Connect with us

NIL

NCAA’s House settlement to pay athletes is just the beginning, what happens next?

The House v. NCAA settlement has fundamentally changed the way college sports will function. College sports have left amateurism behind for good, and right now, questions seem to outnumber answers. How does the House v. NCAA settlement change college sports? The House settlement, which began as a class-action lawsuit against the NCAA and five collegiate […]

Published

on


The House v. NCAA settlement has fundamentally changed the way college sports will function. College sports have left amateurism behind for good, and right now, questions seem to outnumber answers.

How does the House v. NCAA settlement change college sports?

The House settlement, which began as a class-action lawsuit against the NCAA and five collegiate conferences profiting from a former Arizona State swimmer, a TCU basketball player and others, sets up direct payments from schools to athletes for the first time. People across the country are actively debating how this new paradigm will affect universities and their athletic programs. Officials have introduced some new rules, with more on the way, but they have not yet been fully tested. Some suggest that the same issues college athletics faced before the settlement may have simply shifted focus.

Each school participating will now have a $20.5 million yearly cap to spend on its athletic programs. Football and basketball will see the vast majority of that money. NIL payments will also continue to exist in addition to the direct payments. During an interview with Panther Insider, Pitt Athletic Director Allen Greene said this is just the first step in reforming what was a broken “amateur” system.

“I think student-athlete employment is still a topic of conversation that’s going to occur,” Greene said. “I think rule setting is going to occur still, in just how we are applying all the various rules in our industry that govern what we do. And I think there’s still going to be conversations around congressional engagement, congressional involvement.”

What if schools don’t have the pool of money to pay players?

Many schools will continue to depend on wealthy alumni for support as their athletic budgets remain under pressure. Adding another $20.5 million in expenses means schools will have to make tough choices. Iowa State Athletic Director Jamie Pollard was blunt in a recent interview. 

“Iowa State does not have that $20 million,” Pollard said. “But if we don’t pay it for this coming year, we have big problems, right? So we’re going to pay it.”

It’s also bigger than college athletics. Towns like Ames, Iowa, depend on college athletic programs and the tourism dollars they generate.

“Iowa State University will be faced with an athletics program with a huge annual deficit if it wants to stay in the Big 12 and if it wants to have a P4 (Power 4) athletics program,” Pollard said. “Now, we can decide we just want to have an athletics program like Northern Iowa, but that’s going to have a huge economic impact on the state, on central Iowa, on the city of Ames and on this institution.”

What will happen to NIL payments?

Those issues also don’t account for NIL payments. That money will still be available to athletes in addition to the $20.5 million pool. Just hours after the settlement received approval, leaders formed a new College Sports Commission. Brian Seeley is the man in charge. The former MLB executive and his team will review each NIL transaction to ensure it serves a legitimate business purpose and is not merely “Pay for Play.”

There will be a lot of gray areas to sift through because, up to this point, there were no rules for why a business or collective could pay a player. Conference athletic directors say it will be incumbent upon everyone to follow the rules when they are set up. Penn State head coach James Franklin said this does nothing to address the moral issue surrounding football programs, where it’s all about the dollars.

“I worry a little bit now that because of how the sport has changed,” Franklin said. “There’s people being attracted to the sport for the wrong reasons and the way the sport has changed from a transfer portal perspective and from an NIL perspective. I think there’s also young people and families that are making decisions based on a transactional experience rather than a transformational experience.”  

There’s also nothing stopping a Penn State, an Ohio State or an Alabama from using the majority of their $20.5 million on their football program in addition to another $20-30 million in NIL payments. That could create an arms race that the whole settlement intended to curb. Without stronger guardrails, the gap between well-funded programs and those with fewer resources may continue to grow.

“You watch Ohio State in the men’s football game, national championship game, you don’t hear any announcers talking about NIL,” Texas Tech softball coach Gerry Glasco said. “They just don’t talk about it. And yet, Ohio State had one of the highest two or three NIL payrolls last year in college football.”

Glasco, whose school’s collective announced a second million-dollar payment to star pitcher NiJaree Canady one day before they lost in the championship of the Women’s College World Series, knows his “non-revenue” program will have to continue raising money outside of the $20.5 million. Paying a player like Canady through NIL is worth it if they want to remain relevant.

“I think it was three days after she signed, somebody told me there was over 700,000 Associated Press type articles where they said Stanford, Texas Tech and NiJa Canady and softball all in one,” Glasco said. “Seven hundred thousand times you got mentioned. Then you look at the exposure she brought to us. I think we now played 10 or 11 games on national TV.”

What will happen to “non-revenue” sports?

Whether non-revenue sports are left behind in this new college landscape is one of the many questions left unanswered in the aftermath of the settlement. It will depend on how each school divides the $20.5 million in payments and how schools chase the NIL opportunities.

Schools without football, like Gonzaga University and many others in the Big East Conference, will be flush with cash to spend on their 12- to 15-member basketball teams and their non-revenue sports teams. That could open the door to another gap between “haves and have-nots” in their respective situations. The catch is not having a football team makes it a bit harder to find that $20.5 million in a school budget.

There may also be more litigation in the near future as challenges to upcoming NIL payments make their way through the College Sports Commission. What comes next will largely depend on what rules are put in place and how they’re enforced.



Joey Nunez (Video Editor)


and Devin Pavlou (Digital Producer)

contributed to this report.



Link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

NIL

NIL Alert: $2.8 Billion Athlete Revenue Settlement Approved – Sport

To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com. On June 6, 2025, U.S. Northern District of California Judge Claudia Wilken approved the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s (NCAA’s) $2.8 billion athlete revenue settlement (Settlement) in the consolidated case, In re College Athlete NIL Litigation.1 The Settlement will reimburse […]

Published

on



To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

On June 6, 2025, U.S. Northern District of California Judge
Claudia Wilken approved the National Collegiate Athletic
Association’s (NCAA’s) $2.8 billion athlete revenue
settlement (Settlement) in the consolidated case, In re College
Athlete NIL Litigation
.1 The Settlement will
reimburse a class of former college athletes for their previously
withheld name, image, and likeness (NIL) compensation going back to
2016, with the majority of the Settlement funds going to college
football and men’s basketball scholarship players, and lesser
amounts to women’s basketball players and student athletes from
other sports. The Settlement also creates a system for the
NCAA’s Division I (D-I) institutions to share billions of
dollars of revenue with their student-athletes over the next ten
years, beginning July 1, 2025, through revenue-sharing NIL
agreements.

Background

Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2021 decision in NCAA v.
Alston, 594 U.S. 69, student-athletes gained the opportunity to
receive compensation from third parties using their NIL. Although
hundreds of thousands of student-athletes have since profited, two
issues persisted: (1) the rules restricted NCAA member conferences
and schools from directly sharing revenue derived from the
commercial use of student-athletes’ NIL with
the student-athletes and (2) studentathletes who finished
playing before the Supreme Court’s decision lost the
opportunity to earn revenue from their college’s commercial
exploitation of their NIL. 

The In re: College Athlete NIL Litigation
Settlement

Subjects of the Settlement & Voluntary Opt-In /
Opt-Out 

The NCAA and the “Power Five” conferences (Conference
Defendants)—Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC), the Big Ten
Conference, Inc. (Big Ten), the Big 12 Conference, Inc. (Big 12),
the Pac-12 Conference (Pac-12), and the Southeastern Conference
(SEC) (collectively, the Defendants)—and their “Member
Institutions” (meaning, any college, school, or university
that is a member in any sport of the North Carolina –
that was until a lawsuit was filed against the state’s Board of
Education compelling them to do otherwise.

That lawsuit, brought by Rolanda Brandon, on behalf of her minor
son Faizon Brandon (a highly rated 5-star quarterback), was filed
on August 23, 2024, in North Carolina’s General Court of
Justice, Superior Court Division against the North Carolina State
Board of Education and North Carolina Department of Public
Instruction. Per the complaint, the Brandons asserted that although
the state of North Carolina’s legislature did direct the North
Carolina State Board of Education to regulate how high school
athletes could monetize their NIL, that the Board, in lieu of
regulating, prohibited it outright.2 Because the Board
of Education exceeded their delegated statutory authority, the
Brandons’ claimed, its NIL prohibition was arbitrary and
capricious and therefore invalid pursuant to N.C. State Stat.
Section 1-253 and the North Carolina Rule of Civil Procedure 57.
The Brandons’ sought a preliminary injunction against the
Board’s NIL ban due to the fact that Faizon and his family
would be irreparably harmed financially because it precluded them
from entering into a formal licensing and endorsement agreement
with NIL Sponsor 1, while also foreclosing any
additional opportunities with other businesses in the
future.3 

By way of background, in September of 2023, the North Carolina
state legislature adopted a bill directing the Board of Education
to “adopt rules governing high school interscholastic athletic
activities conducted by public school units” including
“student amateur status requirements, and rules related to use
of a student’s name, image, and likeness.”4 On
July 1, 2024, the North Carolina State Board of Education, in lieu
of adopting a set of regulatory rules, instead outright banned
every public high school athlete from using his or her name, image
or likeness for commercial purposes.5 That outright
prohibition, however, apparently was an overreach by the Board of
Education because on October 1, 2024, Superior Court Judge Graham
Shirley granted the Brandons’ motion for preliminary injunction
and enjoined the Board from prohibiting any athlete attending a
public school in the state of North Carolina from exercising his or
her right to monetize their NIL.

Although the state of North Carolina’s ruling is not legal
precedent for the other remaining states currently foreclosing high
school athletes from monetizing their NIL, those states should
take notice and understand that their prohibition may be vulnerable
to a legal challenge. That being said, with no national standards
regarding NIL, most of the forty states that do allow for
monetization rest upon their high school athletics governing body
to formulate any and all rules and regulations. This leads to a
variation of standards between states, but there are a few key
restrictions present in most of these rules that high school
athletes should be aware of:

  • High school athletes typically may not refer to or include
    their school’s uniforms, logos, colors or facilities of the
    state’s high school athletic association in their NIL
    activities.

  • High school athletes are typically prohibited from partnering
    with gambling, alcohol, tobacco, weapons, firearms, ammunition, and
    other adult categories brands. In those states where NIL op

portunities are allowed, high school athletes have a chance for
a significant financial windfall. However, athletes, their parents
and those advising them must ensure that any NIL agreement is in
accordance with the applicable rules of their state, since
noncompliance could lead to loss of eligibility to participate in
athletic competition, which will certainly jeopardize any future
athletic and financial opportunities.

NCAA D-I and/or a Conference Defendant)—plus Notre
Dame—are automatically bound to the Settlement and must
comply with its terms and requirements. Non–Power Five D-I
schools are not automatically covered by the revenue-sharing
component of the Settlement; however, they did have the opportunity
to opt in to the Settlement by June 15, 2025, to share NIL-related
revenue with athletes and join the enforcement and reporting
framework.

Notably, the Ivy League decided not to opt in. Ivy League
schools do not offer athletic scholarships, using need and
merit-based financial aid instead. The Ivy League views the
Settlement’s revenue-sharing model as a departure from its
principles of no athletic scholarships and avoidance of
pay-for-play. Although Ivy League athletes will not have the
opportunity to share revenue derived from their schools’
exploitation of their NIL, they can still pursue third-party NIL
deals.

Further, athletes who did not want to be part of the class (and
therefore want to preserve the right to sue the NCAA and Power Five
conferences for antitrust-related claims) had the opportunity to
opt out, which would exclude them from all aspects of the
Settlement.

Future Institutional RevenueSharing Framework

Beginning July 1, 2025, NCAA D-I and Power Five Member
Institutions may enter into exclusive or non-exclusive NIL licenses
and/or endorsement agreements with athletes to share revenue
for athletes’ NIL and institutional brand promotion, excluding
broadcast rights for a term not to exceed the student-athlete’s
eligibility to participate in NCAA sports. Member Institutions may
act as the marketing agent for studentathletes with respect to
third-party NIL contracts.

Although Ivy League athletes will not have the
opportunity to share revenue derived from their schools’
exploitation of their NIL, they can still pursue third-party NIL
deals.

Further, Member Institutions, and Notre Dame, can provide
studentathletes with additional direct payments and/or benefits
over and above annual existing scholarships and all other benefits,
capped at $20.5 million per school for 2025–2026, increasing
~4% annually for the following ten years; however, the increase
will be reevaluated every three years based on increases in certain
sports-related revenue among the Conference Defendants and Notre
Dame.

Enforcement & Oversight

All D-I student-athletes must report to their school and/or the
“Designated Reporting Entity” (managed by Deloitte) any
and all third-party NIL contracts or payments with a total value of
$600 or more on a schedule to be determined by the Defendants.

The College Sports Commission (CSC), an independent regulatory
body established by the Power Five, is the central enforcement
authority for the Settlement’s new compensation model and will
oversee all enforcement of the Settlement terms including
“Revenue Sharing,” “Name, Image, and Likeness
Deals,” and “Roster Limits.” The CSC states that the
NCAA “remains responsible for enforcement of rules not created
in connection with the settlement.”

Retroactive Benefits Pool

Under the Settlement, a total of approximately $2.8 billion in
backdamages will be distributed over ten years (~$280 million per
year) to eligible D-I athletes for past NIL restrictions
(2016–2024). This consists of a $1.976 billion NIL fund plus
$600 million for pay-for-play claims. Approximately 90% of the
Settlement will be paid to former football and men’s basketball
players because the payout formula is based on historical media
revenue and licensing data, with the remaining funds reserved for
other men’s sports and women’s sports.

Roster & Scholarship Policies

All NCAA D-I athletic scholarship limits are eliminated;
instead, the NCAA may adopt D-I roster limits, capping the
total number of athletes who can participate on a team. The new
roster caps are largely modeled on existing scholarship limits.
This shift gives schools greater flexibility on how they can
allocate aid and compensation and not affect athletes who were
already enrolled or who had signed letters of intent before April
7, 2024—this ensures no current student-athlete loses a spot
due to the new limits during their eligibility. Each school must
submit its list of exempt/grandfathered athletes by July 6,
2025.

Still, Member Institutions will have the option of making
incremental athletic scholarships available to student-athletes
above the number currently permitted by NCAA D-I rules for a
particular sport, subject to the roster limits. However, the full
cost-of-attendance dollar value of any new or incremental athletic
scholarships—that were not previously permitted by NCAA D-I
rules—up to $2.5 million (the Athletic Scholarship Cap) will
count against the pool of funds each Member Institution may
allocate to student-athletes.

Title IX Objections on Appeal to the Ninth Circuit

Before approving the Settlement, Judge Wilken held a hearing on
April 7, 2025, where she addressed objections raised by several
female student-athletes. The objectors argued that the proposed
$2.8 billion in backpay would disproportionately benefit male
athletes—particularly those in football and men’s
basketball—due to historic and systemic disparities in media
exposure and revenue generation.

Judge Wilken rejected these Title IX objections, reasoning that
the instant antitrust case had nothing to do with Title IX, a
federal law that prohibits sex-based discrimination in education
programs and activities that receive federal financial assistance.
While the court declined to consider Title IX arguments in the
context of this Settlement, Judge Wilken did leave the door open
for future Title IX lawsuits based on how schools make future
payments to athletes.

Almost immediately after Judge Wilken’s final judgment,
approximately twelve female athletes filed a notice of appeal to
the Ninth Circuit, arguing that the $2.8 billion settlement
violates Title IX based on inequalities in compensation. While
injunctive reform under the Settlement is already in effect, damage
payments are stayed pending the outcome of the appeal.

Impacts of the Settlement

Student-Athlete Transfers, Eligibility, and Poaching

On April 22, 2024, the NCAA adopted legislation removing limits
on the number of times an academically eligible student-athlete may
transfer during their collegiate career. This change allows
athletes to transfer multiple times without penalty, provided they
are in good academic standing.

This Settlement is expected to significantly increase transfer
activity. In particular, student-athletes at Ivy League
institutions and non–Power Five or non-NCAA schools may be
incentivized to transfer to schools that participate in
revenue-sharing, offer larger athletics budgets, and actively
support third-party NIL opportunities. With no threat of losing
eligibility, transferring becomes an attractive avenue for athletes
seeking both competitive and financial advancement.

However, transferring raises concerns about schools poaching
studentathletes who have already signed NIL contracts with other
programs. This exact issue was raised on June 20, 2025, when the
University of Wisconsin (UW) and its NIL collective filed a
complaint against the University of Miami (UM) over alleged
tortious interference with a two-year binding revenue-sharing
contract that was set to begin July 1, 2025. UW claims that UM
communicated with a UW defensive back, Xavier Lucas, who had not
entered the transfer portal, “knowingly inducing” him to
breach his contract with UW. The studentathlete had reportedly
requested to enter the portal, but UW refused, based on their
agreement.

This case is the first of its kind and may set a critical
precedent on whether schools can legally recruit student-athletes
already under binding revenue-sharing contracts tied to the
Settlement. The Big Ten is supporting UW with the lawsuit against
UM.

Questions on Employee Status

While the Settlement allows schools to directly pay their
athletes and share revenue, it does not redefine the
student-athletes as employees. However, student-athlete
compensation creates ambiguity regarding whether they are
“employees” under federal or state law, allowing
student-athletes to collect benefits and unionize. The question of
whether student-athletes are considered employees under
the Fair Labor Standards Act is currently being litigated in
the Third Circuit in Johnson v. NCAA. If a court
eventually does rule that student-athletes are employees, the
Settlement has provided that the NCAA or Power Five conferences may
modify or terminate their agreements, accordingly.

Potential Federal Legislation

There is currently no NIL federal legislation in place, but
prior to the Settlement, many state legislatures were actively
enacting NIL laws. Although the Settlement fundamentally reshapes
the national college sports landscape, it does not override or
preempt existing state laws. Instead, it operates alongside state
legislation, creating a layered legal environment where schools
must comply with both the Settlement terms and their state’s
NIL statutes. Where conflicts exist, states are prompted to revise
their laws to harmonize with the Settlement and avoid competitive
disadvantages in recruiting.

Because the Settlement does not have federal preemption power,
there is growing pressure for federal legislation. The NCAA has
asked Congress for legislation that would grant it an antitrust
exemption, preempt all state laws related to NIL, and restrict
student-athletes from being considered employees.

Congress is not alone in examining the impact the Settlement has
on college athletics, and the disparity it creates among sports and
athletes. President Donald Trump is reportedly considering an
executive order to regulate NIL deals in college athletics. He has
instructed White House aides to begin studying what an order would
look like. Other government officials, such as Rep. Michael
Baumgartner (R. WA.), may propose legislation to replace the NCAA
with a new body headed by a presidential appointee to ensure that
NIL funds and revenues are shared with schools and distributed
“equally among all student athletes of such
institutions.” This Bill, H.R. 2663, the Restore College
Sports Act, has been assigned to the House Committee on Education
and Workforce.

Conclusion

The Settlement represents a transformative moment in the legal,
financial, and regulatory framework of college athletics. It not
only compensates thousands of former student-athletes for years of
denied NIL revenue but also creates a forward-looking
revenue-sharing model that provides substantial compensation to
certain student-athletes. While the Settlement brings long-overdue
benefits, it also introduces a host of unresolved legal and policy
challenges, such as Title IX concerns, transfer/poaching disputes,
questions surrounding employment status, and conflicting state
legislation. As these issues continue to unfold, it will be
interesting to see how schools, athletes, and lawmakers respond to
this new era in college sports.

Footnotes

1. This consolidated litigation began as two separate
actions: (1) House v. National Collegiate Athletic
Association
, 4:20-cv-03919 (N.D. Cal) and (2) Oliver v.
National Collegiate Athletic Association
, 4:20-cv-04527 (N.D.
Cal). ). The litigation was further consolidated with two similar
actions: (3) Hubbard v. National Collegiate Athletic
Association
, 4:23-cv-01593 (N.D. Cal) and (4) Carter v.
National Collegiate Athletic Association
, 23-cv-06325, (N.D.
Cal.).

2. Brandon v North Carolina Board of Education, et al,
24CV026975-910

3. 24CV026975-910 Complaint at page 20.

4. 2023 N.C. Sess. L. 133 Section 17. (a) (N.C. Gen Stat.
Section 115C-407.55(1)(h))

5. ATHL-008 (NIL Prohibition).

Originally Published by The NIL Institutional
Report

The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.



Link

Continue Reading

NIL

Frustrations Mount As New NIL Deal Approval Process Lags

Frustrations Mount As New NIL Deal Approval Process Lags Privacy Manager Link 0

Published

on





Frustrations Mount As New NIL Deal Approval Process Lags


































Link

Continue Reading

NIL

AJ Dybantsa Makes Big Move on Wednesday to Expand His $4.1 Million NIL Portfolio

AJ Dybantsa Makes Big Move on Wednesday to Expand His $4.1 Million NIL Portfolio originally appeared on Athlon Sports. Although the next college basketball season feels like it’s years away from starting, BYU’s No. 1 overall recruit, AJ Dybantsa, has already proven he is a star. Advertisement This past week, he helped lead a star-studded […]

Published

on


AJ Dybantsa Makes Big Move on Wednesday to Expand His $4.1 Million NIL Portfolio originally appeared on Athlon Sports.

Although the next college basketball season feels like it’s years away from starting, BYU’s No. 1 overall recruit, AJ Dybantsa, has already proven he is a star.

Advertisement

This past week, he helped lead a star-studded Team USA squad to a gold medal in the FIBA U19 World Cup in Switzerland, earning tournament MVP honors. On Wednesday, he inked a massive NIL deal with one of the most prestigious companies in sports memorabilia.

As announced on social media by Topps, which has been making iconic collectible sports cards since 1950, Dybantsa and the memorabilia giant have inked an NIL partnership.

“JUST IN: We’re excited to announce that we’ve signed BYU star AJ Dybantsa to an exclusive trading card & memorabilia deal 🏀🔥 Welcome to the family, AJ,” read the post.

BYU college basketball signee AJ Dybantsa.AJ Dybantsa/BYU Athletics

BYU college basketball signee AJ Dybantsa.AJ Dybantsa/BYU Athletics

For Dybantsa, in addition to his latest move, he now has NIL deals with major brands such as Nike, Fanatics and Red Bull. His $4.1 million NIL Valuation is also the fourth-highest among all college athletes according to On3, trailing only Ohio State wide receiver Jeremiah Smith, Miami quarterback Carson Beck and Texas quarterback Arch Manning.

Advertisement

It’s unclear how much this deal is worth, but it’s hard to imagine his valuation won’t see an increase in the near future.

As for BYU, there may not be a college basketball program with as much hype around them as the Cougars. They brought in a recruiting class that On3 ranks as the sixth-best in the country, complemented by a transfer portal class that ranks as the No. 32 class in the country.

With a major buy-in from boosters, the pressure will be on in Provo next season.

Related: Walter Clayton Jr. Turns Heads With Latest NBA Summer League Explosion

This story was originally reported by Athlon Sports on Jul 9, 2025, where it first appeared.



Link

Continue Reading

NIL

Jonathan Perrin On NIL & College Baseball’s Financial Landscape

Image credit: Jonathan Perrin (Zachary Lucy/Four Seam Images) The phrase “a new era of college athletics” has gotten a lot of run over the past decade thanks to the advent of things like NIL and the transfer portal. As of July 1, 2025, fans of college athletics—especially baseball—find themselves in yet another new era.  For […]

Published

on



Image credit:

Jonathan Perrin (Zachary Lucy/Four Seam Images)

The phrase “a new era of college athletics” has gotten a lot of run over the past decade thanks to the advent of things like NIL and the transfer portal. As of July 1, 2025, fans of college athletics—especially baseball—find themselves in yet another new era. 

For college baseball, the results of the House v. NCAA settlement mean an increase to 34 scholarships for programs wanting to fully fund. Schools can also now provide “direct institutional support for talent acquisition,” allowing programs to pay athletes as independent contractors to play at their schools.

Jonathan Perrin, a former Oklahoma State and Brewers minor league righthander who now works as a certified financial planner, joined the latest episode of BA’s ‘From Phenom to the Farm’ podcast to discuss the winners and losers of this new phase of college baseball.

And he can easily point to one obvious winner. 

“The biggest winner (is) the SEC,” Perrin said. “It just means more down there. There are certainly levels to this in terms of levels to investment when it comes to NIL, and even, quite frankly, legislation at the state level … They have the most money, they have the most resources and I think you can see in the transfer portal with the types of players they’re getting, they are just offering numbers that schools in other conferences can’t offer.”

Want more podcasts like this one? Subscribe below!

Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Player FM

On the opposite end, mid-major programs that lack resources of Power 4 schools—especially ones coming off highly-visible postseason runs like the recent displays from Murray State and UTSA—will struggle to keep a roster together. 

“It used to be you run to Omaha, and the coach gets a contract extension or he’s going somewhere else,” Perrin said. “Now, it’s the coach gets a contract extension or he’s going somewhere else, and your entire starting nine is thinking about the same thing.

“Murray State had a player just recently go in the portal, and go to Ole Miss—if you can’t beat them, pay them to come to your school.”

Mid-majors have naturally always had a tougher time building an Omaha contender than Vanderbilt or Tennessee, but that task has become even more difficult. Teams that have the financial resources and allure of a big conference mean the path to contending in the postseason for mid-majors will require a specific type of roster creation. 

“You gotta be old, and you’ve have to have played a lot of baseball,” Perrin said. “Junior college is going to be a huge component of that, where you’re able to get guys who have played a couple years of junior college baseball—they’ve played a lot of games.”

It’s easy to see benefits on the player side, as teams are no longer capped at finding a way to spread 11.7 scholarships across a roster. More scholarship availability, plus NIL dollars for top contributors, means less out-of-pocket school cost and more money being paid to baseball players than ever before. 

However, for Power 4 schools, that means players viewed as fringe roster types—like preferred walk-ons who would previously have found themselves on a P4 roster—could lose out in deference to teams choosing to allocate their resources to proven contributors at lower levels. College rosters have never been older, meaning there’s less opportunity for young players to slot into a power conference lineup. 

This also affects the draft decision for high school prospects. Initially at the onset of the NIL era, some draft-eligible players were asking for higher figures to sign because they had NIL leverage. But the increased age of Power 4 rosters could lead some players to opt for the clearer developmental path of pro ball. 

“It’s really hard for freshman right now to get playing time, especially at P4 schools,” Perrin said. “Agents and parents are starting to realize that, ‘Wait a second, if my end goal is to get to the big leagues, what is the best opportunity to make that happen?’”

Although the new rules may keep some players from reaching campus, it could keep older players around for another year. Draft-eligible juniors and sophomores landing in the 11-20 round range who teams are unlikely to break into their bonus pool for might actually lose money in the short run by opting for pro ball. 

“That $150,000 bonus is not what it used to be,” Perrin said. “There are a lot of kids in college baseball this year who are going to make more than that … Ff you’re getting $150K to go play for the Royals, and Arkansas or LSU are paying you $250K to stay here, I can’t speak for everybody, but I’m going back to school in that situation.” 

Even top Power 4 programs are going to feel the strain when it comes to tapping their finances to keep up with competitors. For top talent out of high school and in the portal, the NIL bill comes due yearly, and programs who want a yearly seat in Omaha will need top-tier facilities. 

“The demands on the recruiting base and the alumni donor base are going to be so much higher moving forward,” Perrin said.

It’ll take years for the ramifications of the July 1 changes to be fully understood, but in year one, the theme of this new era of college baseball is clear. 

“It’s going to very much be a financial arms race when it comes to being competitive,” Perrin said.



Link

Continue Reading

NIL

EA College Football 26 Review, Gameplay Impressions, Videos, Top Modes and Features

For College Football 26 from EA Sports, so begins the hopeful build to dynasty status.  The beloved football series returned from a hiatus stretching all the way back to 2013 last year to praise as it looked and felt the part of a next-generation game while navigating some of the new hurdles that popped up […]

Published

on


For College Football 26 from EA Sports, so begins the hopeful build to dynasty status. 

The beloved football series returned from a hiatus stretching all the way back to 2013 last year to praise as it looked and felt the part of a next-generation game while navigating some of the new hurdles that popped up across college football, impacting recruiting and otherwise. 

But now? The honeymoon phase is over. 

College Football 26 won’t get the benefit of the globe just being happy it exists. It faces the same pressures as any sports gaming release, plus the expectations that those at the controls listened to fan feedback and continued to find ways to smooth over tricky real-world obstacles, namely name, image and likeness (NIL) and the transfer portal and the huge impacts there. 

If it can one-up last year’s effort, this year’s game should be a great sign of things to come. If not, onlookers would be right to fret that CFB 26 and beyond are comfortable with small annual updates and sitting in the middle of the annual-releases pack. 

Last year, CFB 25 arrived at a fever pitch, thankfully leaning into that old-school, yet also accurate tempo. It was faster than the simulation Madden strives to be and littered with explosive plays and highlight moments. 

The result was a proverbial breath of fresh air and a fun sprint in most games. Quality defensive options carried over from the past and Madden, like subpackags, shading, broad schemes and pre-snap controls, didn’t leave those trying to stop the onslaught helpless. It was, simply, fun. 

Fun, too, is CFB 26 because the bulk of that gameplay returns, albeit with some key tweaks. It’s obvious some serious tweaks went into the blocking aspect of the trenches, with offensive linemen clearly finding assignments better and holding blocks in ways that make sense. On defense, more complex things like stunts seem smooth. 

Even better are the coverage tweaks, where defenders do a better job of sticking with possible targets and not robotically falling into zones that players can exploit. 

One of the bigger complaints last year was miracle interceptions by defensive backs. It feels like this has been addressed by, as funny as it might sound, this game making sure defenders can’t pick off passes they’re obviously not looking at. That helps it feel less like a video game and more like the real thing, as players should feel more comfortable targeting those defenders who don’t have their eyes toward the passer. 

In the strive for realism (and it helps out the defense too), quarterback vision is also a thing, meaning shorter quarterbacks could have offensive linemen block their ability to “see” some of their targets downfield during parts of a play’s development. 

Momemtum feels more pervasive than ever, too. Beyond the crowd and stadium effects based around the on-field happenings, a new “Out of Body” system accurately captures the feel of when a star takes over a game. A quarterback who gets hot, for example, will have his ratings boosted. 

CFB 26 tacks on new player types and abilities for good measure, too, which helps encompass more of the game’s biggest stars accurately on the field, while also just giving players more ways to customize. 

A year removed from truly impressive controls over hot routes at the snap, the long-awaited arrival of dynamic substitutions is seamless, as pulling up the menu pre-snap to make a quick swap or two is nice. Fitting, too, because the wear and tear and confidence and composure subsystems will have players juggling injuries and the mental side of the game more often than ever. 

This is more than just making the “toughness” rating matter, too. There’s a strategic element to these additions in one-off games, sure, but it borders on full-blown RPG when, say, smack in the middle of a dynasty season, the star quarterback starts feeling discomfort in his throwing arm or something. 

CFB 26 packs in a bunch of playbook upgrades, including modernizations in misdirections and gadget plays, as well as formations. Defense gets some love too with new stunts and others.

Some may spend time debating whether CFB 26 upgrades the gameplay more than sports titles in the past. But the game is snappy, fun and still straddles that balance of simulation vs. arcade well, while throwing in some more complex systems to keep those craving long-term experience entertained, too. 

Graphics and Presentation

The big return for the series one year ago meant the king of gameday atmosphere was back on the block. 

That meant screen-shaking, accurate-looking environments where crowds dynamically reacted to the action and even dressed differently based on the weather. It meant superb-looking lighting, shadows, physics sway on the fabrics, fun pre- and mid-game traditions, mascots, and more. 

All of that returns in the presentation realm, but it’s the upgrades that really make CFB 26 feel far more complete by comparison. 

This time out, the game offers up dynamic time-of-day features. This is a big one for the sake of immersion and actual impact, as regional time of day and seasonal time of day matter now. A game kicking off in the early morning vs. mid-afternoon vs. night will feature different sun locations, shadows and more. The fan attire and broadcast commentary from the multiple teams will reflect the timing and weight of the given matchup, too. 

Also dynamic? The tweaks to runouts before a game. During a big game with postseason implications, players can expect the big stuff. During a warmup game against an inferior foe…not so much. 

That mentioned wear and tear system shows up in the mannerisms of those on the field, too, as say, a running back above a certain leg injury threshold might limp out of the huddle. 

Boasting accurate coaches and expanding the number of mascots is just another one of those little things that is both expected, yet welcome. Ditto for new chants and PA work in the stadiums. 

The game already getting new broadcast banners and info sheets during and around the on-field action is mildly impressive for an annually releasing sports game, too, putting a nice little bowtie on a robust presentation package that meets the biggest of expectations with ease. 

Dynasty, Road to Glory and More

Dynasty is again deservedly the headline act, with CFB 26 bringing forward those smooth modernizations to the recruiting process and modern-feeling features, like the ability to take multiple decades of the mode online with more than 30 other players, if desired. 

Making the beloved recruiting aspect of the series more RPG-like than ever is again on the menu, too, in the best way possible. 

Beyond a deeper-than-expected coach creator and the ability to customize a given program, recruiting gets some notable love. A new location-based recruiting mechanic is exactly what it sounds like: The precise cost and time of a visit will be impacted by real-world miles between recruit and program, giving players even more RPG-like things to juggle. 

Tweaks to the transfer portal feel good and there’s more weight to dealbreakers that emulate real-life. Think, the one star who wants more from NIL and might leave, or the former 5-star recruit who never got the promised shot at a starting job, etc. 

Road to Glory doesn’t get as much love, but there was only so much room for the mode to expand. It’s still a blast to create a character, then juggle things like NIL deals while attempting to establish a legacy and perhaps some NFL draft stock. The high school aspect of the mode is on the shorter side, but welcome all the same. 

College Ultimate Team, beyond getting more creative with card arts, will lean more into real-time happenings through events. Tasks and events that match with the actual football schedule will create some exclusivity and keep things fresh. 

The mode yanks out solo battles and instead has something dubbed Study Hall as the single-player experience and boils down simply enough: complete weekly refreshing games for rewards. 

Road to the College Football Playoffs grows, literally, in that it boasts 12 teams now and the rankings system has been overhauled in a good way to put more of an emphasis on beating better teams, as well as winning road games.

Like its re-debut one year ago, CFB 26 runs well and throws out the droves of sliders that dedicated players crave atop the standard suite of options, too. 

CFB 26 explodes out of the honeymoon phase with some impressive upgrades across the board. 

The engaging gameplay that captures the spirit of college football just as well as the presentation does gets a boost from better AI in key areas, plus some impressive simulation-like controls. 

Plus, the layers added atop the heavyweight gamemodes, especially in the RPG-like feel of Dynasty, really set the series above the rest of the market in terms of offerings. 

Presumably, it won’t always be easy for the series to dodge the annual release allegations. But CFB 26 carries just as much weight as the re-debut last year and likely just shuttered the top sports game of the year conversation again in the middle of the summer. 



Link

Continue Reading

NIL

Fanatics Strikes Major NIL Deal with AJ Dybantsa for Trading Cards and Memorabilia

Fanatics and Fanatics Collectibles have announced an exclusive multi-year NIL deal with college basketball standout AJ Dybantsa, marking one of the company’s most significant partnerships to date. The agreement, which takes effect immediately, focuses on trading cards and memorabilia, including autographs, game-used jerseys, inscriptions, and Dybalska’s presence in Fanatics brand campaigns. To kick off the […]

Published

on


Fanatics and Fanatics Collectibles have announced an exclusive multi-year NIL deal with college basketball standout AJ Dybantsa, marking one of the company’s most significant partnerships to date.

The agreement, which takes effect immediately, focuses on trading cards and memorabilia, including autographs, game-used jerseys, inscriptions, and Dybalska’s presence in Fanatics brand campaigns.

To kick off the announcement, a cinematic video spot shows Dybantsa gazing out at Utah’s Wasatch Range, symbolizing his journey ahead.

Fanatics Collectibles confirmed Dybantsa will appear in several upcoming products, including Bowman U NOW, which highlights key moments in collegiate sports.

Dybantsa, a soon-to-be college freshman, was previously featured in Fanatics’ McDonald’s All-American Game collection during his high school career.



Link

Continue Reading

Most Viewed Posts

Trending