House v. NCAA settlement: Approval awaits in landmark case as judge digs in on roster limits

Jonnyeagle · April 8

House v. NCAA settlement terms$2.77 billion in back payments to as many as 390,000 athletes who played an NCAA sport between 2016 and 2024. NIL deals must meet "fair market value." How that fair-market value is determined is the subject of intense debate.

The long-expected approval of a landmark antitrust case allowing college players to be paid directly by schools is on hold for at least one week.

The federal judge presiding over the House v. NCAA case requested attorneys make additional tweaks to the settlement's terms regarding roster limits and whether future players should be tied to the current class in the multi-billion dollar lawsuit. A final approval could come upon receipt of those tweaks from attorneys, though that might not happen for several weeks.

"Basically, I think it's a good settlement," said Judge Claudia Wilken of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. "Don't quote me. I think it's worth pursuing and I think some of these things can be fixed if people tried to fix them."

The House settlement would allow schools to directly pay players millions of dollars starting July 1. Each school's revenue-sharing formula would be capped at $20.5 million, with the pool increasing 4% each year during the 10-year agreement. The $2.8 billion in back payments for athletes who competed between 2016 and 2024 would also be set in motion upon Wilken's approval.

read more: https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/house-v-ncaa-settlement-approval-awaits-in-landmark-case-as-judge-digs-in-on-roster-limits/amp/

Jonnyeagle · April 8

I assume ours will be similar

Revenue-sharing formula: Many schools are preparing to mirror the back-payment formula in their revenue-sharing model for the future. That means roughly 75% of future revenue will be shared with football players, 15% to men's basketball, 5% to women's basketball and 5% to all remaining sports. Those numbers will differ from school to school, but most power programs have shared similar models with administrators.

cousin oliver · April 8

MeanGreenZen · April 9

True story: the judge in the House case thought every time they were referencing the SEC they were talking about the Securities and Exchange Commission.

untbowler · April 9

NCAA will be gone in 5-10 years, then maybe College Sports can go back to what it was intended for Student Athletes playing a sport they love while getting a free education. These athletes now days are selfish and the NCAA has given up on the academic/education side of college sports. The quicker it implodes the better

UNTFan23 · April 9

14 hours ago, cousin oliver said:

50% of revenue will be sustainable for some programs but not all. Time will tell if this ruling/settlement will have any negative long term affects.

Jonnyeagle · April 9

9 minutes ago, untbowler said:

NCAA will be gone in 5-10 years, then maybe College Sports can go back to what it was intended for Student Athletes playing a sport they love while getting a free education. These athletes now days are selfish and the NCAA has given up on the academic/education side of college sports. The quicker it implodes the better

You leave out the fact coaches and universities made billions and that is what caused this not the players.

TIgreen01 · April 9

47 minutes ago, Jonnyeagle said:

You leave out the fact coaches and universities made billions and that is what caused this not the players.

A select few made big money. We should be talking about throwing them out, but instead it’s always been the other way. Throwing out the basket with the bad apples makes no sense.

Dannymacfan · April 9

New Bill introduced that looks quite interesting. Not sure it will fly tho.

UNTFan23 · April 9

10 minutes ago, Dannymacfan said:

New Bill introduced that looks quite interesting. Not sure it will fly tho.

So many reasons why this bill is a horrible idea.

Dannymacfan · April 9

38 minutes ago, UNTFan23 said:

So many reasons why this bill is a horrible idea.

Why do you think that? Thanks for your input. I am just trying to figure out where we stand.

UNTFan23 · April 9

3 hours ago, Dannymacfan said:

Why do you think that? Thanks for your input. I am just trying to figure out where we stand.

Schools need to be in the same time zone. Commissioner of the association to be appointed by POTUS and confirmed by Senate. These are two that I saw that I feel are bad ideas.

Edited April 9 by UNTFan23

Mean Green 93-98 · April 9

5 hours ago, untbowler said:

NCAA will be gone in 5-10 years, then maybe College Sports can go back to what it was intended for Student Athletes playing a sport they love while getting a free education. These athletes now days are selfish and the NCAA has given up on the academic/education side of college sports. The quicker it implodes the better

The NCAA is not causing this to happen. This is all being done through legislation and the court system. So whether or not the NCAA exists, this will all continue to be forced on college sports.

Mean Green 93-98 · April 9

4 hours ago, Dannymacfan said:

New Bill introduced that looks quite interesting. Not sure it will fly tho.

Of those presently contributing to NIL, how many will continue to do so, and at the same level, if their contributions are redistributed among all schools?

And I imagine top athletes at top schools would sue over that, because it inhibits them from profiting from their own valuable Name, Image, and Likeness.

MeanGreenZen · April 10

16 hours ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

Of those presently contributing to NIL, how many will continue to do so, and at the same level, if their contributions are redistributed among all schools?

And I imagine top athletes at top schools would sue over that, because it inhibits them from profiting from their own valuable Name, Image, and Likeness.

Good point, I wouldn’t give to NIL if my $ was being redistributed to athletes at other schools.
Don’t know if it is part of this proposal, but would be hard for a program to agree to share concession sales, ticket sales and local advertising sales with other schools. Some sort of model that shared 50% of national broadcast rights with athletes could work.
I also have a hard time with the morality of using student fees to pay a small forward. And any model that doesn’t use student fees to pay a small forward will leave UNT behind.