athletes. The House case is been been around now for multiple years and it's really a consolidation of three cases that really go back to antitrust violations. So there's an aspect of it that's really about the settlement of past NIL and that is being handled between the NCAA and the division one conferences in terms of the back pay for that settlement. Still, it also talks about the future, it talks about what revenue share and how we're going to share revenue with the current student-athletes and moving forward and so it's a combination of those two in the settlement talks. It's finally been approved tentatively by the judge. There's a process that's underway with notification of the student-athletes and feedback from them then the actual final hearing is in April, the beginning of April, and that's when she'll codify exactly what the settlement is going to be and finally we can move forward at that point. But it is tentatively approved and we're looking forward to moving with an answer about what it's going to actually be and what we need to do. So it's a case that has been talked about now for a while and I look forward to it being finalized but it's going to provide benefits to past student-athletes in that particular settlement as well as revenue sharing to our current student-athletes.

On what the House case means for the University of Michigan in general

In general terms it means we're going to be paying our student-athletes more money. Our budget is going to grow, which means we're going to have to look at new revenue streams and also look at our expenses and making sure we control our expenses. It's going to be a combination of both additional revenue that we need to look at because this is additional payments that we have to make to our student-athletes as well as reduction of expenses where we can but the goal is to continue to perform. For our teams to perform at a championship level and to continue to drive the success that we've had here for our history but particularly in the last five to ten years, it's really been phenomenal what our student-athletes and coaches and programs have accomplished.

On how TV revenue impacts the money coming in

It's a combination. It's not only our new television contract which kicked in this year and it grows over time but it's also about what revenue is going to kick in from the new CFP agreement which is another year or so away. In combination, next year we're going to have about an additional six million in revenue from the Big Ten to offset the cost of adding 22 million and the following year when the new CFP contract kicks in it's going to be about 16 million in additional so either way we're looking at a negative number when you just look at what you're paying out in terms of revenue share anywhere from 20 to 22 million based on what revenues coming in from, planned on coming in, from the Big Ten in terms of sharing revenue from television and CFP agreement.

On how the money will be dispersed to players, monthly? One lump sum?

All questions that we're really working through now. I mean it's not something that has been solidified at this point in terms of how the distribution occurs, what's the time frame, what's the mechanism that we're going to use. All those things are under discussion at this present time as to how we'll do that.

Will each school determine how the money will be dispersed?

Yes, that's part of the settlement that it's not specific. Every school doesn't have to follow the same percentage or same way to do it. We have different programs that others don't have. For example, we have ice hockey, right, not every school in the Big Ten has ice hockey. That's just an example, so if we choose to use some of the revenue share to support ice hockey that's going to be different. We also have women's water polo so they're sports that not everybody has and so we can choose to support and to do it in different ways.

On how Title IX plays a role in the House case

Title IX is a federal law that we all have to keep in mind and so that's another component of how we have to think through how we pay out the revenue, how we do the scholarships, all those things are coming into conversation and consideration. So we're also trying to figure that out as well is it market-based based on the revenue from television and CFP and other things or is it strictly based on Title IX. All those things are being worked through at this present time and it's not just us, this is a national conversation that's occurring about these things and we're working to try to figure it out as quickly as we can.

On not wanting to cut sports and funding scholarships if needed

You could do it that way where you take every student-athlete would get something, you could do that. We are going to lose opportunities though because what the scholarship—I'll just take the sport of football. Right now we have a scholarship limit of 85 but we have a roster as we sit here today of 136, the new roster limit is 105 and that is something that is going to be codified in this settlement. In this agreement the new NCAA rule will be everybody can have a roster limit now of 105 where it used to be a scholarship limit but with no roster limit you can have as many on the roster as you want. So we're actually going to see about a reduction of across the board with every sport of about 170, and that's men and women opportunities, and, again, it's something that I thought may have been going too far to limit but this was negotiated amongst the commissioners and different leagues. So, for us, moving forward we're going to see some participation numbers going down but you'll see the number of scholarships we provide going up and so that is the difference in where we are now with the roster limit versus the scholarship limit.

On whether the athletic department can still support the same number of athletic programs as they have in the past

The plan is to do that. The reality is we can't go up to you—right now we provide about 360 scholarships if we fully fund this. In the letter I really talked about if we fully fund all 780 scholarships we're almost doubling what we pay now in scholarship costs which would take us up another 30 million on top of the 22 million, 20 to 22 million, we would be paying in revenue share so that's where in the letter I talked about the 50 million dollar number. We don't have that to do right now and so we're going to invest in certain sports and hopefully grow that over time the investment we make in all of our sports. We're not reducing any sport lower than where they are now by the NCAA rules and so we're not cutting any sports, for me, the goal is that we will continue to work to support our student-athletes in our programs to win, to support them at a championship level, Big Ten and mational.

On how he will determine which sports increase the scholarship level

It's another conversation that's ongoing. We talked to our coaches about it, we've implemented some increases now because they're recruiting and so we've invested about another five million dollars in scholarship commitments moving forward and we'll continue to take a look at it so of that 33 million, 30 to 33 million, I talked about, we've already gone into about 5 million of that with additional scholarships and we'll continue to take a look to increase different teams even more than we have and some of the teams that we didn't have an opportunity to increase at this present time we'll look to increase them as we move forward.

On other revenue streams under consideration

Yeah I mean there's a lot of things we've left on the table and we're actually going to be surveying our fans to really get a sense of what they think about different opportunities to increase revenue. We look forward to doing that and hearing back. Not that we're looking to implement all of that we'll survey them on but just to get a sense of where our fans are and to get their feedback so as we start to think about some things as we move forward we can start to do that. One that stands out, and again, there's no commitment to doing it but one of the things that stands out is really in our stadium, in Michigan Stadium. We have prided ourselves, we've had a history of no signage, no advertising in Michigan Stadium and if they as our fans go to other locations they'll see how people have utilized their stadiums to bring in revenue. Now the good news is we have a source that is untapped at this point in time. Not that we're going to, we no have plans right now to do that but that's one of the sense of questions that we want to get our fans to say, well, how would you like to see us develop revenue streams that would support our student-athletes, Is it ticket sales increase or ticket price increase? Is it through corporate sponsorship? Is it through looking at other premium options that others have those kinds of things.

On whether 'premium experiences' is something that is considered

Well ,you know what, we're already taking a look at that. For example, this year in Mortenson Plaza we've actually had an area that we set aside for our fans to have another premium experience. We're constantly trying to look at and elevate what our fans want. What they've talked to us about, what their interests are and that has been very successful. What's very well received by our fans. We're constantly trying to figure out ways to generate additional revenue to support our student-athletes, our coaches and our programs.

On potentially dipping into the taxpayer base to get funds

We're not asking the state to support us through any type. I want to make sure our fans understand that that is not a plan that we have. We, again, prided ourselves we've basically one of the handful or so of departments in this country that have been self-sufficient, that haven't relied on tax dollars, haven't relied on university support or student fees and I've been at institutions that have relied on all three. For us I think it's important to understand our values and what we value so we may look at an additional fee increase in ticket prices, seat contributions, those kind of things that we've done and our fans have supported. The idea of looking at taxes and asking the state to give us money, it hasn't been on the table haven't even thought about that.

On whether there's anything the fans can do right now to support the student-athletes

Absolutely. First and foremost, we always are looking for our donors and people who want to support our programs through donations to the athletic department. Secondly, support of our student-athletes through NIL. If you have a company and want to hire our student-athletes and come into a partnership with them to do endorsements to do a signing or autograph appearance fees, those kind of things, or if you want to support the Champions Circle, they've been the biggest supporter of our programs. It's all on our website and I would encourage our fans who are interested in supporting our student-athletes, in supporting Michigan athletics and our programs to go in and support. Times have changed, right, we need to get beyond the fact that we are uncomfortable with giving money to our student-athletes and paying them. That day is past, it's well past, and it's time for us to support our student-athletes, so I welcome our fans to go to our website to go to the Champion Circle website and support. Any dollar figure is welcome and we would love, I would love, for you to do that for our student-athletes.

On the House settlement does for collectives moving forward

Collectives don't necessarily have to go away. The one thing that they're looking at now is how to sort of make it a market-based NIL if you will. So if there's a range of what people are paid for doing endorsements, whether you're an actor or professional athlete or college athlete, are you in that range? If you're in that range, you're fine. If you're out of that range then there's going to be implications on the cap for the revenue share so NIL and collectives are not going to go away, don't have to go away, but the idea is that they will have some sort of parameters for lack of a better word, not so much control, but parameters around how much can be counted as true NIL versus additional money for the cap.

On what the process looks like right now to get set up for the House settlement

First of all, it's got to go through the legal process and we have to figure out exactly how ultimately in April that document and what the judge decides and puts out there is going to determine exactly what we can do. But we're working through the process and preparing ourselves right now for the process of how we're going to do revenue share, scholarships, all those kind of things that we already talked about. I think the important thing to understand is that there's a six-month period that this is not going to be in place that we still have to look at supporting the collectives, supporting our student-athletes in that six-month transition period for lack of a better term that we're going to need our fans to step up and support our student-athletes because we can't start paying them until July 1, 2025. So this idea that collectives are just going to go away now is not the case because that's been the mechanism to support our student-athletes directly because we're not allowed to by NCAA rules. So those are some of the things that we are going to need and we're going to prepare for July 1 and how we're going to do it. Some of the questions you have about how the process is going to be handled, what's the time frame of paying them, those kind of things, but we're still going to need people to support our student-athletes through the collective for the next six months after our start in January through July 1.

On the communication with recruits about the House settlement

Well, that it's different. You know, different sports and different conversations have been ongoing and that's why we really needed to tell our coaches how many additional scholarships they're going to have. Some really lean on the scholarship side, right, the scholarship offer and coming here at Michigan to participate in sports and to receive a full scholarship or close to a full scholarship or whatever in some is a combination of scholarship, you know how much revenue share are you planning on giving to each position, my child, those kind of things. So the conversations are different depending on the actual recruit, depending on the sport, those kind of things. Almost virtually all of our sports, that conversation is occurring in some way shape, or form and that is the piece of having 29 sports is you have to just manage and really get into the details on sport by sport.

---

Discuss this article with our community on our premium message boards

Not a subscriber to Maize & Blue Review? Sign up today to gain access to all the latest Michigan intel M&BR has to offer

Follow our staff on Twitter: @JoshHenschke, @Berry_Seth14, @TrevorMcCue, @DennisFithian, @BrockHeilig, @JimScarcelli, @Jerry_Diorio

Subscribe to our podcasts: Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts and Spotify

Check out Maize & Blue Review's video content on YouTube

Follow Maize & Blue Review on social media: Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, and Instagram