A federal judge’s final approval of the NCAA’s $2.8 billion settlement with student-athletes won’t quell all the antitrust threats for the sports organization as it seeks to provide stability in college sports.

Judge Claudia Wilken of the US District Court for the District of Northern California in a 76-page order June 6 found the settlement fair to class members and overruled numerous objections, including over a controversial spending limit cap, viewing the deal as a compromise between the parties.

The deal removes a huge headache for the NCAA, in that the claims of a huge consolidated class action fall by the wayside, and, for the first time, a system will exist in which schools can pay athletes directly. But the settlement won’t insulate the NCAA from antitrust challenges alleging anticompetitive practices, said Cal Stein, litigation partner with Troutman Pepper Locke.

Objectors are also likely to appeal the settlement, while future athletes could bring separate suits challenging pay limits and roster limit provisions. Opt-out plaintiffs who declined to participate in the settlement could pursue individual claims. Other cases with claims against the NCAA outside the settlement remain in play.

Attorney Steven Molo, who represents athletes opposed to the deal, said in a statement to Bloomberg Law that he is reviewing the order and “considering our options.”

“I don’t think it’s a silver bullet,” Stein said of the settlement. “The NCAA saw the writing on the wall. They needed to get out of the way of this freight train, and they managed to do it on terms that they can live with. But it’s very clear to me that there is going to be continued litigation.”

Push for Legislation

Another sign that the NCAA expects legal trouble: NCAA President Charlie Baker made another appeal to Congress for college sports legislation even as he praised the settlement approval.

“You wouldn’t be doing that if you didn’t have fear of this new system being subject to challenges and legal difficulties,” Stein said.

Rep. Lisa McClain (Mich.), the fourth-ranking member of GOP House leadership, and Rep. Janelle Bynum (D-Ore.) introduced a bill (H.R. 3847) Monday that would standardize athletes’ NIL pay.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee has a June 12 legislative hearing on separate draft legislation by Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R-Fla.) that is considered largely in line with the NCAA’s wishes. The draft includes a provision that would address antitrust liability in college sports.

Follow-on Litigation

The judge’s approval doesn’t function as an endorsement of the legality of the NCAA’s rules and her order “invites follow-on litigation,” said Christine Bartholomew, a law professor at University at Buffalo focused on antitrust issues.

“The judge just recognizes that this doesn’t provide complete relief,” Bartholomew said. “This opinion, in my mind, is written with the realization that there is a very high likelihood of appeal.”

Expect to see appeals from objectors in the next month, with future lawsuits thereafter, said Michael Carrier, a professor at Rutgers Law School who writes about antitrust and intellectual property.

An appeal could be an “uphill climb” for plaintiffs covered by the deal, but that doesn’t mean they won’t be successful, he said. “There’s a chance that an appellate court could overturn it.”

Smaller colleges that feel disadvantaged by the NCAA’s settlement’s revenue-sharing model also may pursue litigation, said William Lavery, a partner in Clifford Chance’s global antitrust litigation practice.

Institutions can distribute up to 22% of the average revenue generated by schools in conferences including the ACC and Big Ten. The cap is estimated to be roughly $20.5 million per school.

“It allows schools to prioritize the revenue-sharing model to revenue-generating sports disproportionately; that’s obviously going to entrench inequality,” Lavery said. “These elite programs are going to continue to attract more talent. It’s going to make it effectively impossible for smaller schools to compete, at least in the big sports.”

Plaintiffs are also represented by Winston & Strawn LLP and Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP. The NCAA is represented by Wilkinson Stekloff LLP.

The case is In re College Athlete NIL Litig., N.D. Cal., No. 4:20-cv-03919, 6/6/25.

• Purdue coach Matt Painter used a comparison to professional sports when explaining the difference between revenue-sharing and name, image and likeness.

WEST LAFAYETTE — The financial allotment for college athletes went from one extreme (legally nonexistent) to another when the NCAA instituted name, image, and likeness (NIL), allowing student-athletes to capitalize on their marketability.

Colorado football coach Deion Sanders has been sidelined recently as he deals with an unknown illness, USA Today and ESPN reported. Sanders is away from Colorado’s program and has been resting, his son, Deion Jr., shared in a YouTube video.

“He’ll tell y’all soon enough what he’s going through, what he went through,” the younger Sanders said, according to USA Today. “When we get back to Boulder, I don’t know. I’m waiting until my dad leaves. When he leaves, then I’ll go. Until then, I’m going to sit here with him.”

While Colorado isn’t practicing at the moment due to summer break, it’s been hosting its annual football camps in Boulder over the first two weeks of June. Sanders reportedly hasn’t been present for those camps this summer after appearing at them in his first two years on the job. Operating the summer camps is part of Sanders’ job description at Colorado, according to USA Today. 

The 57-year-old Sanders also recently canceled a speaking engagement at the Sickle Cell Disease Research and Educational Symposium.

“Due to an unavoidable last-minute scheduling change, our originally scheduled Foundation Keynote Speaker, Deion Sanders ‘Coach Prime,’ is unable to attend,” the organization wrote in a social media post. “We are grateful for his support and look forward to future opportunities to welcome him.”

Sanders hinted that he had been dealing with a health issue when he appeared on former NFL cornerback Asante Samuel’s podcast in May. As Samuel wished Sanders well, the Colorado coach said what he was “dealing with right now is at whole nother level” and that he had lost 14 pounds. Still, Sanders said he planned to return to coaching whenever the illness subsided.

Sanders has dealt with multiple serious health issues over the last few years. In 2021, he had two toes on his left foot amputated due to blood clots that stemmed from a previous surgery. He underwent surgery again to help relieve blood clots in both of his legs in 2023.

Want great stories delivered right to your inbox? Create or log in to your FOX Sports account, follow leagues, teams and players to receive a personalized newsletter daily.

Get more from College Football Follow your favorites to get information about games, news and more

By The Associated Press

INDIANAPOLIS — INDIANAPOLIS (AP) — Online abuse related to sports betting decreased during the NCAA’s March Madness basketball tournaments compared with the prior year, but people involved in the competition still received more than 3,000 threatening messages, the NCAA said Tuesday.

The NCAA hired Signify Group to monitor messages directed at athletes, coaches, game officials, selection committee members and others with official roles in the tournament. Signify used both artificial intelligence and human analysts to confirm the threats and, when necessary, report them to law enforcement.

Overall, abuse related to sports betting was down 23%, the NCAA said in a news release.

The men’s March Madness bracket was notable this year for the scarcity of upsets, with all four No. 1 seeds advancing to the Final Four and Florida, a popular pick to win it all, claiming the national title. On the women’s side, three top seeds made the national semifinals and No. 2 seed UConn, among the pre-tournament favorites, won the championship.

The NCAA’s analysis found that overall, abusive statements directed at people involved in the men’s tournament increased by 140% — much of it directed at the selection committee and coaches — while abuse related to sports betting was down 36%.

Abuse was down 83% on the women’s side and betting-related abuse declined 66%.

One women’s player who was targeted online was Chandler Prater of Mississippi State, who was guarding Southern California star JuJu Watkins when she suffered a season-ending knee injury.

“I received all kinds of messages, so many of them hateful and abusive,” Prater said in a statement. “It was unlike anything I’d ever experienced before.”

Signify’s AI flagged more than 54,000 posts, and its human analysts confirmed that 3,161 messages were abusive or threatening, the NCAA said. Those messages were reported to social media platforms and occasionally to law enforcement. The reporting led to the removal of abusive posts and restrictions on social media accounts.

NCAA President Charlie Baker said he has made curbing online harassment a top priority.

“We have been encouraged to record a reduction in sports betting-related abuse and threat at the 2025 event,” Signify CEO Jonathan Hirshler said, “as this is often the trigger for the most egregious and threatening content we detect.”

___

AP college basketball: https://apnews.com/hub/college-basketball

Can lawmakers agree on a bill that would help regulate college athletics after House settlement

PublishedJune 10, 2025 5:32 PM EDT•UpdatedJune 10, 2025 5:32 PM EDT

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Email
• Copy Link

Are lawmakers ready to come together for a Bi-Partisan bill that would protect college sports in the aftermath of the House settlement? In the upcoming ‘College Sports Act’ that is set to be presented this week, commissioners from the Power Five conferences have also voiced their support for this new legislation that could wrangle some of the biggest issues that are of concern moving forward. 

On Tuesday, two different bills were introduced by lawmakers that are aiming to address some of the problems that have plagued college sports over the past few years, especially the NCAA. 

Over the past few years, there has been a massive push from athletic directors and commissioners to have Congress intervene and adopt a bill that could give them some type of protection in this growing age of college athletics. 

U.S. Representatives Lisa McClain (R-Mich.)and Janelle Bynum (D-Ore.) introduced the new bill that is now making the rounds. At the same time, Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R., Fla) and Rep. Brett Guthrie (R., K.Y.) presented a discussion draft for an NIL bill that is being called the SCORE act. 

In the first mentioned bipartisan legislation, the following points were laid out for discussion. 

• NIL Rights: Codifies the right of college athletes to receive compensation for their name, image, and likeness. Prohibits the NCAA and schools from penalizing student-athletes for NIL activity.
• Extended Academic Access: Allows student-athletes to use their scholarships to complete a degree within 10 years, even if they leave school early.
• Health & Life Skills Education: Requires Division I, II, and III schools participating in a Division I sport to provide training on mental health, sexual violence prevention, nutrition, career preparation, NIL education, and more.
• Medical Protections: Requires schools to cover the medical costs of sports-related injuries for at least two years after the athlete leaves the institution.
• Scholarship Security: Prohibits schools from canceling or reducing scholarships based on athletic performance, injury, or roster management.
• Agent Oversight: Establishes agent registration and disclosure requirements to protect athletes from exploitation.
• Employment Status: Prohibits student-athletes from being classified as employees of their university, preserving the collegiate nonprofessional model.
• Federal Preemption: Creates a single national standard, overriding inconsistent state laws to ensure clarity for athletes, schools, and sponsors.

‘SCORE’ Act Draft Has The Vote Of Power-Five Commissioners

While there is one bill that was introduced, the ‘Autonomy Conferences’ praised a discussion draft that has been making the rounds on Tuesday as well. 

In what is being called the ‘SCORE Act’, leaders from the Big Ten, ACC, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC released a statement on Tuesday morning that praised what could potentially be coming down the pipeline over the next few days. 

The House of Representatives’ Committee on Energy and Commerce is scheduled to broach this topic during a hearing scheduled for Thursday. The key talking points of the draft were highlighted by the statement released by Power-Five commissioners on Tuesday. 

• Replacing the confusing patchwork of state NIL laws with a national standard ensuring all student-athletes are treated fairly, no matter where they play.
• Affirming student-athletes’ right to profit from their name, image and likeness.
• Requiring academic support and ensuring access to mental health and well-being resources for student-athletes.
• Prohibiting student-athletes from being considered employees of an institution, conference, or athletic association.
• Protecting rules that serve the educational mission of college

What does all of this mean? This is simply a way for the conferences and House settlement ‘College Sports Commission’ to set guardrails around college athletics. A push to have some sort of federal legislation has been the main point of emphasis, ramping up again recently as the House settlement was approved. 

“This discussion draft comes at a time of historic transition for college athletics,” the ACC, Big 12, Big Ten, Pac-12 and SEC said in a joint statement on Tuesday morning. “In the absence of federal standards, student-athletes and schools have been forced to navigate a fractured regulatory framework for too long. 

“Following the historic House settlement, this draft legislation represents a very encouraging step toward delivering the national clarity and accountability that college athletics desperately needs. We urge lawmakers to build on this momentum and deliver the national solution that athletes, coaches, and schools deserve.”

Will we finally see Congress pass some sort of bill that would satisfy all parties involved? That’s still up for debate, and congressional leaders will meet on Thursday to continue discussing the latest bills that have been presented. 

No matter what, it doesn’t sound like college commissioners are going to stop their lobbying for federal legislation on how to fix college athletics. 

The NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel on Tuesday approved changes they say will help enhance the flow of the game in men’s basketball for the 2025-26 season.

Changes include a coach’s challenge at any point in a game to review out-of-bounds calls, basket interference/goaltending and whether a secondary defender was in the restricted-area arc. The panel also approved modifications to the rule on continuous motion on field goal attempts.

Other enhancements to help with the flow of the game focus on the points of emphasis for officials for 2025-26. These will include directives to address delay-of-game tactics, limit time spent at the monitor, improve game administration efficiency and reduce physicality.

Under the coach’s challenge rule, teams must have a timeout to request an instant replay review challenge.

If the instant replay review challenge is successful, teams will be allowed to have one additional video review challenge for the rest of the game, including overtime.

If the first video review challenge is unsuccessful, the team loses the ability to challenge the rest of the game.

Officials can initiate video reviews on basket interference/goaltending and restricted arc plays in the last two minutes of the game and into overtime. Recent data shows these reviews caused minimal game interruptions. NCAA Men’s Basketball Rules Committee members think the coach’s challenge will have a significant impact on the flow of the game. Officials cannot conduct video review on out-of-bounds calls unless through a coach’s challenge.

The coach’s challenge, however, does not impact the NCAA officials’ voluntary use of instant replay for timing mistakes, scoring errors, shot clock violations, 2-point versus 3-point field goal attempts, flagrant fouls, etc.

In considering the decisions last month, the NCAA Men’s Basketball Committee had conversations about ways to continue this direction in the upcoming years, which includes positive momentum for moving the men’s game from halves to quarters. The committee realizes there are hurdles to implementing the quarter format to the game, including the structuring of media timeouts to accommodate commercial inventory.

The committee recommended NCAA Division I conferences create a joint working group to provide feedback on the potential change from halves to quarters.

The Men’s Basketball Rules Committee would like to have feedback from the conferences by the next rules-change year.

Under the changes to the continuous motion rule, an offensive player who ends his dribble going toward the basket and absorbs contact from the defense will be permitted to pivot or complete the step the player is on and finish the field goal attempt.

Currently, players are credited with field goals only when they are fouled while shooting the basketball.

Other rule changes:
– Officials will have the option to call a Flagrant 1 foul when a player is contacted to the groin. A Flagrant 1 foul results in two free throws for the offended team and possession of the ball. Previously, officials could only call a common foul or deem it a Flagrant 2 foul, in which the player receives an ejection, and the offended team receives two free throws and possession of the ball.
– If a player uses the rim to gain an advantage, it will be a basket interference violation.
– If one of the shot clocks becomes inoperable, the shot clock at the other basket will remain on. Previously, both clocks would be shut off until both are operable.

Coach’s Challenge coming to women’s game also

A coach’s video review challenge in women’s basketball was also approved by the NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel on Tuesday.

After a thorough discussion last month, the NCAA Women’s Basketball Rules Committee voted to recommend the change for the 2025-26 season.

Under the rule change, the following plays can be challenged at any point during the game:

• Ruled out-of-bounds violations.
• Ruled backcourt violations.
• Whether a change in team possession occurred before the ruling of a foul where free throws would be involved.
• Whether a foul was assessed to the correct player.

Officials cannot initiate reviews on these calls, with the exception of whether a foul was assessed to the correct player.

Teams will not be required to have a timeout to make a video review challenge in NCAA women’s basketball competition. However, a failed challenge will result in a technical foul for an excessive timeout.

The panel also approved an experimental rule in exhibition games for the 2025-26 season to allow coaches to make video review challenges on a foul charged to their team at any time during the game.

Other rules changes:

• Setting the shot clock to 20 seconds when, following a dead ball, the offense is awarded the ball in its frontcourt.
• Eliminating the rule that jerseys need to be tucked in.
• Using excessive timeouts or playing with six players when the ball becomes live will become team technical fouls. These violations will count toward team fouls, and the team will be awarded possession at half-court following the free throws.
• Allowing players to complete a jump stop when their feet land approximately at the same time. This will be a legal move and will not be considered a travel. The NCAA Women’s Basketball Rules Committee thinks this change can increase the accuracy on traveling rulings.
• Allowing defenders multiple one-hand (hot stove) touches on stationary players holding the ball or on a dribbler. These touches would be legal as long as they are not repetitive and do not affect the rhythm, speed, balance and quickness of the dribbler or reroute the offensive player.
• If a player competes in a game that the player should have missed due to a suspension, the player and the head coach will both have to serve a one-game suspension for the next scheduled game.

The Daily Hoosier –“Where Indiana fans assemble when they’re not at Assembly”

Related