NCAA's Charlie Baker on House settlement: 'Last night’s hearing did not go as we hoped'

In a letter sent to membership on Friday afternoon, Charlie Baker stated Thursday’s House v. NCAA settlement hearing “did not go as we hoped.”

For more than two hours on Thursday, plaintiffs’ attorneys, the NCAA’s attorney and objectors met with Wilken on a Zoom call. The date had been circled on calendars by college sports administrators for weeks.

Judge Claudia Wilken did not give preliminary approval, pushing back on the language centered around third-party NIL restrictions in the settlement. She expressed concern that the agreement would take away from the “large sums” of dollars currently going to athletes.

“Last night’s hearing did not go as we hoped,” Baker wrote in the letter. “The court posed worthwhile questions that the NCAA began working through immediately last night with our partners in the conferences. The proposal presented to the court was the product of months of negotiations with student-athletes’ attorneys whose track records speak for themselves when it comes to effective athlete representation.”

The NCAA and plaintiffs’ attorneys now have three weeks to craft new language around NIL collective restrictions. At one point, the NCAA’s attorney, Rakesh Kilaru, called the disagreement a possible dealbreaker.

Since the summer of 2021, NIL collectives have become integral for football and men’s basketball programs to recruit and retain top talent. More than 80% of the dollars being distributed to athletes in NIL come from booster-funded entities. A preliminary injunction in Tennessee this winter forced the NCAA to halt all ongoing investigations into collectives.

Plaintiffs’ attorneys Jeffrey Kessler and Steve Berman are fine moving forward with or without a settlement. Kessler told the judge Thursday he was happy to schedule a trial date.

“Oh, 100% serious,” Kessler told On3 on Thursday night about his threat of a trial. “Either we’re moving forward with a deal or not. We’re happy to make the changes the judge suggested in NIL. I hope they’re willing to do it, too. But if not, we’re not going to spend the next three or four months negotiating.”

Baker’s letter touched on the impact that the college experience makes on athletes. But if the NCAA cannot reach an agreement with plaintiffs, the case could head to trial and the governing body and its members could be looking at upwards of $20 billion in back damages.

“Our next step will be responding to the court’s questions. As we prepare to do that, we will discuss the issues with the appropriate NCAA governance groups, including student-athletes and campus and conference administrators.”