After four years of unregulated money flooding into college football, the “Wild Wild West” days of the NIL may finally be winding down.

The long-awaited House v. NCAA settlement has been ratified, and it introduces a seismic shift to college athletics. Starting July 1, 2025, schools will be able to directly pay athletes through formal contracts, but under a hard salary cap.

Additionally, programs that opt into this agreement will be allowed to share revenue with athletes, capped at $20.5 million per year per school. Although this cap is expected to grow over time, for now, it becomes the upper limit of what any school can spend across all varsity sports, not just football or basketball.

This fundamental restructuring of athlete pay has caught the attention of NFL veterans and former college stars like Taylor Lewan and Will Compton. They didn’t hold back when discussing the implications of these changes.

“I love the idea of a cap,” Lewan said on the latest episode of the Bussin’ With the Boys podcast. “In the sense that all these major schools are now on the same playing field.”

Lewan’s point hits a growing concern in college football circles: parity. Without limits, NIL money has turned recruiting into an arms race. How?

Schools with deep-pocketed boosters and donor-backed collectives were regularly outbidding smaller programs, creating a system where athletes chase the highest bidder, often jumping schools mid-career.

“It’s the Wild West, bro,” the former Titans tackle added. “Right now it’s just, ‘who’s got the biggest bank account.’ That’s how I feel.”

This newly added upper limit for spending, Lewan believes, could restore some much-needed level of balance and loyalty in college football, which was missing in the last 4 years of the NIL era.

“Now we can kind of get back to, ‘I grew up a fan of this team, I’m loyal to this team,’” he said. “This is our team—not, ‘It’s springtime, I’m not getting enough snaps, I’m gonna get the hell out of here.’”

Will Compton, Lewan’s co-host, echoed similar concerns. However, he focused on what’s still missing: enforceability. “It’s legitimately, for me, like: when’s the rule going to come out where kids and athletes can be locked into multi-year deals?” Compton pondered.

That question cuts to the heart of the new model. While schools can now offer revenue-share contracts, their binding nature remains unclear. Recent high-profile cases, like Madden Iamaleava transferring from Arkansas to UCLA despite having a contract with a buyout clause, highlight how murky the NIL legal framework is.

“There’s so much money,” Lewan said. “All this is telling me, based on the little things I know, is $20.5 million is just being added to everything else that’s going on right now.”

And he’s not wrong. The NCAA expects compensation (between revenue share, scholarships, and benefits) to eventually reach close to a whopping 50% of athletic department revenue at some schools. That’s a dramatic departure from the amateur model that college sports were built on, and the scary part is, it’s only the beginning.

The former NFL star, however, continued championing the newly implemented cap by pointing out how it could also help solidify team culture and commitment, especially if combined with contract terms that actually stick. “Have one fixed area for free agency or the portal,” he said. “Then it’s a contract — you are here unless these things happen.”

But until courts settle whether these contracts are truly enforceable, schools will continue to operate in a legal grey zone.

For now, the only certainty is the number: $20.5 million. So until further notifications, every power-conference school will have to make it work within that limit, while still trying to land and retain top-tier talent.

With more than 70% of that money expected to go to football alone, expect the elite programs, those who already recruit well and spend big, to only strengthen their grip.

Because the question isn’t just who gets paid anymore. It’s who stays, and why. A sentiment Taylor Lewan summed up best: “Everyone’s getting paid, that’s great. But you chose to come here knowing the money was basically the same in a lot of places.”

On Friday, June 6, 2025, US District Judge Claudia Wilken of the United States District Court, Northern District of California, Oakland Division, finally approved the $2.8 billion settlement agreement arising from Case No. 4:20-cv-03919-CW In re: College Athlete NIL Litigation (“Settlement Agreement”), a class action lawsuit against the NCAA and the Power Five Conferences challenging their rules restricting payments to student-athletes, including payments related to student-athletes names, images, and likenesses (NIL) for commercial purposes. The Settlement Agreement will reshape college sports by allowing universities to pay student-athletes directly starting July 1, 2025, effectively ending the NCAA’s longstanding argument that student-athletes are amateurs and should, therefore, not be paid.

1. Background

2. Settlement Terms

The terms of the settlement included a release of claims by the class members in exchange for, among other terms, payment of back damages by the NCAA and the Power Five conferences in the amount of $2.8 billion to those class members, revenue sharing by colleges directly with student-athletes, and certain rule changes in the NCAA and the Power Five conferences allowing for payment directly from the universities. More specifically, the terms include:

1. Release of Claims

2. Change in Payment Rules

In exchange for the release of the claims by the class members, the NCAA and Power Five conferences agreed to change certain rules restricting payments made to college athletes, both from the institutions themselves, and from third parties. The rule changes include:

1. Changing the NCAA Division 1 and Power Five conferences’ rules to allow payments to student-athletes, so long as they are consistent with the limitations of the Settlement Agreement.[7]
2. Allowing Division 1 colleges and Division 1 student-athletes to enter into licensing and endorsement agreements for the use of that student athlete’s NIL, institutional brand promotion, or other rights, provided that the agreement is not for the right to use a student athlete’s NIL for a broadcast of college games.[8] This licensing or endorsement agreement may not extend for longer than the student-athletes eligibility to participate in NCAA sports.[9]
3. Prohibiting the NCAA from having any rules prohibiting student-athletes from receiving payments from third parties for NIL, as long as the student-athletes adhere to the reporting requirements under the Settlement Agreement.[10]
4. Requiring Division 1 student-athletes to report to their respective colleges, the NCAA and/or a third-party clearinghouse run by the accounting firm Deloitte any and all third-party NIL contracts or payments with a total value of six hundred dollars ($600) or more.[11] The clearinghouse will be responsible for assessing the fair market value of transaction by using data from past endorsement deals signed by college and professional athletes to determine if the payment should be considered “pay-for-play.”[12]
5. Requiring each Power Five conference school, and all non-Power Five schools who choose to provide payments or benefits under this Agreement, to report each NIL contract or payment reported to the college and any agreement between the student-athlete and the college.[13]

3. Back Damages

4. Revenue Sharing by the Schools

5. Roster Limits

3. Opposition

Several athletes spoke out against the Settlement Agreement at an approval hearing held on April 7, 2025, before Judge Wilken. The objections included arguments that settlement payments are inaccurate and lack transparency with how they are calculated, challenges to the imposed roster limits, arguing that they would unfairly reduce opportunities for athletes, and concerns over the disproportionate financial distributions to football and basketball over Olympic sports. One notable objection came from Livvy Dunne, a gymnast from Louisiana State University, and one of the most profitable athletes in the NIL era, who argued that some calculations of damages were not accurate based on the value of some of the more profitable athletes lost. Several other athletes argued that the roster limits would create less opportunities for student-athletes who would have otherwise had opportunities on college sports teams.

4. Open Questions

5. How Can We Help?

Whiteford is here to assist colleges and athletes navigate through this new era of NIL and college sports. Our team has extensive experience in advising clients on regulatory compliance, creating manuals, and providing guidance to ensure both athletes and their institutions are in compliance with the new NCAA rules and regulations. We continue to closely monitor the evolving and dynamic legal landscape affecting college sports.

College athletics have officially entered uncharted territory.

After the landmark decision by Judge Claudia Wilken in the House vs. NCAA Settlement case, colleges will be able to share up to $20.5 million of earned revenue with their student-athletes per year.

The settlement marks the first time in NCAA history that schools will legally be able to directly compensate student-athletes for their on-field performance. Despite the new ruling, student-athletes will still be able to receive compensation from their name, image and likeness (NIL), but schools no longer have to use an NIL collective to pay their players.

Although all the legal jargon can be hard to decipher and understand, what this means is that schools can finally play their athletes legally without having to jump through any loopholes or break any rules.

Colorado athletics director Rick George knows these changes can be hard to follow, but reassured Buffs Nation that CU has positioned itself to thrive in this new era of college sports.

“While the changes may seem drastic and sudden to those just learning about the settlement, we’ve been preparing for this eventuality for nearly a year,” said George in a press release after the ruling. “And I believe we’ve positioned CU Athletics to be successful in this new era of college athletics.”

George says the ruling mainly affects CU in three major ways: revenue sharing, third-party NIL and roster limits.

The revenue sharing aspect of CU’s plans post-ruling is self-explanatory: Colorado will pay its players. The question is just how much.

The $20.5 million allotment acts like a salary cap. Schools must split that sum of money among all sanctioned sports teams, although they are free to allocate that budget how they see fit.

For CU, that means giving most of the money to the sports that earn the most revenue.

“Each CU sport program will have a revenue-share budget that is proportional to the revenue that sport generates, but all of our student-athletes will be able to participate in revenue-sharing to some degree if they choose,” wrote George in a press release. “Each student-athlete will be given the opportunity to enter into a licensing agreement with CU Athletics.”

While the ruling states that schools aren’t required to share the full $20.5 allotment with their student-athletes, George says that CU intends to take full advantage of revenue share by using the full amount.

“While athletic departments are not required to compensate student-athletes up to the cap, in order to remain competitive, it is our intention to fully meet the $20.5 million responsibility,” wrote George in his press release.

Outside of the $20.5 million that will be paid directly to players from CU, athletes can still take advantage of third-party NIL deals.

“In addition to compensation provided directly by athletic departments, the Settlement allows student-athletes to continue to enter into third-party NIL agreements with businesses, who can use student-athletes to enhance their brands,” wrote George.

With the sweeping changes in the college athletics landscape, Colorado will no longer need its NIL collective. George and the school made the move to ditch CU’s “5430 Alliance” collective in January 2025 in preparation for this moment, and that decision has finally paid off.

This means that student-athletes can no longer rely on the 5430 Alliance to net them NIL deals. Instead, they’ll have to fish for those deals themselves.

George says that the school is looking into ways to streamline finding third-party NIL deals for CU student-athletes, but for now, the businesses and athletes will have to figure it out for themselves.

“I look forward to sharing more about the innovative initiatives we’re working on, but in the meantime, businesses can still directly support our student-athletes and that is crucial for the long-term success of our programs,” wrote George. “If you own a business or are a decision maker in your company, we need your support in engaging in third-party NIL agreements with our student-athletes.”

It’s unfortunately not all sunshine and roses for CU. As a replacement for scholarship limits, the settlement ruling will now implement strict roster limits for each sport. Football’s roster limit will be capped at 105 players, while basketball will be set at 15.

This won’t make too much of an impact on Colorado, as both the football and basketball programs have been known to keep smaller rosters, but it will likely result in some football players being dismissed from the program. It will also make it significantly harder for walk-ons to make the squad.

“The settlement has also replaced scholarship limits with roster limits, which has guided us in updating roster sizes for all of our sports,” wrote George. “Our approach is to be open-minded while fulfilling our responsibilities as outlined by the settlement and mandated by Title IX. The NCAA is permitting departments to potentially grandfather roster spots that had been removed, something CU will explore on a case-by-case basis.”

The house settlement ruling is no doubt exciting for college athletics, but it also will come with a fair share of hiccups and speed bumps. George has assured Colorado fans that their athletics department knows that challenges may lie ahead, but is prepared and willing to tackle them.

“There is no doubt this settlement will create challenges for our department and our student-athletes, but I know we’re prepared to meet these challenges head-on and to continue to provide a world-class experience for every Buff,” wrote George.

For more updates on Colorado athletics and the house settlement, make sure you’re staying up to date with us here at Ralphie Report.