College student-athletes are one step closer to sharing the wealth with the schools they call home.
In a historic turn for college athletics, Judge Claudia Wilken granted preliminary approval to the NCAA’s groundbreaking $2.78 billion settlement in the House v. NCAA lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
This settlement paves the way for revenue sharing between schools and athletes, a move that will reshape the landscape of college sports.
According to the settlement’s current plan, schools will be able to begin sharing revenue with players as early as the 2025-26 school year, marking a significant shift in how student-athletes are compensated. In addition, schools will retroactively pay former players dating back to 2016 who could have benefited from NIL deals that were not allowed.
The settlement: a game changer for college athletes
The settlement addresses three major issues in college athletics: back payment to athletes for claims relating to name, image and likeness; academic-related awards and eliminating scholarship limits in favor of roster limits.
Under the settlement, the NCAA will distribute nearly $2.78 billion in retroactive damage payments to former college athletes who were denied opportunities to profit from their name, image, and likeness between 2016 and 2021. These payments reflect the growing movement to recognize the right of student-athletes to benefit from the massive revenues generated by college sports.
If approved, the average damages award paid back to football or men’s basketball players at a Power 5 conference school will be about $135,000.
Looking ahead, the settlement will allow schools to directly share revenues with current and future athletes, with projected payouts starting at over $20 million annually per school. While it is not specifically considered salary, the school itself would be able to enter into NIL deals with the athletes.
Something to note from the settlement is that not every school needs to participate — while this will impact recruiting, the schools will have the option to abstain from revenue sharing if they choose to do so.
The settlement also lists adjustments to roster limits, with the proposed caps being 105 for football, 15 for men’s and women’s basketball, 34 for baseball, 25 for softball and 18 for volleyball.
A timeline for the transformation
Several key dates have been outlined as the case moves toward final approval. Former players eligible for compensation were notified on Oct. 18, with the claims process beginning shortly. By December, athletes will have a clearer sense of how much compensation they are owed. A final approval hearing is scheduled for April 7, 2025, the same day as the NCAA men’s basketball national championship game.
If the court grants final approval, the settlement will officially take effect, allowing schools to implement their plans.
What this means for the future of college sports
The House v. NCAA settlement marks a pivotal moment in the evolution of college sports. For decades, the NCAA has resisted changes that would allow athletes to share in the vast revenues they help generate.
Beyond the immediate financial impact, the decision could reshape recruiting, competition and the overall structure of collegiate athletics. Larger roster sizes and expanded scholarships could give more athletes the opportunity to compete at the collegiate level. However, schools will also face new challenges in managing their budgets and maintaining competitive balance across programs.
For fans, this settlement represents a shift in how college sports operate, potentially creating a more professionalized atmosphere that moves away from the amateurism idea many college football fans favor. Yet, the NCAA is attempting to hold its ground and states the importance of maintaining the spirit of amateurism while simply offering student-athletes new benefits.
There are many questions left unanswered as the courts will continue to determine how best to handle these issues. Where the funds come from, how the funds will be distributed, what this means for Title IX and if these student-athletes will be deemed employees and, therefore, receive employee benefits are all issues the court will scramble to answer as they progress in this movement.
Clemson head coach Dabo Swinney expressed his interest in sharing revenue with athletes on his radio show.
“We’re going to be in a great spot when the revenue sharing starts,” Swinney said.
As far as what Clemson players will benefit from the damages awards, this has not yet been announced.
While plenty is still unknown about where this pivotal decision will take the future of college sports, it is known that it has brought about significant changes to the amateurism of college athletics.
