A proposed settlement under discussion in an antitrust lawsuit against the NCAA and major college conferences could cost billions of dollars and pave the way for a compensation model for college athletes.
The agreement has not yet been finalized and many questions remain unanswered. It's also unclear whether the new rules will withstand further legal scrutiny, but college sports appear to be on a revolutionary path, with at least some schools paying players directly to participate. Here's what we know and what we still need to understand.
Case
House v. NCAA is a federal lawsuit dating back to 2016 that seeks damages for athletes who were denied the opportunity to earn money through the use of their names, images and likenesses. Plaintiffs also include former Arizona State swimmer Grant House. NIL damages should include billions of dollars in media rights fees paid to the NCAA and its wealthiest conferences (Big Ten, Big 12, Atlantic Coast, Southeastern), primarily football and basketball, the court ruled. is requested from the court.
how much?
Under the settlement currently being discussed, the NCAA could end up paying nearly $3 billion in damages over 10 years, with insurance assistance and withholding of distributions that would have been paid to the four major conferences. be. NCAA revenue approached $1.3 billion last year, and the association projects it will steadily increase over the next few years, thanks in large part to increases built into the men's basketball tournament's television deal with CBS and Warner Bros. Discovery are doing. A new eight-year agreement with ESPN worth $920 million goes into effect in 2025 for the Division I women's basketball tournament and other championship events.
The settlement also calls for each school to contribute $300 million over 10 years across the four conferences, including about $20 million annually to pay players. Administrators warned that this could lead to program cuts in so-called non-revenue sports familiar to fans who watch the Olympics.
“It's the Olympic sports that are at risk,” Alabama athletic director Greg Byrne said during a March panel discussion in Washington led by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas). “That's men and women. If you look at the numbers for the University of Alabama, his 19 sports outside of football and men's basketball have lost almost $40 million combined.”
Who gets paid?
It's not completely clear. It'll probably start with athletes in the sports that generate the bulk of the revenue: football players and men's basketball players at the biggest and wealthiest programs. Women's basketball is likely to be next, but athletes in all sports could potentially benefit in some way, but probably not at every school.
What is being considered is allowing schools to pay players, but not requiring them to do so. Schools that aren't making millions of dollars in TV revenue aren't necessarily in dire straits. An open question also remains as to whether Title IX of the federal Gender Equality Act requires equal funding for male and female athletes.
Conference turmoil, Notre Dame's future and more
Who makes the call?
Getting the four conference presidential boards and the NCAA Board of Governors, not to mention the plaintiffs in the House suit, to approve the settlement is not a given. Still, the NCAA could have to pay $4 billion in damages and has lost a number of recent lawsuits, increasing interest in the deal ahead of the January trial.
The case is being heard by U.S. Judge Claudia Wilken in the Northern District of California, who has already ruled against the NCAA's other landmark antitrust lawsuits and sided with the House to settle the case. I ordered him to seek it.
Employment and collective bargaining
Resolving existing cases is only one step. Avoiding similar challenges in the future will require a new system for compensating college athletes. For example, something like the Big Four's cap on compensation would be ripe for new litigation.
The NCAA has been seeking some kind of antitrust exemption from Congress for years, but recently the focus has shifted from regulating NIL compensation to ensuring that players are not considered employees.
NLRB regional director's ruling clears the way for members of the Dartmouth men's basketball team to vote to unionize after they are considered employees, with many calling for collective bargaining as a solution to antitrust busts in college sports is claimed.
Jason Stahl, executive director of the College Football Players Association advocacy group, said lawmakers created a special status that would give college athletes organizational and collective bargaining rights without actual employee status. states that it should be done.
Stahl said that even though many college athletes don't feel comfortable being employees or joining a union, they should have the right to make that decision.
“My concern is that there could be some sort of one-two punch,” Stahl said, adding that a settlement of the lawsuit would soon be followed by a lawsuit settlement that would soon result in a loss of athlete employee status and solidarity. He spoke about the passage of federal legislation codifying revenue-sharing plans that eliminate the right to “A lot of what I'm hearing about this cap is not what I want to hear.”
what's next
It's hard to say with certainty because there are so many variables, but settling the house in late spring or summer appears to be a priority. The earliest we will see any real changes on campus will be fall 2025.
Associated Press reported.
Enjoy more college football Follow your favorites to stay informed about games, news and more
