The NCAA and its associated leagues are progressing with a significant financial agreement to resolve three ongoing federal antitrust lawsuits. According to sources familiar with the matter, it is set to disburse over $2.7 billion in damages to former and current athletes over the next decade. Additionally, sources indicated that an agreement has been reached on a revenue-sharing plan, permitting each school to distribute approximately $20 million annually to its athletes.
“The agreement between the five autonomous conferences and the NCAA on settlement terms marks a significant step in ongoing college sports reforms, which will benefit student-athletes and clarify college athletics regulations across all divisions for years to come,” stated NCAA president Charlie Baker and the commissioners of the five power conferences in a joint statement on Thursday evening.
“This settlement also provides a blueprint for college sports leaders and Congress to ensure this uniquely American system continues to offer unparalleled opportunities to millions of students. Division I as a whole made the progress made today possible, and we must carry out the terms of the agreement as the legal process develops. We look forward to collaborating with our various student-athlete leadership groups to shape the future of college sports.”
“The agreement between the five autonomy conferences and the NCAA to settle is a significant move in the ongoing reform of college sports. This step will benefit student-athletes and bring clarity to college athletics across all divisions for the long term,” said NCAA president Charlie Baker and the five power conference commissioners in a joint statement on Thursday evening.
“This settlement also serves as a guide for college sports leaders and Congress to maintain this distinctive American institution, ensuring continued opportunities for millions of students. The progress reached today was a collective effort from all of Division I, and there is still work ahead to enforce the terms of the agreement as the legal process unfolds. We are eager to collaborate with our various student-athlete leadership groups to shape the future of college sports.”
All Division I athletes since 2016 are eligible for a share as part of the settlement class. In return, athletes cannot file lawsuits against the NCAA for other possible antitrust violations and must withdraw their complaints in three active cases: House v. NCAA, Hubbard v. NCAA, and Carter v. NCAA.
Judge Claudia Wilken, who is overseeing all three cases, must approve the settlement terms. This approval process is anticipated to take several months, and sources indicate that schools will likely begin distributing revenue in the fall of 2025
The governors of the NCAA and leading representatives from the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC, and Pac-12 cast their votes to approve the core principles outlined in the 13-page agreement. Notre Dame, as an ACC member, also endorsed the settlement.
“The agreement, despite its many drawbacks and its promise of only short-term stability, is essential to prevent the collapse of collegiate sports,” stated John I. Jenkins, the president of Notre Dame. added, “For the preservation of the respected American tradition of college athletics, Congress needs to enact legislation that overrides the existing varied state laws; confirms that our athletes are not employees but students pursuing their degrees; and offers safeguards against further antitrust lawsuits. This will enable colleges to set and uphold rules that protect our student-athletes while ensuring fair competition among our teams.”
The recent agreement falls short of addressing all the outstanding legal matters that have significantly impacted the college sports industry, leading to instability in this multi-billion-dollar sector. Athletes and their supporters continue to strive for employee status or seek other methods to collectively negotiate in the future, potentially altering revenue-sharing deals. Nevertheless, this week’s agreement may reduce the NCAA’s vulnerability to antitrust lawsuits, a major force in compelling schools to better support their athletes.
“We acknowledge that we are merely at the beginning of this entire journey,” stated Josh Whitman, Illinois’ athletic director and the new chair of the NCAA’s Division I Council. “There’s a great deal left to clarify as we attempt to fully grasp some of the specifics we are currently implementing.”
Steve Berman, who co-leads the case for the athletes with experienced antitrust lawyer Jeffrey Kessler, mentioned that while this week’s agreement feels like reaching the “finish line,” the cases will not be officially closed for a few more months. Other antitrust lawyers informed ESPN that the deal could fall apart if athletes decide to join a separate pending antitrust case or if Judge Wilken rejects the settlement terms. Berman expressed confidence that their agreement would remain intact.
“I’m extremely proud,” Berman said. “This is a groundbreaking change I never imagined when I first started. I’m excited for the student-athletes because this will significantly impact their lives.”
By the end of this week, the parties plan to inform Wilken—who has overseen the most significant antitrust cases in the past decade—that they will present the final details to the court within the next 30 days.
If Wilken approves these details in a preliminary hearing, likely in July, Berman stated that the plaintiffs’ attorneys would create a website and distribute a notice to all players explaining the possible benefits of staying in the class, along with options to object or opt out.
Class members typically have over 30 days to raise objections or opt out of a settlement. If players opt out, they will forfeit any monetary compensation from the damages but retain the right to sue the NCAA and its schools for antitrust violations in the future.
Another pending antitrust lawsuit not included in this week’s agreement is from former Colorado football player Alex Fontenot, who is suing the NCAA over how it distributes TV revenue to players. The NCAA and the attorneys in the House case argued that Fontenot’s claims should be combined with other lawsuits due to their likeness. However, a Colorado judge denied that request on Thursday morning.
Garrett Broshuis, Fontenot’s lawyer and a negotiator for a significant settlement for minor league baseball players in recent years, told ESPN they are closely monitoring this week’s agreement. They might consider opting out once they review the deal’s terms, potentially shortening the peace the NCAA and its conferences are hoping to achieve.
Berman believes the judge in Fontenot’s case might reconsider her opinion once the settlement terms are approved. He also thinks that it’s unlikely that athletes risk missing out on the potential settlement money to join Fontenot’s case.
“Some athletes could get tens of thousands or even over a hundred thousand dollars in the settlement,” Berman explained. “They’d have to decide if they could do better on their own.”
Berman explained that a sports economist devised several formulas to distribute the $2.7 billion in damages among more than 10,000 former and current athletes. Some money will be equally divided among all members, while other amounts will be based on the athlete’s market value. Factors like a career snap count or a player’s star rating in recruiting might determine their payout, he said.
Collecting the necessary data for these formulas could be intricate, and Berman hopes schools will provide “granular data” instead of having players submit claims independently.
The settlement terms set 10 years to distribute the $2.7 billion fully. Each player in the class will receive an annual check worth 10% of the money they are owed. Berman said Wilken would approve the amount allocated for attorneys’ fees.
Several athletic directors informed ESPN that they hope the settlement sets the foundation for a system where success on the field is less dependent on schools’ financial spending. Some challenges to address include distributing the revenue-sharing money in a way that meets market needs and complies with Title IX laws, and whether schools can regain control of the college athlete marketplace, which has been managed by booster collectives in recent years through name, image, and likeness endorsement deals.
.tioned the settlement includes a “mechanism” he believes will help schools control the marketplace for third-party NIL deals. He declined to provide more details. Several athletic directors expressed cautious optimism to ESPN this week, uncertain whether the settlement would provide enough legal flexibility to regain control.
“I believe we now have an opportunity to reshape the model in the most meaningful way of our lifetimes, and possibly ever,” said Whitman, the new Division I Council chair.
When asked if the settlement offers the tools the NCAA and schools need to reclaim control of the college athlete market and stabilize the new landscape, Whitman replied: “We’ll find out.”
Frequently asked questions
What is the NCAA settlement?
Several details remain to be determined, but the agreement calls for the NCAA and conferences to pay $2.77 billion over ten years to more than 14,000 former and current college athletes who claim now-defunct rules prevented them from earning money from endorsement and sponsorship deals dating back to 2016.
Who gets paid how much? What to know about the land for Ik NCAA settlement?
The key takeaways are: WHO IS GETTING PAID NOW? Under the settlement, $2.77 billion in damages will be paid over ten years for about 14,000 claims dating back to 2016. The initial plaintiffs comprised Grant House, a former Arizona State swimmer, and Sedona Prince, a current TCU basketball player.
Who is House in House vs. NCAA?
The two listed plGrant House, a former swimmer for Arizona State, and Sedona Prince, a former Oregon and current TCU women’s basketball player, are the two listed plaintiffs. Lead attorneys Steve Berman and Jeffrey Kessler are representing them. suit: one facing backward and one facing forward.
