ADVERTISEMENT
Last Updated on May 22, 2025 The ACC drove in record revenue from the fiscal year 2023-24, as tax documents reported that the conference brought in $711 million, up from last year’s $706 million. In turn, the conference was able to award a record-high average of $45 million to its 14 full-member schools. The two […]
Last Updated on May 22, 2025
The ACC drove in record revenue from the fiscal year 2023-24, as tax documents reported that the conference brought in $711 million, up from last year’s $706 million. In turn, the conference was able to award a record-high average of $45 million to its 14 full-member schools. The two teams that received the highest payout were Florida State, which earned $46.3 million, and Louisville, which earned $46.4 million. Additionally, Notre Dame received $20.7 million as a football independent.
It’s worth noting that the ACC’s record-breaking year did not include ACC newcomers SMU, California, and Stanford. Despite the milestones reached on revenue and school payouts, the ACC remains behind the SEC and Big Ten.
To close the gap, ACC Commissioner Jim Phillips implemented a “success initiative” that rewards schools with more revenue if they make the postseason. Starting next year, the ACC will enact its new TV revenue-sharing plan, allowing schools to receive bonuses for the games that draw the most viewership, particularly in football and men’s and women’s basketball.
Another critical aspect of the shared ACC tax documents was that the conference reportedly spent $12.3 million on legal fees, starkly contrasting the $7.2 million spent the previous year. That spending largely stems from legal disputes involving Florida State and Clemson, where both schools filed lawsuits over financial disparities that threatened their membership in the conference. With a new ESPN media rights deal extension locked in until the 2035-36 season and the additions of SMU, Cal, and Stanford, the ACC looks to forge a new chapter.
“I just think you’ve got to settle down,” Phillips said. “I think college athletics needs to settle down, not just the ACC. I think we’ve positioned ourselves for that. The chaos and constant wondering of what’s happening here or there, that distracts from the business at hand.”
Phillips emphasized that the ACC is in a good place despite some of the recent legal headlines.
“I feel good about where we’re at, and while I do take things one day at a time, I think there’s a period of time where let’s settle in and get things done,” Phillips said.
It won’t just be current and future college athletes benefitting from the passing of the House v. NCAA settlement. The House v. NCAA settlement was finalized on Friday, making it legal for universities to start directly paying student-athletes starting on July 1. Also part of the agreement was $2.8 billion in back payments for athletes […]
It won’t just be current and future college athletes benefitting from the passing of the House v. NCAA settlement.
The House v. NCAA settlement was finalized on Friday, making it legal for universities to start directly paying student-athletes starting on July 1. Also part of the agreement was $2.8 billion in back payments for athletes who competed between 2016 and 2024. That means former athletes can also benefit from theoretical money they missed out on from NIL opportunities, but there is a catch.
How much an athlete gets depends on the value of their lost possible NIL opportunities. Meaning, Baker Mayfield will not get paid the same as a former walk-on teammate who never saw the field. Payments could reportedly be between $1 and $1,859,000.
Most of the money will go to football and basketball players. However, that could be different for a school like Oklahoma, where a small-revenue sport like softball is so high on the food chain.
With this news, I created a list of OU athletes from during that time who certainly earned their pay and missed out on countless dollars during their time as a Sooner.
Baker Mayfield
Baker Mayfield could have been the richest man in Norman if he played during the NIL era. He was a Heisman Trophy winner, so obviously his play was worth a hefty paycheck, but NIL is even more than just what a player does on the field.
Mayfield’s personality stood out even more than what he did on the field as a fan-favorite. He was one of the most famous athletes in the country during his time at OU. Mayfield would had been an easy sell for anyone and would had been on more commercials than Petyon Manning while he was a Sooner.
Yes, Mayfield got a good payday as a No. 1 overall NFL Draft pick, but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t deserve all the money that was left on the table during his time at OU.
Trae Young
Hindsight is 20/20, but money spent on Trae Young would had been well-spent and just been funneled back into OU. He was one of the greatest freshmen in college basketball history after his 2017 season. Young and his name can also be thanked for getting the Sooners into the NCAA Tournament that season.
Now that he is getting paid handsomely, Young frequently gives back to the Norman community, has donated $1 million to OU basketball and serves as the Sooners’ assistant general manager while still playing in the NBA.
Jocelyn Alo
Jocelyn Alo certainly got her share of NIL deals, but any legend from OU softball deserves everything possible and then some, especially considering there’s no lucrative pro career for them no matter how good. Alo is worthy of getting a pretty paycheck after her college career.
Paige Parker
Paige Parker is another softball legend deserving of money she was never able to make just because of the sport she played and when she played it. The Sooners won back-to-back national titles in 2016-17 thanks to Parker, and that was the launching pad for OU transforming into a dynasty.
The Sooners have the most notable softball program in the country that’s constantly breaking attendance records, and it’s fair to say that might not have ever happened without Parker, who didn’t make a dime as a Sooner.
Read more about the Oklahoma Sooners
Over the years, the transfer portal and NIL have completely changed the landscape of college sports. The portal has become the professional sports version of free agency, while NIL funds have varied from school to school, something Virginia Tech has found out over time. When it comes to rules and regulations surrounding NIL, fans have […]
Over the years, the transfer portal and NIL have completely changed the landscape of college sports. The portal has become the professional sports version of free agency, while NIL funds have varied from school to school, something Virginia Tech has found out over time.
When it comes to rules and regulations surrounding NIL, fans have been paying close attention and listening to what has been going on with the house settlement, which brings rules regarding NIL and also supplies revenue sharing. It has been taking some time for a ruling to officially come down, and that decision came down late Friday night.
Judge Claudia Wilken officially signed off on the final approval to the proposed settlement.
The case could officially and finally shape college sports forever, and rules regarding NIL, the transfer portal, and revenue sharing. This decision by Judge Wilken all but eliminates concerns going forward, and now it’s up to the schools to go to work.
“Despite some compromises, the settlement agreement nevertheless will result in extraordinary relief for members of the settlement classes,” Wilken wrote in her 76-page final opinion. “If approved, it would permit levels and types of student-athlete compensation that have never been permitted in the history of college sports, while also very generously compensating Division I student-athletes who suffered past harms.”
Athletes will be allowed to be paid by their schools, and each program will be granted just over $20 million to share with athletes across a number of sports. Schools agreed to grandfather the scholarship athletes, which allows athletes to remain and not risk losing their scholarships currently. The NCAA will also pay former athletes $277 million per year over the next 10 years to compensate them for damages.
This decision finally paints a picture of what things will look like going forward, which is what college athletes, coaches, and fans have been waiting for.
The recent announcement on the NCAA settlement paving the way for players to be directly paid by schools has been met with mixed emotions already. Obviously, players who are in line to get a share of the $2.8 billion coffers are quite happy. Georgia fans, however, are looking at it in a different light and […]
The recent announcement on the NCAA settlement paving the way for players to be directly paid by schools has been met with mixed emotions already. Obviously, players who are in line to get a share of the $2.8 billion coffers are quite happy.
Georgia fans, however, are looking at it in a different light and see this as potentially damaging recruiting and roster building, putting unfair shackles on schools who have traditionally led the pack.
Beyond the settlement for former players dating back to 2016, current players can now be paid directly by the school, however there will be a cap on the amount allowed. That could mean that stacking a huge recruiting class of five and four-star players could be a thing of the past.
Some Georgia fans let their feelings be known.
Other fans voiced concern with this new model, calling it “unsustainable”, “damaging to recruiting”, and “forced parity”.
The feelings that this will damage Georgia’s recruiting are probably valid, but Kirby Smart has also been a master at navigating changes in the landscape of college football. His recruiting approach to building relationships, selling being on a winning team over being a big fish in a little pond, and NFL development will need to be adjusted for sure.
While this new system won’t mean the end of titles in Athens, it may bring an end to any one team dominating the sport for an extended period of time. In other words, RIP college football dynasties.
Judge Claudia Wilken announced the approval of the House v. NCAA settlement Friday in the U.S. Northern District of California. It’s a landmark decision that’s likely to usher in a revenue-sharing era among college sports, effectively allowing schools to pay their athletes. The ruling also created a clearinghouse for third-party NIL deals, which will have a say over […]
Judge Claudia Wilken announced the approval of the House v. NCAA settlement Friday in the U.S. Northern District of California. It’s a landmark decision that’s likely to usher in a revenue-sharing era among college sports, effectively allowing schools to pay their athletes.
The ruling also created a clearinghouse for third-party NIL deals, which will have a say over NIL arrangements of $600 or more.
“Despite some compromises, the settlement agreement nevertheless will result in extraordinary relief for members of the settlement classes,” Wilken wrote in her 76-page opinion. “If approved, it would permit levels and types of student-athlete compensation that have never been permitted in the history of college sports, while also very generously compensating Division I student-athletes who suffered past harms.”
We still have a long way to go before we fully understand the impact on college sports, especially football. One person who is not optimistic is ESPN and SEC Network host Paul Finebaum.
“I couldn’t help but think back about 10 years ago, when Mark Emmert, then the President of the NCAA, essentially said college athletes will be paid over my dead body. He’s still alive, but the NCAA is dead,” Finebaum said during an appearance on SportsCenter. “It may still be in existence. We’re still having tournaments, such as the Women’s World Series and the Men’s Baseball Tournament, but the NCAA, as we know it, is gone. They literally have no jurisdiction whatsoever other than to be tournament directors.
“This was supposed to level the playing field. Everybody pays the same into the kitty and then divides it up, but it will do anything but. The big will get bigger, and the small schools will simply slip away… Other than maybe in in basketball-only conferences that can use all that money for basketball, as opposed to, like, Alabama and Georgia and Ohio State, where they have to split up $20.5 million.”
Starting July 1, schools will be able to share $20.5 million with its athletes. Football is expected to receive 75%, followed by men’s basketball (15%), women’s basketball (5%) and all remaining sports (5%). Power Four football programs will have between $13 to $16 million to spend on rosters during the 2025 season under the settlement agreement.
Finebaum, known for his devotion to SEC football, views this situation as one that could jeopardize the momentum of women’s sports and non-revenue sports.
“The real casualty of all this, I believe, is going to be the one part of college athletics that has grown so much,” said Finebaum. “We watched the Women’s World Series last night, a million-dollar pitcher, by the way, for Texas Tech. Women’s sports, I think, are going to suffer from this. If you’re one of these Ohio States or Alabamas, and you’re dividing up $20.5 million, you know where most of it’s going, it’s going to football. That’s really a major casualty.
“College athletics did this to themselves. They’re not really suffering for it, because it’s a billion-dollar industry, but it’s going to be very uneven in the future. I think, at some point, fans are going to start tuning out. There’s such an existential threat to what we grew up loving, and we still do. It’s not going to be the same anymore.”
Finebaum is one of several prominent voices who see player compensation as the end of college athletics as we know it. Others might say that’s only fair considering the severe imbalance in profits generated by those institutions on the labors of those players.
College sports are indeed changing and getting more professional. However, they’ve been professional for a long time; the people in charge are only now being forced to acknowledge it.
Associated Press Sydney Moore and Sabrina Ootsburg were surrounded by hundreds of college athletes at AthleteCon when news broke that the $2.8 billion NCAA settlement had been approved by a federal judge. In a room full of college athletes, they felt like the only two people who understood the gravity of the situation. “I’m about […]
Associated Press
Sydney Moore and Sabrina Ootsburg were surrounded by hundreds of college athletes at AthleteCon when news broke that the $2.8 billion NCAA settlement had been approved by a federal judge. In a room full of college athletes, they felt like the only two people who understood the gravity of the situation.
“I’m about to get paid,” Moore said a Division I football player told her.
“Yes, you are about to get paid, and a lot of your women athlete friends are about to get cut,” she responded.
Moore acknowledged that her response might be a stretch, but the sprawling House settlement clears the way for college athletes to get a share of revenue directly from their schools and provides a lucky few a shot at long-term financial stability, it raises genuine concerns for others.
Schools that opt int will be able to share up to $20.5 million with their athletes over the next year starting July 1. The majority is expected to be spent on high-revenue generating sports, with most projections estimating 75% of funds will go toward football.
So what happens to the non-revenue-generating sports which, outside of football and basketball, is pretty much all of them?
It’s a query that’s top of mind for Ootsburg as she enters her senior year at Belmont, where she competes on track and field team.
“My initial thought was, is this good or bad? What does this mean for me? How does this affect me? But more importantly, in the bigger picture, how does it affect athletes as a whole?” Ootsburg said.
ADVERTISEMENT
“You look at the numbers where it says most of the revenue, up to 75% to 85%, will go toward football players. You understand it’s coming from the TV deals, but then it’s like, how does that affect you on the back end?” Ootsburg asked. “Let’s say 800k goes toward other athletes. Will they be able to afford other things like care, facilities, resources or even just snacks?”
Moore has similar concerns. She says most female athletes aren’t worried about how much – if any – money they’ll receive. They fear how changes could impact the student-athlete experience.
“A lot of us would much rather know that our resources and our experience as a student-athlete is going to stay the same, or possibly get better, rather than be given 3,000 dollars, but now I have to cover my meals, I have to pay for my insurance, I have to buy ankle braces because we don’t have any, and the athletic training room isn’t stocked,” Moore said over the weekend as news of Friday night’s settlement approval spread.
One of the biggest problems, Ootsburg and Moore said, is that athletes aren’t familiar with the changes. At AthleteCon in Charlotte, North Carolina, they said, perhaps the biggest change in college sports history was a push notification generally shrugged off by those directly impacted.
“Athletes do not know what’s happening,” Ootsburg said. “Talking to my teammates, it’s so new, and they see the headlines and they’re like, ‘Ok, cool, but is someone going to explain this?’ because they can read it, but then there’s so many underlying factors that go into this. This is a complex problem that you have to understand the nuances behind, and not every athlete truly does.”
Some coaches, too, are still trying to understand what’s coming.
Mike White, coach of the national champion Texas softball team, called it “the great unknown right now.”
“My athletic director, Chris Del Conte, said it’s like sailing out on a flat world and coming off the edge; we just don’t know what’s going to be out there yet, especially the way the landscape is changing,” he said at the Women’s College World Series in Oklahoma City. “Who knows what it’s going to be?”
Jake Rimmel got a crash course on the settlement in the fall of 2024, when he said he was cut from the Virginia Tech cross-country team alongside several other walk-ons. The topic held up the House case for weeks as the judge basically forced schools to give athletes cut in anticipation of approval a chance to play — they have to earn the spot, no guarantees — without counting against roster limits.
Rimmel packed up and moved back to his parents’ house in Purcellville, Virginia. For the past six months, he’s held on to a glimmer of hope that maybe he could return.
“The past six months have been very tough,” he said. “I’ve felt so alone through this, even though I wasn’t. I just felt like the whole world was out there – I would see teammates of mine and other people I knew just doing all of these things and still being part of a team. I felt like I was sidelined and on pause, while they’re continuing to do all these things.”
News that the settlement had been approved sent Rimmel looking for details.
“I didn’t see much about roster limits,” he said. “Everyone wants to talk about NIL and the revenue-sharing and I mean, that’s definitely a big piece of it, but I just didn’t see anything about the roster limits, and that’s obviously my biggest concern.”
The answer only presents more questions for Rimmel.
“We were hoping for more of a forced decision with the grandfathering, which now it’s only voluntary, so I’m a little skeptical of things because I have zero clue how schools are going to react to that,” Rimmel told The Associated Press.
Rimmel is still deciding what’s best for him, but echoed Moore and Ootsburg in saying that answers are not obvious: “I’m just hoping the schools can make the right decisions with things and have the best interest of the people who were cut.”
___
AP Sports Writer Cliff Brunt contributed.
___
AP college sports: https://apnews.com/hub/college-sports
recommended
The DBR wants your help! We are partnering with our good friends on the Duke Basketball Roundup podcast for a fun summer activity. It is a Duke fan survey to gauge everything from how you became a Duke fan, to your favorite Duke player, to your feelings about NIL and the transfer portal, and much, […]
The DBR wants your help! We are partnering with our good friends on the Duke Basketball Roundup podcast for a fun summer activity. It is a Duke fan survey to gauge everything from how you became a Duke fan, to your favorite Duke player, to your feelings about NIL and the transfer portal, and much, much more.
It contains about 20 questions but shouldn’t take more than a few minutes to fill out. A word of advice — don’t ponder too much, go with your gut on each of these Qs.
The Duke Basketball Roundup will be revealing the answers on their podcast starting in a couple weeks and we will publish the results here too. This is a great way to talk about what we love about Duke and what maybe worries us too… And without you it won’t be complete.
So click here and tell us all about your relationship with Duke hoops!
Portal Update – Basketball and Gymnastics Take Hits
Portal Update – Basketball and Gymnastics Take Hits
Jon Jones answers UFC retirement speculation as fans accuse champion of 'holding the belt …
Xavier Legette taught Marty Smith his signature celly
2025 NCAA Softball Tournament Bracket: Women’s College World Series bracket, schedule set
NCDC Commitment Profiles: Cyclones’ Martins Moving On to Saint Anselm College • USPHL
IU basketball recruiting
Today in the MHSAA
Why IHOP Rode With Dale Earnhardt Jr. In Amazon NASCAR Debut
Former Alabama QB Trusts Nick Saban to ‘Save College Football’ on New NIL Commission