The business of college sports has become a hot topic in the realm of college sports over the course of the last few years. The House v. NCAA lawsuit filed in 2020 has played a big factor in the continuation of this discussion, especially amongst athletes seeking justice for lost compensation. Others, such as Hubbard v. NCAA and Carter v. NCAA, were also key players in the steps taken toward making an overall change. Division One athletes from several different schools have filed lawsuits against the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), claiming they broke antitrust laws. The Department of Justice explains antitrust laws as laws that “prohibit anti-competitive conduct and mergers that deprive American consumers, taxpayers, and workers of the benefits of competition.”
Photo from on3.com
It is important to understand where this discussion started before getting to where the case is now in 2025. Back in 2020, Grant House (a swimmer from Arizona State University) and Sedona Prince (a basketball player from Texas Christian University) filed a lawsuit against the NCAA alleging that antitrust laws were broken because the NCAA was attempting to regulate their compensation from NIL (name, image, and likeness) deals they had acquired outside of their universities. The NCAA has clear guidelines and regulations placed on how athletes and universities should treat NIL deals. The previously stated parties filed against these guidelines, claiming that they were impacting the athletes overall compensation. So, what came of these lawsuits?
After careful consideration, the parties decided to agree on a settlement. Fast forward to July 2024, where a major settlement agreement that could drastically change the future of the business of college sports was proposed. On September 5, 2024, Judge Wilkin rejected the settlement citing concerns over the settlement’s proposed restrictions on third-party NIL agreements and the definitions of “booster” and “pay for play.”
Towards the end of September, a revised settlement was proposed. Judge Wilken granted preliminary approval a few weeks later in October. NCAA expressed their proposed settlement explanation on their website, stating, “The settlement addresses three primary issues: payment of back damages for claims relating to name, image and likeness (NIL), academic-related awards and other benefits; increased benefits from institutions to student-athletes going forward, including additional NIL opportunities for student-athletes directly with the institution; and eliminating scholarships limits in favor of roster limits.”
This settlement, if approved, would cover back pay of all revenues athletes should have received from NIL deals between 2016 to present day. This would round up to about $2.78 billion dollars, which the NCAA agreed would be paid over the course of 10 years (about $280 million annually), in order to cover damages in various capacities (broadcast revenue, video game revenue, and third-party NIL deals). Though the money will not be distributed equally, this is a huge step forward, especially for athletes who filed lawsuits with their concerns.
The next steps are for the settlement to be approved by the court, which could take several months. The NCAA seems very hopeful of where this new settlement agreement will take the future business of their athletes. On their website, the commissioners of the five conferences, as well as the NCAA president, have stated, “This is another important step in the ongoing effort to provide increased benefits to student-athletes while creating a stable and sustainable model for the future of college sports…While there is still much work to be done in the settlement approval process, this is a significant step toward establishing clarity for the future of all of Division I athletics while maintaining a lasting education-based model for college sports, ensuring the opportunity for student-athletes to earn a degree and the tools necessary to be successful in life after sports.”
It can be understood that the NCAA is taking the necessary steps to make the NIL compensation process simpler and more streamlined for their athletes with less hoops to jump through. For more information on details of the settlement, check out the NCAA's website with their official statement.
Thumbnail photo from on3.com