Connect with us

NIL

Season of major parity for college football in 2025? Deep contender field looks to break glass ceiling

There’s a better-than-decent chance the preseason AP Top 25’s release will represent a shift in the college football landscape. The last decade has seen only four teams — Ohio State (1), Alabama (5), Clemson (2), Georgia (2) — hold the distinction of preseason No. 1. That’s likely to change in a few months.  Texas is […]

Published

on


There’s a better-than-decent chance the preseason AP Top 25’s release will represent a shift in the college football landscape. The last decade has seen only four teams — Ohio State (1), Alabama (5), Clemson (2), Georgia (2) — hold the distinction of preseason No. 1. That’s likely to change in a few months. 

Texas is the favorite to start in the top spot. It did so in 247Sports’ post-spring Top 25. CBS Sports’ Brandon Marcello has Ohio State at No. 1 in his post-spring top 25. Penn State could find itself ranked No. 1 like it did in Joel Klatt’s post-spring Top 25.

LSU, Oregon, and Notre Dame at least belong in the conversation. Clemson, which hasn’t really been part of the national title discussion since the advent of NIL, got my vote for preseason No. 1 in 247Sports’ too-early Top 25 voting.

There’s a fluidity among the 2025 projected contenders we haven’t seen in the last decade. Obviously, Ohio State, Georgia and Alabama haven’t gone away. But it no longer feels obvious that one of those recruiting juggernauts — they’ve made up the top three of the 247Sports Team Talent Composite rankings for seven straight years — is destined to win the national championship.

There’s a new era of parity in college football … sort of.  

Parity to a degree

Yes, NIL and the transfer portal have closed the gap in college football. But it also depends on what gap you’re talking about. In the end, high school recruiting remains the ultimate separator.

Have portal boons led to leaps in talent level for teams like Arizona State or Texas Tech? Absolutely. But there’s a reason why every national champion since 2013 reached Bud Elliott’s Blue Chip Ratio (in which 50% of its roster made up of four-star recruits or better). There’s a baseline of talent required to win in college football, especially in an era where teams must win three or four playoff games to earn a national title. Last year, Arizona State came within an eyelash of upsetting Texas, but the Sun Devils still had Ohio State and Notre Dame between them and a national title.

But it’s worth noting the difference between Georgia at No. 2 in the 2024 Team Talent Composite and say, Penn State at No. 11, is smaller than it’s ever been. That’s not because of the number of five-stars on each roster. Georgia is still more top heavy. Instead, it’s about depth. 

Blue Chip Ratio for 2024 season

Take Texas, for example.

The Longhorns — which came in at No. 4 in the 2024 Team Talent Composite — had two defensive tackles drafted on Day 2 of the 2025 NFL Draft. No problem, right? Just plug and go thanks to your recruiting wins. 

Not so fast. 

Seven DTs played 10-plus snaps behind that drafted pair for Texas last season. Two graduated. Four entered the transfer portal.

That’s how you get to a place where Texas, after four straight top-six recruiting classes, must sign FIVE defensive tackles in the portal. 

You can see examples like that across all the top rosters. Georgia lost the No. 3 player in the portal, Damon Wilson, to Missouri. Alabama lost its starting right tackle Elijah Pritchett to Nebraska. Clemson lost part-time starting DT Tre Williams to Michigan.

The top programs still have more talent than anyone, but other teams spend big to upgrade their rosters through the transfer portal. That makes keeping

depth pieces happy more difficult than it was a decade ago — when Nick Saban could basically stash a high-profile recruit for two or three years before they emerged as fully formed monsters. In this era, those players transfer after a season or two to get on the field. 

So, yes, there’s a still a gap in talent between Georgia and Penn State. But it’s a lot smaller than it was five years ago.

Legit roster questions for the usual favorites

Let’s run through the usual list of favorites — all of which ranked in the top five of the 2024 Team Talent Composite — and poke some holes in their 2025 chances.

Ohio State: The Buckeyes will either start Julian Sayin (12 career pass attempts) or Lincoln Kienholz (22 career pass attempts) at quarterback. They’re replacing two first-round picks on the offensive line, two Day 2 picks at running back and eight draft picks on defense. I haven’t even mentioned the loss of offensive coordinator Chip Kelly and defensive coordinator Jim Knowles. That’s a lot!

Georgia: Gunner Stockton solidified the starting QB role for Georgia in the Sugar Bowl. But it’s worth noting the Bulldogs were hunting transfer portal quarterbacks before that performance. He’s got a lot to prove. So do his receivers in a reworked room that suffered from drop issues a season ago.

Georgia faces questions along its defensive front after losing four starters to the NFL. The Bulldogs also produced their worst pass defense since 2020 last season and lost starting safeties Malaki Starks and Dan Jackson to the draft.

Alabama: We all watched the Vanderbilt and Georgia games from last season. Alabama, despite returning the 35th most production in the FBS, has a ton to prove next season in Year 2 under Kalen DeBoer.

Texas: Yep, the Longhorns belong here after two straight trips to the CFB semifinals. But Arch Manning, despite all the hype, has only really played significant snaps against UTSA, ULM and Mississippi State. His receivers are unproven. Both Texas’ offensive tackles got drafted. The defensive tackle room — the source of Texas’ defensive dominance the last two years — is completely reworked.

Will those teams be fine? Probably! I’d be shocked if any won fewer than nine or 10 games. But their rosters present enough questions to ponder some teams outside the usual suspects. 

Texas QB Arch Manning is uber talented, but the Longhorns are breaking in a group of new receivers and offensive linemen in 2025.
Getty Images

The other options

Penn State: NIL usually is mentioned with roster acquisitions: “Who can my favorite team go out and buy in the portal?” But Michigan and Ohio State have shown retention is the key over the past two seasons. Not necessarily retention with portal, though that’s important. Instead, retention with the NFL Draft.

Both Michigan and Ohio State convinced critical starters to return to school, largely because the NIL dollars they received were comparable to what they could have earned in the pros. This year Penn State quarterback Drew Allar, running backs Nicholas Singleton and Kaytron Allen and defensive lineman Dani Dennis-Sutton and Zane Durant all passed on the draft.

Thus, Penn State has the 33rd-most returning production in college football coming off a season where they were a few snaps away from a national title berth. Throw in a few key acquisitions in the portal, particularly at wide receiver, and the Nittany LIons are in the best position they has ever been under James Franklin.

Clemson: The latest CBS Sports mock draft has two Clemson players going in the top 10 next year, and other outlets have as many as six Tigers going in the first round. That shows the level of talent in Death Valley for a program brings back the most production of any team in the FBS. Throw in a few key portal additions — Dabo Swinney’s first ever non-walk-on-QB transfer takes — and the Tigers have the most proven roster in college football, including the potential No.1 overall pick in the 2026 NFL Draft in Cade Klubnik. 

Again, I have Clemson right now as the best team in college football and believe the Tigers are a strong favorite to win the ACC. Clemson being +1400 to win the national championship is tasty. There’s great value there. The Tigers are also +145 to win the ACC, per FanDuel Sportsbook. 

LSU: There’s an argument that Garrett Nussmeier is the top returning quarterback in college football this season. Add his presence to the No. 1 transfer portal class in the country, and the Tigers have filled almost every roster hole you can think of this offseason. If a re-armed defense can take a step forward, Brian Kelly will have a playoff team (and maybe much more) in Year 4. 

Meanwhile, Oregon and Notre Dame both also profile as contenders once again if their new QBs pan out the way the recruiting industry expects them to. That’s nine legit contenders entering 2025, and that’s not even counting teams like Auburn, Florida, Miami, Michigan and Texas A&M that all have an outside chance to force their way into the conversation if things break right. 

The run up to the preseason feels different for a reason. For the first time in a decade, more than just a handful of teams profile as contenders. It’s not true parity. It’s still very difficult to imagine a team outside the top 20 of the Team Talent Composite winning a national title. But for a sport so long occupied by just a handful of programs, the door finally feels like it’s cracked open for a few more. 





Link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

NIL

House v. NCAA settlement quells issues in college sports? No, but be prepared for a whole …

Judge Claudia Wilken approved the House v. NCAA settlement late Friday, ending three federal lawsuits that alleged the NCAA was illegally limiting the earning power of student-athletes in college. CBS Sports’ John Talty has a nice piece on it. My favorite line is his last. “There’s never been a better time to be a lawyer […]

Published

on

House v. NCAA settlement quells issues in college sports? No, but be prepared for a whole ...

Judge Claudia Wilken approved the House v. NCAA settlement late Friday, ending three federal lawsuits that alleged the NCAA was illegally limiting the earning power of student-athletes in college. CBS Sports’ John Talty has a nice piece on it. My favorite line is his last.

“There’s never been a better time to be a lawyer with an interest in college sports.”

Yeah, that’s where this is headed.

What happened Friday in California is significant, no doubt. But anybody describing it as a solution to the issues ailing college athletics simply lacks an understanding of the history of NCAA sports and exactly what will and won’t be allowed moving forward.

The end of chaos?

Nah.

It’ll just be a different kind of chaos that leads to more legal threats and billable hours than you can wrap your mind around. Plus, high-level cheating will return. Oh, we’re back baby! Illegal cash-deals are on tap.

The biggest winners and losers from House v. NCAA settlement: Amateurism is dead and the class divide grows

John Talty

The biggest winners and losers from House v. NCAA settlement: Amateurism is dead and the class divide grows

Before I explain why, let’s go over the basics.

This settlement will allow schools to start directly paying athletes — for the first time ever — next month with an expected salary cap of roughly $20.5 million. That’s $20.5 million for all sports to be distributed however each school sees fit. Additionally, all future NIL deals between boosters/collectives and athletes will be vetted by a new entity designed to ensure they’re for valid business purposes and not merely the kind of recruiting incentives that have been flying around the country in recent years.

That paragraph is littered with problems.

Let’s start with the salary cap. Simply put, it won’t work as intended.

As Matt Norlander and I have discussed many times on the Eye On College Basketball Podcast, the most obvious problem with a salary cap for entire athletic departments is that all athletic departments don’t have football rosters to purchase. In other words, at a place like Alabama, the school is expected to devote the majority of that $20.5 million to football, leaving relatively little for other sports, most notably men’s basketball. Meantime, at a place like St. John’s, where there is no football, most of that $20.5 million could be spent however Hall of Fame basketball coach Rick Pitino sees fit.

Now, let’s be real.

Do you actually think a SEC school with millions tied up in football is going to concede a recruiting battle in basketball to a Big East program sans football because, you know, the money just isn’t in the budget, according to the rules? LOL. When it comes to that, not all basketball staffs, but certainly lots, will simply do what they’ve always done, i.e., find a way to get the player even if it requires circumventing the rules.

Again, this weekend, cheating returned to college sports.

It’s inevitable.

Every Power Four conference features a coach who has violated one recruiting rule or another. If you think they won’t do it again, if required, you’re silly. And now every time a player picks a school with little known-money left in the budget over a school that’s reportedly offering much more, fans on the wrong end of the commitment will assume something happened in violation of the rules and scream for an investigation.

We lived that life for decades. Who really wanted that again?

And don’t even get me started on the document Power Four conferences are circulating that’s intended to force schools to play by the rules or face serious consequences. Among other things, schools are being asked to forfeit their right to legally challenge the new enforcement entity on any and all decisions. Reportedly, schools that refuse to sign the document could face expulsion from their conferences.

Please.

All it will take for this goofy idea to fail is one powerful school — like, say, Texas or Ohio State — declining to sign it, at which point other schools will say, “If they’re not signing it, we’re not signing it.”

Then what?

Do you really think the SEC is going to expel Texas? Do you really think the Big Ten is going to expel Ohio State? Do you really think the television networks paying billions to those conferences would allow it?

Please.

Now, to NIL.

According to the settlement, a new thing called the NIL Go clearinghouse will be charged with approving future NIL deals to ensure they are within a “reasonable range of compensation based on multiple factors.”

I look forward to the word “reasonable” appearing in court.

Don’t ever forget how we got here — specifically by the NCAA being sued repeatedly for illegally limiting the earning power of student-athletes. So what do you think is going to happen when a school with serious softball ambitions like Texas Tech offers a NIL deal worth more than a million dollars to the next NiJaree Canaday? Let me tell you. NIL Go will likely deem the deal “unreasonable” for obvious reasons and void it. Then everybody will be back in court based on the idea that, once again, a student-athlete’s earning power is being illegally limited.

Rinse and repeat.

Last month, NIL Go officials told ACC administrators that more than 70% of current NIL deals with booster collectives would have been denied according to the new rules. That suggests NIL Go will frequently be in the business of telling student-athletes they cannot take what somebody is willing to give them, and not every student-athlete will accept that decision without pursuing legal action.

The end of chaos?

Hahaha. No way!

Trust me when I tell you, this is only the beginning. Because when a solution to a problem just creates more problems, you’re not really fixing anything as much as you’re simply trading in one set of issues for a new set of issues that will have to be addressed again, sooner or later. Like Talty wrote, congrats to the attorneys. They’re the real winners here, as always.

Continue Reading

NIL

5 House settlement changes college fans will notice immediately

NCAA Division I Board of Directors has taken action to approve rules changes that — if the proposed House-NCAA settlement is approved — will align the D-1 rule book with terms of the settlement. pic.twitter.com/5jHvVu1UVA — Steve Berkowitz (@ByBerkowitz) April 21, 2025 It’s a new dawn in the world of college athletics. On Friday night […]

Published

on


It’s a new dawn in the world of college athletics. On Friday night the long-awaited $2.8 billion House settlement was approved, officially ushering in an era where schools can directly pay players.

Immediately after the landmark agreement, a number of new entities and executives emerged to lead college sports into the future. While this is all expected to play out in the coming months and years, there is already A LOT of moving pieces.

GAME THE SYSTEM: 5 petty ways fans can weaponize EA Sports usage payouts in College Football 26

You can read all about what’s included in the settlement here, but if you’re looking for a quick breakdown of some of the more immediate changes, we’ve got you covered.

Here are the people, terms and regulations you need to know about.

The College Sports Commission

Say goodbye to the NCAA’s wildly unpopular enforcement and penalty process, and say hello to its replacement: the newly-created College Sports Commission. You’re going to be hearing about it a lot when it officially begins operations on July 1, 2025.

Here’s what the new oversight authority will be in charge of policing, per USA TODAY’s Steve Berkowitz:

▶Rules-making.

▶Managing the NIL Go system, an electronic system that athletes will be required to use to report the details of their NIL deals with entities other than their schools.

▶Figuring out how to determine the legitimacy of those deals, and how to deal with appeals by athletes, who — under the settlement — can seek arbitration if they want to challenge a determination that a deal is not legitimate relative to having a “valid business purpose” and being within “a reasonable range of compensation.”

▶Forming a new regulatory and enforcement entity that will be led newly named chief executive officer Bryan Seeley. According to the announcement of his hiring on June 6, Seeley “will build out the organization’s investigative and enforcement teams and oversee all of its ongoing operations and stakeholder relationships. … Seeley and his team will also be responsible for enforcement of the new rules around revenue sharing, student-athlete third-party name image and likeness (NIL) deals, and roster limits. 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.” 

Speaking of enforcement, the CSC is expected to resolve any investigations within 45 days — a major shift from the long, drawn out NCAA investigations fans have come to expect. The CSC’s CEO can be the judge, jury and executioner here with the ability to impose fines and penalties.

College Sports Commission CEO Bryan Seeley

For all intents and purposes, Seeley is the new top dog when it comes to college sports compliance. He was hired by the four power conference commissioners (ACC’s Jim Phillips, Big Ten’s Tony Petitti, Big 12’s Brett Yormark and SEC’s Greg Sankey).

So here’s the skinny, per ESPN’s Jeff Passan and Pete Thamel:

Seeley is MLB’s executive vice president, legal & operations, and he brings investigative experience, which will be key in this role. In the post-settlement era, the NCAA will no longer be in charge of the enforcement of most rules. (It will still maintain purview over things like academics, but it will not patrol benefits.)

The CSC is the new era’s enforcement arm that will have final say in doling out punishments and deciding when rules have been broken. It’s one of the most important roles in this new era, as the industry has been craving some type of guidance since the advent of name, imagine and likeness has made the descriptor “wild, wild west” a common one in regard to the generally unregulated college sports industry.

In a formal announcement, Seeley’s job is described as having to “build out the organization’s investigative and enforcement teams and oversee all of its ongoing operations and stakeholder relationships.” Per the release: “Seeley and his team will also be responsible for enforcement of the new rules around revenue sharing, student-athlete third-party name image and likeness (NIL) deals, and roster limits.”

Some more quick facts about Seeley:

  • 42 years old
  • Joined MLB as Vice President, Investigations & Deputy General Counsel in 2014
  • Served as Assistant U.S. Attorney in Washington D.C. from 2006-2014, prosecuting white-collar crimes, fraud and corruption
  • Attended Princeton University and Harvard Law School

NIL GO

No, this is not the latest streaming service. It’s a clearinghouse established by Deloitte to handle number-crunching and maintain compliance between schools, athletes and third parties. It will also fall under the CSC’s purview.

Per ESPN’s Pete Thamel and Jeff Passan:

LBi Software and accounting firm Deloitte have been lined up to handle salary cap management and to manage the clearinghouse for NIL. Those NIL deals will be outside of the revenue share directly from schools, and how they are approved has been the focus of much conversation around college sports.

The clearinghouse that Deloitte has established will be known as NIL Go, which will be used to verify whether deals between athletes and boosters or associated entities are for a valid business purpose rather than a recruiting incentive.

Whether or not a school opts in to provide NIL payments to athletes, any Division I athletes who signs an NIL deal worth $600 or more will have to go through NIL GO.

Salary Cap And Roster Limits

Yep, it’s happening in college sports.

Schools will start with a $20.5 million cap that’s set to increase by four percent annually, with a notable caveat, per Berkowitz:

In Years 4, 7 and 10, new baselines would be established based on the defined set of Power Five athletics department revenues. However, under certain circumstances connected to the timing and value of media rights contracts, the plaintiffs’ lawyers have two options during the 10-year settlement period to have new baselines set more quickly.

The settlement was temporarily help up in court by the issue of roster limits, as programs already began cutting walk-ons and other players in anticipation of the salary cap. That was resolved through a “grandfathering” agreement that will delay some roster limits if players were already promised a spot.

Per CBS Sports:

[U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken] asked attorneys to craft a plan to allow current players to be “grandfathered in” with the new roster limits. The NCAA, power conferences and the plaintiffs in the lawsuit instead offered a compromise: schools have the option to keep current players on their rosters and temporarily exceed new limits until their eligibility expires.

The new roster limits were expected to lead to the cutting of nearly 5,000 athletes from teams across the NCAA’s 43 sponsored sports. Some sports will increase roster limits compared to previous years, but many will be trimmed despite offering unlimited scholarships within those new thresholds. Football rosters will shrink to 105 players, resulting in schools cutting more than 20 players, though most schools are expected to exceed those limits by grandfathering in current athletes.

March 1 Deadline For Non-Power 5 Schools

The start of March has now become one of the most crucial days on the sports calendar as non-Power 5 schools will have to declare by then whether or not they are opting into revenue sharing for the following academic year.

Per the CSC:

All current members of the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC are participating in the new revenue sharing model overseen by the College Sports Commission. Division I schools from other conferences can choose to “opt in” to revenue sharing and must formally do so by June 15, 2025, at which point a full list of participating schools will be made public.

Each year, schools outside of the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC will have the option to opt in to or out of revenue sharing. These schools must notify the NCAA if they will opt in to (or opt out of) revenue sharing for the upcoming academic year by March 1 of each year. In order to opt out, an institution must have fulfilled any relevant obligations to student-athletes and all revenue sharing – or incremental increases in scholarship – must cease.

It is important to note that regardless of whether an institution opts in to revenue sharing, all Division I student-athletes will be subject to the new rules and requirements around third-party NIL deals.

This is a whole new world of college athletics and there’s a lot to process here. We’ll continue to break down all the developments over the coming months (and years).





Link

Continue Reading

NIL

Judge approves NCAA settlement allowing schools to pay athletes: Winners and losers

A federal judge signed off on arguably the biggest change in the history of college sports Friday, clearing the way for schools to begin paying their athletes millions as soon as next month as the multibillion-dollar industry shreds the last vestiges of the amateur model that defined it for more than a century. Nearly five […]

Published

on


A federal judge signed off on arguably the biggest change in the history of college sports Friday, clearing the way for schools to begin paying their athletes millions as soon as next month as the multibillion-dollar industry shreds the last vestiges of the amateur model that defined it for more than a century.

Nearly five years after Arizona State swimmer Grant House sued the NCAA and its five biggest conferences to lift restrictions on revenue sharing, U.S. Judge Claudia Wilken approved the final proposal that had been hung up on roster limits, just one of many changes ahead amid concerns that thousands of walk-on athletes will lose their chance to play college sports.

The sweeping terms of the so-called House settlement include approval for each school to share up to $20.5 million with athletes over the next year and $2.7 billion that will be paid over the next decade to thousands of former players who were barred from that revenue for years.

Syracuse University has said it intends to distribute the full $20.5 million spending cap on its athletes, though it has declined to say how that money will be distributed across football, men’s and women’s basketball and the other sports.

Le Moyne, which recently moved its sports programs to compete in Division I, has not said how much it will pay its players. Division I schools can choose to “opt in” to revenue sharing by June 15.

All Division I athletes will be subject to the new rules around third-party pay regardless of whether their school opts in to revenue sharing.

One of the lead plaintiff attorneys, Steve Berman, called Friday’s news “a fantastic win for hundreds of thousands of college athletes.”

The agreement brings a seismic shift to hundreds of schools that were forced to reckon with the reality that their players are the ones producing the billions in TV and other revenue, mostly through football and basketball, that keep this machine humming.

The scope of the changes — some have already begun — is difficult to overstate. The professionalization of college athletics will be seen in the high-stakes and expensive recruitment of stars on their way to the NFL and NBA, and they will be felt by athletes whose schools have decided to pare their programs. The agreement will resonate in nearly every one of the NCAA’s 1,100 member schools boasting nearly 500,000 athletes.

NCAA President Charlie Baker said the deal “opens a pathway to begin stabilizing college sports.”

The road to a settlement

Wilken’s ruling comes 11 years after she dealt the first significant blow to the NCAA ideal of amateurism. Then, she ruled in favor of former UCLA basketball player Ed O’Bannon and others seeking a way to earn money from the use of their name, image and likeness (NIL) — a term that is now as common in college sports as “March Madness” or “Roll Tide.”

It was just four years ago that the NCAA cleared the way for NIL money to start flowing, but the changes coming are even bigger.

Wilken granted preliminary approval to the settlement last October. That sent colleges scurrying to determine not only how they were going to afford the payments, but how to regulate an industry that also allows players to cut deals with third parties so long as they are deemed compliant by a newly formed enforcement group that will be run by auditors at Deloitte.

The agreement takes a big chunk of oversight away from the NCAA and puts it in the hands of the four biggest conferences. The ACC, Big Ten, Big 12 and SEC hold most of the power and decision-making heft, especially when it comes to the College Football Playoff, which is the most significant financial driver in the industry and is not under the NCAA umbrella like the March Madness tournaments are.

Roster limits held things up

The deal looked ready to go, but Wilken put a halt to it this spring after listening to a number of players who had lost their spots because of newly imposed roster limits being placed on teams.

The limits were part of a trade-off that allowed the schools to offer scholarships to everyone on the roster, instead of only a fraction, as has been the case for decades. Schools started cutting walk-ons in anticipation of the deal being approved.

Wilken asked for a solution and, after weeks, the parties decided to let anyone cut from a roster — now termed a “Designated Student-Athlete” — return to their old school or play for a new one without counting against the new limit.

Wilken ultimately agreed, going point-by-point through the objectors’ arguments to explain why they didn’t hold up. The main point pushed by the parties was that those roster spots were never guaranteed in the first place.

“The modifications provide Designated Student-Athletes with what they had prior to the roster limits provisions being implemented, which was the opportunity to be on a roster at the discretion of a Division I school,” Wilken wrote.

Her decision, however, took nearly a month to write, leaving the schools and conferences in limbo — unsure if the plans they’d been making for months, really years, would go into play.

“It remains to be seen how this will impact the future of inter-collegiate athletics — but as we continue to evolve, Carolina remains committed to providing outstanding experiences and broad-based programming to student-athletes,” North Carolina athletic director Bubba Cunningham said.

Winners and losers

The list of winners and losers is long and, in some cases, hard to tease out.

A rough guide of winners would include football and basketball stars at the biggest schools, which will devote much of their bankroll to signing and retaining them. For instance, Michigan quarterback Bryce Underwood’s NIL deal is reportedly worth between $10.5 million and $12 million.

Losers, despite Wilken’s ruling, figure to be at least some of the walk-ons and partial scholarship athletes whose spots are gone.

Also in limbo are the Olympic sports many of those athletes play and that serve as the main pipeline for a U.S. team that has won the most medals at every Olympics since the downfall of the Soviet Union.

All this is a price worth paying, according to the attorneys who crafted the settlement and argue they delivered exactly what they were asked for: an attempt to put more money in the pockets of the players whose sweat and toil keep people watching from the start of football season through March Madness and the College World Series in June.

What the settlement does not solve is the threat of further litigation.

Though this deal brings some uniformity to the rules, states still have separate laws regarding how NIL can be doled out, which could lead to legal challenges. Baker has been consistent in pushing for federal legislation that would put college sports under one rulebook and, if he has his way, provide some form of antitrust protection to prevent the new model from being disrupted again.



Link

Continue Reading

NIL

Blue Jays Roundup: Avery Graves named All-State

Jun. 6—JAMESTOWN — One Blue Jay was recognized as one of the best in the state of North Dakota. Avery Graves, a junior for the Jamestown High School softball team, was named to the 2025 Class A Softball All-State Team on Friday. Advertisement Graves, the starting first baseman, posted a batting average of .449 and […]

Published

on


Jun. 6—JAMESTOWN — One Blue Jay was recognized as one of the best in the state of North Dakota.

Avery Graves, a junior for the Jamestown High School softball team, was named to the 2025 Class A Softball All-State Team on Friday.

Advertisement

Graves, the starting first baseman, posted a batting average of .449 and a slugging percentage of .692 this season. The senior produced 48 hits — 32 singles, 11 doubles and five home runs. The junior recorded 48 RBIs.

2025 Class A Softball All-State Team

Avery Graves, Jamestown

Halle Baker, Minot

Madison Aadland, West Fargo Sheyenne

Jocelyn Berg, Grand Forks Red River

Riley Ingemansen, Legacy

Rylee Irgens, Williston

Mya Jones, Bismarck High

Katelyn Kackman, West Fargo

Olivia Kalbus, Fargo North

Aubrey King, Fargo North

Mackenna Medina, Dickinson

Jada Purdy, Fargo North

Sophia Rerick, Fargo Davies

Cadey Shipman, Minot North

Advertisement

Gabi Sobolik, Dickinson

Brooklyn Soderberg, Grand Forks Red River

Presley Tveter, West Fargo Sheyenne

Kaebry Weekes, Mandan

Ali Wilcox, Williston

NDHSCA POWERade Outstanding Senior Athlete — Aubrey King, Fargo North

NDHSCA SUBWAY Coach of the Year — Jesse Stundal, Williston



Link

Continue Reading

NIL

EA Sports to pay schools based on how often they’re played in new College Football video game

The long-awaited approval of the House settlement late Friday night is supposed to make it more difficult for individuals to affect the NIL market. Moving forward, players will be paid through highly-regulated revenue share payments directly from their schools, and third-party-approved NIL payments for “legitimate” business purposes. But if every single gamer gets together and […]

Published

on


The long-awaited approval of the House settlement late Friday night is supposed to make it more difficult for individuals to affect the NIL market. Moving forward, players will be paid through highly-regulated revenue share payments directly from their schools, and third-party-approved NIL payments for “legitimate” business purposes. But if every single gamer gets together and decides to play EA Sports College Football 26 exclusively as the Akron Zips, together they can potentially tip the balance of power in the Mid-American Conference.

In short, schools will receive royalty payments for how often users play as them within the game. From the documents:

“For each CFB product released by EA SPORTS, we (CLC Learfield) will provide a percentage for each institution based on the games played for that institution as a percentage of the total games played across all institutions. This percentage of games played will become the final allocation percentage for each school that will be applied to the total gross royalties for all institutions received.”

Now, we have lots of questions:

1) How much money is set aside in this fund?
2) How is EA calculating what percentage of total revenue goes into this fund? Typically, royalties are derived from a percentage of overall sales — i.e., if I sell 100 Albert the Gator keychains for $5 apiece, the University of Florida would get 10 percent of that $500. But EA gets its money when people buy the game, not when they play it.
3) Does this royalty fund last forever? Are schools going to be getting checks in 2031 for how often they’re being played in College Football 26?

College Football 25 needed only five months to become the best-selling sports video game of all-time, and it was streamed a reported 1.7 billion times. It’s unlikely the sequel will duplicate those numbers given the decade-plus wait for College Football 25, but 26 will still be a widely-selling game.

The new royalty structure replaces the previous edition, where EA Sports slotted teams into tiers based on how often they appeared in the year-end AP Top 25 over the previous decade. The 13 schools who made it into Tier 1 received nearly $100,000 in royalties apiece, while the 54 schools in Tier 4 netted around $10,000.

All 136 FBS schools opted into EA’s new pay-for-play royalty structure, so clearly they believe this system has more in it for them.

The players will also see higher checks for appearing in 26 vs. 25. Each player received a $600 check and a free copy of the game for appearing in College Football 25, but in 26 they’ll receive between $1,500 and $3,000 apiece. 



Link

Continue Reading

NIL

College sports power conferences hire MLB exec to serve in CEO role after House v. NCAA settlement approval

College sports’ power conferences — Big Ten, SEC, ACC and Big 12 — have hired a high-profile investigator in professional sports to lead their new governing body that will oversee revenue sharing and NIL contracts. MLB executive Bryan Seeley has been hired after a months-long search for a CEO to lead the new College Sports […]

Published

on


College sports’ power conferences — Big Ten, SEC, ACC and Big 12 — have hired a high-profile investigator in professional sports to lead their new governing body that will oversee revenue sharing and NIL contracts.

MLB executive Bryan Seeley has been hired after a months-long search for a CEO to lead the new College Sports Commission, a spokesperson for the power conferences told CBS Sports on Friday. Seeley emerged as the leader in May as the four commissioners, alongside a group of athletic directors, began finalizing plans for implementation of the long-awaited House v. NCAA settlement, which was approved on Friday.

All four power conference commisioners released a joint statement commending Seeley’s hiring.

“Bryan brings unwavering integrity and a wealth of relevant experience to his new role leading the College Sports Commission and working to ensure a smooth implementation of this new system,” the statement read. “We’re grateful to have an individual with his credentials and expertise at the helm, and we look forward to his leadership as we transition into this new era of college sports.”

Seeley has spent the last decade working for MLB, where he is currently the executive vice president of legal and operations. He was hired in September 2014 to lead MLB’s investigation department after a career as a federal prosecutor and an assistant U.S. Attorney for the Department of Justice’s public corruption section.

“Bryan is an exceptional choice to lead the College Sports Commission,” Major League Baseball Commissioner Rob Manfred said. “During his time at MLB, Bryan demonstrated unparalleled integrity, a commitment to fairness, and the ability to navigate complex challenges with precision and care. I have no doubt he will bring the same level of excellence to the College Sports Commission. College sports will greatly benefit from Bryan’s expertise and vision.”

House v. NCAA settlement fundamentally alters college athletics, but don’t expect it to bring stability

Chris Hummer

House v. NCAA settlement fundamentally alters college athletics, but don't expect it to bring stability

He had an extensive career as an investigator for MLB, where he led baseball’s investigation into sign stealing, which led to penalties for the Houston Astros and Boston Red Sox. He recently penned a letter to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission lobbying for more integrity for exchange-based platforms. 

Seeley will report directly to the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12 and SEC’s commissioners in his new role. Seeley worked alongside Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti when Petitti led the MLB Network in the late 2010s. Petitti was crucial in the targeting of Seeley as the CSC’s new CEO, sources told CBS Sports.

On Friday, Judge Claudia Wilken finally approved the $2.8 billion settlement after weeks of waiting from plaintiffs and the defendants in the landmark antitrust case. The CSC will be overseen by the power conferences and mostly operate outside the NCAA’s rules-enforcement umbrella.

The CSC will police and enforce NIL and revenue-sharing rules tied to the terms of the House settlement. In essence, the CSC is set to become a smaller, more agile version of the NCAA’s enforcement arm. The CEO will have final say on settlement-related items and enforcement of fair market value NIL deals of greater than $600, according to sources. 

Scrutinized NIL deals would be subject to arbitration, and if the third party sides with the CSC’s findings, players and universities would face penalties — the severity of which is not yet entirely known. The new CEO is expected to have considerable latitude to penalize as they see fit, according to those familiar with the situation, and won’t be boxed into a strict penalty structure that must be followed. 

An athlete who accepts a deal flagged by a Deloitte-administered clearinghouse called “NIL Go” as “pay for play” and does not meet a fair market value range would be ruled ineligible. The clearinghouse will give a range — say $75,000-$85,0000 — on what a deal should be worth based on market data and will flag a deal that fits the criteria but is for more than that amount. While the NCAA’s investigations typically take months to years, the CSC is expected to conduct and close investigations in a considerably more timely manner. The hope is that the process will be more transparent, too, and give schools more opportunity to have a say in it. 

Meanwhile, the membership agreement for the CSC has prompted questions about its legality in a system that has been under attack in the court system for years, from the O’Bannon case to Alston to House, which was filed in 2020 and helped lead to the implementation of NIL regulations from the NCAA in 2021. Those regulations, however, have proven toothless in the face of legal challenges and legislation in more than 30 states. The question that arises now anytime new rules are introduced: Is this legally enforceable?

The thinking among college leaders is the CSC will have some legal protection because of the House settlement. Current players who opt into the settlement are bound to the terms, which include the formation of the CSC as an enforcement entity. That entity, as explained in the settlement terms, is required to install a binding arbitration process, which players are required to follow as members of the settlement. Essentially, the athletes cannot sue over a deal flagged as not meeting fair market value. 

“Unless the new state laws specifically create a new legal claim that gives them right to sue, which I don’t think they do, the players’ legal claims would still be wiped out by the settlement,” said Sam Ehrlich, a sports law professor at Boise State. “And even if the rules do allow players to sue, there’s a strong argument that the settlement also blocks similar claims under state law since it’s a similar field of law.”





Link

Continue Reading

Most Viewed Posts

Trending