What to know as key week arrives for college sports with House v. NCAA settlement deadline

Revenue sharing in college sports has always been discussed in private circles as a theory.

But this week, the NCAA could agree to a settlement agreement in its ongoing litigation with House v. NCAA plaintiffs to reshape the model and install revenue sharing. Amateurism has been dead for years, however, this settlement would put the NCAA enterprise as many know it to bed.

Lawyers have been working on the agreement for nearly nine months. The NCAA Board of Governors is expected to meet later this week. The Big Ten presidents plan to meet in person while leaders in the ACC, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC will also vote.

Deadline week arrives with concerns over House v. NCAA settlement
All D-I conferences will foot damages in House v. NCAA settlement

The details of the settlement have brought disagreement, though. In an email Saturday morning to members, Big East commissioner Val Ackerman expressed “strong objection” to the NCAA’s proposal on how it is determining back damages related to the consolidated settlement in a letter obtained by Yahoo Sports.

Of the $2.77 billion expected to be paid in back damages to former athletes, the NCAA is expected to be responsible for 40% of the payout. The other 60% will come from a reduction in school distributions. Ackerman argued in her letter that the 22 non-FBS Division I conferences will be on the hook for a backpay agreement that will mostly be distributed to football players.

According to Yahoo, the NCAA designed a formula based on the amount of distribution that a league earned over a nine-year period starting in 2016. In this situation, the Big East would be responsible for roughly $5 to $7 million annually or $70 million over the next decade.

The Athletic reported Monday morning the non-FBS schools are submitting an alternate damages payment plan.

Plenty else still needs to be figured out until college sports officially starts its next chapter.

The House v. NCAA timeline

If the NCAA and its conferences sign off on the broad strokes of the House v. NCAA settlement this week, attorneys will immediately start sketching the actual agreement. That will not be a quick process.

From that point, terms of the settlement would need to be presented to Judge Claudia Wilken. House v. NCAA is playing out in California Northern District Court. What could be a months-long process, Wilken will have the power to approve or deny the settlement. Sources have indicated to On3 that Wilken may not support a framework prohibiting athletes from entering future lawsuits.

The question then shifts to when this framework is put in place. Power conference schools will obviously need to opt-in or opt-out of the revenue-sharing portion. Schools would disperse roughly $20 million annually to athletes. It remains unclear how Title IX would factor into payouts and how distribution would be split. If everything goes smoothly this week and in the coming months, the soonest this structure would begin is the 2025-26 academic year.

What will college football look like?

Multiple sources at various Power 4 schools have told On3 that they’re already starting to calculate out how revenue sharing would be dispersed inside a football program. Roster limits are another item on the minds of coaches. Currently, teams have 85 scholarships and carry up to 115 total players.

However, walk-ons could be eliminated. That’s a top concern amongst the coaching ranks which still needs to be sorted out. In the age of NIL, donor-driven collectives have created a competitive environment. For example, Miami, Oregon, Tennessee and Texas operate with some of the highest budgets in college football.

While there is a hope among administrators that collectives could move in-house or lose power with a settlement in House v. NCAA, sources have indicated that top-functioning collectives have no plans of going away. Similar to the current structure, collectives would provide competitive advantages to top football and basketball programs through marketing deals. The $20 million revenue-sharing number is similar to the payroll of the top college football programs.