In re. "Students should not have to pay surcharges in tuition to pay for sports" and "Schools should not be short-changing research dollars to pay for coaches' salaries." Both claims rest on one provision: §114(e). Here's what it actually says. If a school makes more than $80 million a year in athletics revenue, it can't pay a coach more than $500,000 using money from outside the athletic department. Tuition and research funds are off limits. But there are two big holes. Hole one: booster money is fine. The provision expressly allows athletic department donations. So does it allow media revenue. Which means every eight-figure coaching contract in America stays perfectly legal, funded exactly the way it's funded today. The rule limits where the money comes from, not how much a coach gets paid. Hole two: it covers the wrong schools. Only programs above $80 million are subject to it. But those are the schools whose football revenue already pays the coaches. The schools that actually lean on student fees and university funds are the ones below $80 million — and the provision doesn't touch them. The one real constraint on coaching pay is buried in §125(b)(2)(B). A school asking for a waiver from the women's and Olympic sports roster requirements must first cut revenue-sport coaching salaries proportionally. That's it. And it only kicks in when a school is already trying to cut swimming.