LOUISVILLE, Ky. (WDRB) -- Let's start with a simple question.
If the University of Kentucky is taking out a $31 million loan from the school's general fund to help pay athletes, should the public have the right to know how that money is being spent?
If the University of Louisville instituting a new student fees to fund its new revenue-sharing obligations, should students and their families have access to the numbers?
Both Kentucky and Louisville are public institutions. Both are using university-affiliated money to fund athlete payments under the new era of college sports revenue sharing. And both are operating in legal environments — at the state and federal level — that explicitly prohibit those payments from being disclosed to the public.
Louisville | Kentucky | Indiana | Eric Crawford
Kentucky law exempts these payments from open records scrutiny. So does the pending federal SCORE Act, which would codify that “compensation paid to a student athlete shall not be subject to public disclosure.”
The justification for all this secrecy? Protect the players. Don't turn college locker rooms into Forbes lists. Don't put 19-year-olds under added pressure from fans or media. Don't open the door to public resentment or intra-team jealousy.
Fair concerns. But are they the real reason schools want these salaries hidden?
Because there's another layer to this: competitive secrecy. With schools now meeting a $20.5 million payroll for players, they don't just want to protect their athletes. They want to protect their edge.
When public money pays private figures
Let's be clear: this isn't about NIL. If a quarterback makes $500,000 from a local car dealer or energy drink brand, that's his or her business.
This is about money flowing directly from the university to the athlete — using public or semi-public funds. And in that case, I'd argue the public deserves a line of sight.
Coaches' salaries are public. So are athletic director salaries. Trainers. Sports information staff. If you're on a public university's payroll, you're searchable in a state database.
But the single biggest new category of compensation in higher education — direct revenue sharing with athletes — is being tucked behind a curtain of legal exemptions.
There is a compromise. Don't name athletes. Don't list individual salaries. But at minimum, require public universities to disclose:
- Total pool payments by sport
- Source of funds used for those payments
- Any use of student fees, university reserves, or other money not generated by athletic departments
We are talking about significant chunks of money. And we know, yes, $20.5 million is going to student athlete pay. If it were going to administrator pay, the public would have a right to know how much is being spent, and who is making what. But in this endeavor, the public isn't even told how much schools are spending on each sport, let alone what players are making.
Even if individual athletes are protected from that disclosure, the listing of sports salaries at least would satisfy some of the need to inform the public.
This wouldn't invade privacy. But it would restore some accountability.
Bottom line
There's a growing movement — especially among athletic directors — to have it both ways.
They don't want players to be classified as employees. But they want to pay them like employees. They want fans or students to help pay for it. But they don't want them to know how they're spending the money.
That doesn't work.
The moment schools started tapping student fees and university budgets to pay players — and the moment they signed on to the House settlement — they entered a new era.
Transparency is not just a good idea. It's the price of public trust.
Quick sips
- Bobby Petrino is back in the head-coaching biz. My thoughts on the prodigal's return to the top job at Arkansas. Read it here.
- Mark Stoops is saying all the right things amid Kentucky football's SEC struggles. But will that matter? Read my column here.
The last drop
"Student-athletes are not employees, and this idea that they are, I just think it's inaccurate. I really do. I know people (are) going to argue with me on that."
Louisville athletic director Josh Heird, speaking to a Kentucky legislative committee in Frankfort last week
Copyright 2025 WDRB Media. All Rights Reserved.
