Q&A: How are college sports changing in the wake of House settlement?
College sports leaders and athletes were in limbo for months while waiting for a House settlement to be approved. An agreement would create clarity, better supporting college conferences and their respective universities that had been blindly preparing for the next academic year — unsure which name, image and likeness (NIL) rules they'd be playing by.
Late Friday, structure and stability arrived as the House settlement became approved and official.
'The decision on Friday is a significant step forward toward building long-term stability for college sports while protecting the system from bad actors seeking to exploit confusion and uncertainty,' Southeastern Conference commissioner Greg Sankey said during a news conference Monday morning that included commissioners of the Big Ten, Big 12, Atlantic Coast and the Pac 12 conferences.
The House settlement has set the stage for revenue-sharing between universities and their athletes. Claudia Wilken, the presiding judge of California's Northern District, accepted the final proposal Friday between the NCAA and the plaintiffs, current and former athletes seeking financial compensation for NIL-related backpay.
The NCAA will pay close to $2.8 billion to former athletes — as many as 389,700 athletes who played between June 15, 2016, to Sept. 15, 2024 — across a 10-year period and will also implement a 10-year revenue sharing model that will allow universities to pay current athletes up to $20.5 million per year.
According to the settlement, the total is '22% of the Power Five schools' average athletic revenues each year' and the revenue-sharing cap will incrementally increase every year.
The newly-founded College Sports Commission, led by former MLB executive Bryan Seeley, was created to make sure all NIL deals comply with NCAA rules shaped by the settlement terms.
The commission 'will investigate potential rules violations, make factual determinations, issue penalties where appropriate, and participate in the neutral arbitration process set forth in the settlement as necessary,' according to a news release naming Sealey as the inaugural chief executive.
Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark said it was a unanimous decision among the commissioners that Seeley was the right person for the role. Tony Petitti, Big Ten commissioner, said that although he didn't work directly with Seeley during his previous stint at MLB, he saw Commissioner Rob Manfred rely on Seeley's expertise.
The College Sports Commission will work alongside a clearinghouse called 'NIL Go,' created by accounting firm Deloitte, to approve or deny any third-party NIL agreements that exceed $600.
'NIL Go' is the technology platform athletes and schools will use to report NIL agreements.
All new third-party NIL deals must now be reported to the clearinghouse starting June 7 — the day after the settlement was approved — although the platform won't launch online until June 11.
The commission is still in the process of determining what punishment schools and athletes might face for violating NIL rules.
'We're in the process of developing some of those rules and structure,' ACC commissioner Jim Phillips said. 'Now that we have Brian [Seeley] on board, I think we'll be able to move a little bit quicker, but we want to get this right. … Nothing to date right now that we're ready to come forward with.'
The ACC, Big 12, Big Ten, Pac-12 and SEC were the original parties targeted in lawsuits finally settled Friday's ruling.
The expectation is that about 90% of financial resources at their schools will go to revenue sports — football and men's basketball — with the other 10% being scattered between traditional Olympic sports.
'The decision was made fairly early on that we'd be in a local decision-making [process] about how rev share would work, and then all the decisions that come off of that,' Petitti said of conversations with leaders of Big Ten's schools. 'So that's where we are, giving our institutions the discretion [on how to allocate revenue-sharing funds] and they want that discretion.'
Most NIL collectives — such as USC's House of Victory or UCLA's Men of Westwood — are expected to focus on marketing and connecting athletes to NIL opportunities rather than brokering agreements and directly paying them. The new revenue-sharing model makes it much easier for schools to directly pay athletes, replacing a role collectives took on in the past when schools were banned from paying athletes.
Contracts may need to be restructured because many — but not all — NIL deals were completed through collectives, a process that would now need to receive approval from the Deloitte clearinghouse.
When determining the proper range for NIL deals, 'NIL Go' references 'market reach' and the 'local market' — two factors among many that could work in favor of UCLA and USC because Los Angeles is the second largest media market in the country and would naturally index high on market reach.
Roster limits will influence all sports. Football teams can now feature up to 105 players, up from 85. Men's basketball rosters can feature 15 players instead of 13. Some Olympic sports, such as baseball, will see a roster-sizes decrease.
In all sports, schools can offer as many scholarships as their roster limit instead of the previous NCAA scholarship limits. Whereas teams could only offer 11.7 scholarships in baseball, now universities can offer a full scholarship to all 34 players. Softball teams can now offer 25 scholarships rather than 12 in previous seasons. Women's gymnastics can offer a full 20.
This is not to say all teams will offer full rides to fill every roster spot. In all likelihood, for most Power 4 programs, there will still be walk-on players filling spots on the team. At UCLA, athletic director Martin Jarmond said he plans on keeping UCLA's scholarship limits at where it was before the settlement — 85 for football and 13 for men's basketball. The rationale, Jarmond said, is to allow UCLA to provide larger revenue-sharing totals to their athletes instead of splitting funds across full scholarship totals. USC has yet to publicly share its plans for athletic scholarships.
'We have to be bold and innovative in this new world,' Jarmond told The Times on Saturday. 'UCLA has always been on the forefront and been a leader and that's not going to change. We will embrace this new era and we will continue to support our student-athletes at a championship level.'
SEC schools also plan to stick with 85 football roster spots during the 2025 season, a conference spokesman told CBS Sports during the conference's recent spring meetings.
Whereas the Power 4 conferences — and the Pac-12 — automatically opted into the House settlement to end litigation, universities outside the Power 4 will have to opt-in to the revenue-sharing agreement by a June 15 deadline. The list of schools that opt in will become public after the deadline, according to the commission's website. The commission claims that even if universities decide not to opt in to the revenue-sharing agreements, they'll still have to report NIL agreements that go beyond the $600 threshold. It's unclear how much money these schools will share with their athletes.
Schools such as Long Beach State — should it opt-in to revenue-sharing — could provide further resources to its athletes in sports where Power 4 schools may not. Men's volleyball, for example, is a perennial national championship contender for Long Beach, winning a championship in 2025. Compared to Power 4 schools that may invest most of its funds into football and men's basketball, Olympic sports could become crown jewels for smaller athletic departments.
With likely 90% of revenue-sharing funds headed toward football and men's basketball, some athletes see the House settlement as the beginning of athletic department restructuring — with Olympic sports being placed on the sidelines in favor of spending more money on high-revenue sports.
Cooper Robinson, who won a men's volleyball national championship with UCLA in 2024, commented on UCLA Athletics' Instagram post about the settlement, asking, 'So like is this only for Football and Basketball?'
This past year, Grand Canyon University announced the dismantling of its men's volleyball program. The fear for athletes, especially for a university such as UCLA that had generated $219.5 million in debt over the last six fiscal years (an amount that has been covered by the university) is that smaller-revenue programs such as men's and women's volleyball could be cut to move finances elsewhere. Jarmond has committed to preserving Olympic sports at UCLA.
In the years ahead, with most financial resources likely headed to football and men's basketball rather than its women's sports programs, universities may have to defend their rationale in Title IX lawsuits. The settlement does not include any language providing directive to universities for how to deal with Title IX — explicitly stating 'the Court cannot conclude that violations of Title IX will necessarily occur if and when schools choose to provide compensation and benefits to student-athletes pursuant to the Injunctive Relief Settlement.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
33 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
GOP tax bill would ease regulations on gun silencers and some rifles and shotguns
WASHINGTON — The massive tax and spending cuts package that President Trump wants on his desk by July 4 would loosen regulations on gun silencers and certain types of rifles and shotguns, advancing a longtime priority of the gun industry as Republican leaders in the House and Senate try to win enough votes to pass the bill. The guns provision was first requested in the House by Georgia Rep. Andrew Clyde, a Republican gun store owner who had initially opposed the larger tax package. The House bill would remove silencers — called 'suppressors' by the gun industry — from a 1930s law that regulates firearms that are considered the most dangerous, eliminating a $200 tax while removing a layer of background checks. The Senate kept the provision on silencers in its version of the bill and expanded upon it, adding short-barreled, or sawed-off, rifles and shotguns. Republicans who have long supported the changes, along with the gun industry, say the tax infringes on Second Amendment rights. They say silencers are mostly used by hunters and target shooters for sport. 'Burdensome regulations and unconstitutional taxes shouldn't stand in the way of protecting American gun owners' hearing,' said Clyde, who owns two gun stores in Georgia and often wears a pin shaped like an assault rifle on his suit lapel. Democrats are fighting to stop the provision, which was unveiled days after two Minnesota state legislators were shot in their homes, as the bill speeds through the Senate. They argue that loosening regulations on silencers could make it easier for criminals and active shooters to conceal their weapons. 'Parents don't want silencers on their streets, police don't want silencers on their streets,' said Senate Democratic leader Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y. The gun language has broad support among Republicans and has received little attention as House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., work to settle differences within the party on cuts to Medicaid and energy tax credits, among other issues. But it is just one of hundreds of policy and spending items included to entice members to vote for the legislation that could have broad implications if the bill is enacted within weeks, as Trump wants. Inclusion of the provision is also a sharp turn from the climate in Washington just three years ago when Democrats, like Republicans now, controlled Congress and the White House and pushed through bipartisan gun legislation. The bill increased background checks for some buyers under the age of 21, made it easier to take firearms from potentially dangerous people and sent millions of dollars to mental health services in schools. Passed in the summer of 2022, just weeks after the shooting of 19 children and two adults at a school in Uvalde, Texas, it was the most significant legislative response to gun violence in decades. Three years later, as they try to take advantage of their consolidated power in Washington, Republicans are packing as many of their longtime priorities as possible, including the gun legislation, into the massive, wide-ranging bill that Trump has called 'beautiful.' 'I'm glad the Senate is joining the House to stand up for the Second Amendment and our Constitution, and I will continue to fight for these priorities as the Senate works to pass President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill,' said Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who was one of the lead negotiators on the bipartisan gun bill in 2022 but is now facing a primary challenge from the right in his bid for reelection next year. If the gun provisions remain in the larger legislation and it is passed, silencers and the short-barrel rifles and shotguns would lose an extra layer of regulation that they are subject to under the National Firearms Act, passed in the 1930s in response to concerns about mafia violence. They would still be subject to the same regulations that apply to most other guns — and that includes possible loopholes that allow some gun buyers to avoid background checks when guns are sold privately or online. Larry Keane of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, who supports the legislation, says changes are aimed at helping target shooters and hunters protect their hearing. He argues that the use of silencers in violent crimes is rare. 'All it's ever intended to do is to reduce the report of the firearm to hearing safe levels,' Keane says. Speaking on the floor before the bill passed the House, Rep. Clyde said the bill restores Second Amendment rights from 'over 90 years of draconian taxes.' Clyde said Johnson included his legislation in the larger bill 'with the purest of motive.' 'Who asked for it? I asked,' said Clyde, who ultimately voted for the bill after the gun silencer provision was added. Clyde was responding to Rep. Maxwell Frost, a 28-year-old Florida Democrat, who went to the floor and demanded to know who was responsible for the gun provision. Frost, who was a gun-control activist before being elected to Congress, called himself a member of the 'mass shooting generation' and said the bill would help 'gun manufacturers make more money off the death of children and our people.' Among other concerns, control advocates say less regulation for silencers could make it harder for law enforcement to stop an active shooter. 'There's a reason silencers have been regulated for nearly a century: They make it much harder for law enforcement and bystanders to react quickly to gunshots,' said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety. Schumer and other Democrats are trying to convince the Senate parliamentarian to drop the language as she reviews the bill for policy provisions that aren't budget-related. 'Senate Democrats will fight this provision at the parliamentary level and every other level with everything we've got,' Schumer said earlier this month. Jalonick writes for the Associated Press.
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
Senate GOP unlikely to release revised megabill text Monday
House Republicans are aiming to slash funding for the nonpartisan watchdog for waste, fraud and abuse within the federal government by nearly half in the next fiscal year, according to spending bill text released Sunday night. The House Appropriations subcommittee funding Congress and its support agencies, led by chairman David Valadao (R-Calif.), is set to mark up their fiscal 2026 measure Monday evening, with the full committee set to act Thursday. The Legislative Branch bill would provide $6.7 billion — $51 million below the current funding level, which was set in fiscal 2024. Per tradition, the House bill does not touch any Senate funding. 'Chairman Valadao's bill puts the American people first — in strengthening the institutions that represent them, protecting effective governance, and safeguarding taxpayer dollars,' said House Appropriations Committee Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) in a statement. The deepest cuts in the bill are to the Government Accountability Office, an arm of Congress that would see a $396.5 million reduction from current levels to $415.4 million. GAO has served as the nation's chief investigator of wrongdoing at federal agencies for more than a century, but has been fighting for months as Republicans in Congress and the Trump administration have attempted to undercut its legal conclusions and independence. Now, they are attempting to shrink the agency into submission as it pursues nearly 40 investigations into whether the White House is illegally withholding, or 'impounding,' money Congress had previously approved. Also tucked into the bill is a major policy change that would eliminate the GAO's ability to bring civil action against the executive branch over impoundments of funds. 'GAO's work makes it possible for the legislative branch to hold government accountable,' said Daniel Schuman, executive director of the American Governance Institute. 'Congress needs independent expert advice, which is exactly what GAO provides.' Also on the chopping block is the Library of Congress, which is another legislative branch agency also engaged in a power struggle against intrusion by the Trump administration. The bill allocates $767.6 million for the Library of Congress, which is $84.5 million below the current funding level and $133.7 million below the FY26 request. 'This bill does nothing to safeguard against the growing levels of executive overreach into legislative branch agencies,' said Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.), the top Democrat on the legislative branch subcommittee. Some other key provisions in the GOP-written bill include: Capitol Police: The Capitol Police would see a $84.4 million boost to their funding under the bill, bringing the total to $891 million. Some lawmakers had asked for an increase in office funding for use for security, but the bill flat-funds the Members Representational Allowance, which can be used for some member security purposes. Member Pay: The bill would continue the member pay freeze that has been in effect since 2013, halting automatic cost of living increases that members of Congress are supposed to get under law. Gay marriage: The bill includes language that prohibits discrimination against any person who 'speaks, or acts' in accordance with a 'sincerely held religious belief, or moral conviction, that marriage is, or should be recognized as, a union of one man and one woman.'
CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
Health-care cuts in GOP's budget bill may add up to $22,800 in medical debt for some families: Report
Proposed federal spending cuts to health care in Republicans' "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" may increase some families' medical debts by as much as $22,800, according to a new report from Third Way, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank. The Republican budget bill proposes $1.1 trillion in cuts to health care that target both Medicaid and Affordable Care Act coverage. An estimated 16 million people may lose health coverage based on those proposals, the Congressional Budget Office has estimated — 7.8 million who would lose Medicaid and 8.2 million who would lose Affordable Care Act coverage. Overall, medical debt would increase by $50 billion as a result of the budget bill changes — a 15% rise over today's $340 billion in unpaid debts, according to Third Way. Health coverage losses would increase the number of people in families with medical debt by 5.4 million, according to Third Way's report. More than 100 million people currently have medical debt in the U.S., according to KFF. More from Personal Finance:'SALT' deduction in limbo as Senate Republicans unveil tax planHow Senate GOP 'no tax on tips' proposal differs from House planSenate tax bill includes $1,000 baby bonus in 'Trump accounts' An estimated 2.2 million households would have medical debt because of Medicaid coverage losses, while 3.2 million more people would rack up balances due to Affordable Care Act reforms that may prompt coverage losses or higher premiums, according to Third Way. Without coverage, families may see their medical debts increase by as much as $22,800, according to Third Way's report. About 87% of households that previously had no medical debt would accumulate an average of $22,800 in balances. Meanwhile, 13% of households may accumulate an additional average of $8,790 in medical debt on top of $13,490 in existing balances. "That's going to put people's dreams back, if they're hoping to go to college or hoping to have a solid retirement or hoping to buy another house," said David Kendall, senior fellow for health and fiscal policy at Third Way. "Medical debt stands in the way of the American dream, and we shouldn't make it worse." The White House said proposed federal spending cuts are aimed at eliminating "waste, fraud and abuse" in government programs including Medicaid. The Trump administration has said the "big beautiful" bill is a potential "economic windfall for working and middle-class Americans" through tax cuts, higher wages and higher take-home pay. In a Monday letter that cites the Third Way report, Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, and Democratic Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey, Chuck Schumer of New York and Ron Wyden of Oregon, urged Republican leaders to reconsider the proposed health-care cuts. Addressing medical debt is a "national priority" with "bipartisan support," the senators wrote in a letter to Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La. Currently, 16 states have moved to either cancel medical debt or eliminate medical debts from credit reports, they wrote. "Medical debt is a complex problem, but having health insurance coverage makes a measurable difference," the senators wrote. They pointed to a 2013 study in The New England Journal of Medicine that found Medicaid coverage reduces medical debt rates by 13.28 percentage points. The study, published ahead of state Medicaid expansion under the ACA, looked at the effects of Oregon's 2008 Medicaid expansion. Americans with unpaid medical balances may face "dire" consequences, which may include delaying or going without needed care, cutting back on food or other necessities or taking on additional debt, the lawmakers wrote. In addition to personal setbacks, medical debt also affects consumer spending, which may prevent economic growth, they said. "If the Republican reconciliation bill passes these drastic health care cuts into law, working class families across America risk going further into medical debt," the senators wrote. "It is not too late to stop these cuts," they wrote.
