NCAA Leadership Closing In On Multibillion-Dollar Settlement In House v. NCAA Case

The House v. NCAA case, which was opened in 2020, argues that the NCAA and its Power Five conferences are breaking federal law by placing restrictions on how student-athletes make money from selling rights to their name, image and likeness (NIL).

College sports leaders are currently in "deep discussions" to reach a settlement that would likely lay out the framework for a revenue-sharing agreement with athletes under a future NCAA business model, according to ESPN.

Talks about settling have been ongoing, but significant progress was reportedly made last week when the Power Five conference commissioners, their general counsels, NCAA president Charlie Baker, NCAA lawyers and the plaintiffs' attorneys met in Dallas.

If House were to win the case, the NCAA and its schools could be liable for up to $4 billion in damages, which is said to be the catalyst for motivation to get a settlement agreement put in place sooner rather than later.

The case is scheduled to go to court in January 2025.

Sources told ESPN that while no deal is imminent, details about what a multibillion-dollar settlement could look like is expected to be shared with schools in the "near future" and progress has "ramped up" in recent weeks.

The settlement is expected to cost billions to the NCAA in backpay to former athletes, which would require a new revenue-sharing agreement to be established moving forward.

ESPN sources report that the high end of a revenue share number per school would be in the range of $20 million annually. Schools will have the opportunity to opt in and share up to that number with their student-athletes—they can choose to share less but no more than the set number.

This could result in schools adding $15 to $20 million to their annual budgets in what new Texas A&M athletic director Trev Alberts called a "new expense category."

How the specifics regarding schools distributing these funds is currently unknown, as is how any potential revenue-sharing system could impact Title IX.

Steve Berman, the co-counsel for the plaintiffs' attorney Jeffrey Kessler, told ESPN: "Judge Wilken has told us that she expected us to be discussing settlement given the lengthy litigation over the issues and the parties' familiarities with the strengths and weaknesses on each side. We are simply following the judge's instructions and have nothing to report other than that."

This past November, Judge Wilken granted class-action status to the House side, and in early April, the plaintiffs' lawyers filed a motion for summary judgment. If that were to be passed, the only thing left for a jury to decide would be the amount of damages.

House's attorneys pointed to NCAA president Baker's recent proposal paving the way for college athletes to receive direct payments from their schools as proof that the organization's remaining restrictions on NIL earnings violate federal antitrust law. For decades, the NCAA leaned on the legal argument that amateurism is necessary to protect consumer demand and competitive balance.

"This pronouncement by President Baker is an admission by the NCAA that, by itself, establishes the existence of less restrictive alternatives," the athletes' lawyers wrote in their motion.

With still eight months until the trial date, a settlement isn't expected immediately, but things seem to have been expedited.

In This Story

• Grant House

  Grant House

About James Sutherland

James Sutherland

James swam five years at Laurentian University in Sudbury, Ontario, specializing in the 200 free, back and IM. He finished up his collegiate swimming career in 2018, graduating with a bachelor's degree in economics. In 2019 he completed his graduate degree in sports journalism. Prior to going to Laurentian, James swam …

Read More »