It’s Tuesday, June 24, 2025, which means there are only 67 days until the Penn State football team opens its season against the University of Nevada, Reno. Its the first of three consecutive home contests that are probably best described as “preseason” games.
The Nevada Wolf Pack finished at the bottom of the Mountain West Conference last season with an 0-7 league record. For comparison, Penn State’s opponent in the Fiesta Bowl last season was Boise State, which won the Mountain West with a 7-0 in-conference record. As we all recall, Penn State won the Fiesta Bowl by a score of 31-14.
Now, a 0-7 versus 7-0 in-conference record might sound a bit lopsided for the two teams, but last November Boise State only beat Nevada by a score of 28-21. And the two teams were tied 14-14 at halftime.
Plus, in Nevada’s seven conference losses last year, three were by four points or less. And their biggest in-conference loss of the year was by only 24 points to in-state rival University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Which might suggest that in Happy Valley on Aug. 30 Nevada could make a game of it against Penn State for a little while.
But let’s be realistic. ESPN’s “Post-Spring SP+ Rankings” for this upcoming season places Nevada at No. 124 out of 136 Division I FBS teams. Penn State is No. 3. I think we can all agree that the Wolf Pack will happily take their reported $1.45 million check for coming to Happy Valley, get back on their jet and return home defeated but richer.
Of course, Nevada might not be the only folks who are richer for playing that game.
Perhaps you’ve heard that a little over two weeks ago on the evening of June 6, a United States District Court judge approved a settlement in a lawsuit against the NCAA, what is widely known as the House v. NCAA settlement. And, like most lawsuits, it’s primarily about money and who gets richer.
One of the parts of the settlement is that this year Penn State and any other Division I school that opts in to the settlement will be able to direct approximately $20.5 million of the school’s money to their student-athletes. As an aside, the settlement projects that payout amount will grow to $32.9 million per school by the final year of the agreement in 2034-35.
As with all court documents, there’s an abundance of legal terminology in it, and as far as that $20.5 million is concerned the most important term is “pro rata.” Pro rata translates from Latin as “in proportion” or “proportionately.” Because that’s how the settlement says the NCAA will distribute the $2.7 billion back-pay money that will go to student athletes who competed since 2016, and also the way Penn State and other colleges who opt in should distribute this $20.5 million revenue-sharing portion with their current student athletes.
How that translates to reality regarding the $20.5 million is that around 95% of it will go to football players, men’s basketball players and women’s basketball players. All the other student athletes get the remaining 5% or so. And, of that 95%, it will be split approximately 70% to football, 20% to men’s basketball and 5% to women’s basketball.
The day after the settlement was approved, Penn State Vice President for Intercollegiate Athletics Pat Kraft issued a statement where he said, “We will share revenue with our student-athletes to the maximum allowable levels.”
If we take that to mean Penn State will give its student athletes the full $20.5 million, then a quick calculation shows Penn State will be giving the players on the football team around $14.35 million. million. If we expect a roster of around 120 football players, that averages out to just shy of $120,000 per player, which is on top of their scholarship (every player can now have one) and NIL money. (A new roster limit of 105 players goes into effect for football teams this year, but players who would be dropped to meet the cap are grandfathered in — so Penn State and other programs seem likely to remain around 120 for now.)
As I said, the University of Nevada might not be the only folks who are richer for playing that game on Aug. 30!
Except, they might.
Because Penn State and almost every other college receives some funding from the federal government, they are subject to “Title IX of The Education Amendments of 1972” – more commonly referred to simply as Title IX.
Title IX states that with minor exceptions, “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”
However, as I mentioned, the House Settlement distributes money on a pro rata basis. This is because, according to the settlement, “Courts routinely uphold allocation plans that divide settlement funds on a pro rata basis… ([to be] fair, reasonable, and adequate’).”
Title IX wants equality. The House settlement wants fair and equitable. They are not the same. And the ramifications of that difference are big. Basically, distributing that $20.5 million to student athletes on a pro-rata basis may violate Title IX.
What we do know is that just days after that federal judge approved the House Settlement, several female athletes from different colleges filed an appeal based on Title IX. The women are arguing that they would not receive their fair share of the back pay portion of the settlement using the pro-rata formula. Since the distribution of that back-pay money – $2.7 billion – was clearly laid out in the settlement, this was an easy part to appeal.
But once colleges around the country start identifying exactly how they will individually distribute their $20.5 million forward-pay money to current student athletes, it’s very possible some female student athletes will file suit against their schools for Title IX violations. Because the pro-rata formula gives student athletes outside of football and basketball very little money, whereas an equal distribution would give them much more.
Personally, I would like to see Penn State distribute that $20.5 million equally among every one of the 840-or-so varsity student-athletes. That would be a little over $24,000 each — as opposed to football players splitting $14 million total and other sports teams splitting maybe $50,000 total.
The problem is if Penn State does this, they are potentially violating the terms of the settlement they are a party to, and could be sued. So, even though that may be the right thing to do, it’s highly likely they won’t, and will need to be forced into doing it via a Title IX lawsuit. We’ll just have to wait and see what happens!
However, one downside to these Title IX lawsuits is the already-filed appeal for the back-pay money is expected to delay the payouts of that money to thousands and thousands of former student athletes. And it would be expected that any suit against the forward-pay $20.5 million would also likely result in those payouts being delayed to current student athletes – including the football team.
Meaning, when Nevada gets their reported $1.45 million check for playing Penn State, they might just be the only ones getting richer that day.
