Report: Details emerge for proposed House antitrust case settlement, deadline set
As negotiations continue in the landmark House v. NCAA antitrust case, details of a proposed settlement are starting to become clear. Thursday night, Yahoo! Sports’ Ross Dellenger reported a deadline has also been set.
The proposed settlement would cost each Power Conference school $300 million over 10 years, Dellenger reported. In that number, those institutions would have to meet certain parameters and effectively usher in the revenue-sharing era of college athletics. Schools would have to meet a $17-22 million revenue distribution cap for its athletes, as well as withholding $2 million of NCAA distribution for back damages and up to $10 million in roster expansion-related scholarship costs.
A 40-day deadline is also in place.
With the revenue sharing portion of the equation, that model is “permissive” and schools don’t have to reach the cap, let alone share revenue. They would also be able to expand scholarships “across new roster limits expected to be implemented across all sanctioned sports,” Dellenger wrote.
If the sides reach a settlement by the deadline, the revenue-sharing model would begin no earlier than Fall 2025. However, Dellenger reported, it could have to wait until 2026.
Inside the numbers of proposed settlement
As part of the financial plan, roster limits would be in place and scholarships would expand as a result. The example Dellenger used was a baseball roster. Current NCAA rules say schools can give a max of 11.7 scholarships for 32-player rosters. Under the proposed model, that number could go up to all 32 players if a school chooses to do so.
The cost would be about $9-$10 million per year, two administrators told Yahoo! Sports, although that number is fluid.
Of course, there’s also the need to get schools on board with this idea. Dellenger reported the Big Ten as the “most aligned” in wanting to settle, and some leagues are considering setting a lower revenue-sharing cap than the proposed numbers.
The House case doesn’t just impact current athletes, though. It also could have an effect on those who came before as the NCAA could be looking at a $4.2 billion hit as backpay if it goes to trial. As ESPN’s Jay Bilas told On3’s Eric Prisbell, the NCAA would be “done” if that happened.
How the NCAA could protect itself in revenue sharing model
As for the revenue-sharing part of the settlement, collective bargaining will likely be necessary to avoid further legal issues for the NCAA. Jim Cavale – founder of players’ association Athletes.org – told Prisbell athletes need to have a voice if the NCAA wants to avoid the courtroom as the number of cases grows.
“The only way to have protection from further litigation and more House cases is to do the new deal with the athletes,” Cavale told On3 on Tuesday. “If athletes are not sitting at the table as an executive committee – representing their teammates with their respective school or conference that’s going to be sharing the money with them – and voting and agreeing to it, we’re going to be right back in the same boat again.
“You cannot do what you’ve been doing for the last century-plus, and that is creating rules without athletes sitting at the table and voting and agreeing to those rules. You’re going to have to do it a new way.”