ORLANDO, Fla. — A new era of college athletics has begun with the approval of the House settlement on June 6. Starting on July 1, institutions such as Florida, Florida State and UCF began the process of offering revenue sharing to their athletes. Here are some of the top questions about that process:

How will schools pay for it?

Any school that aims to remain competitive in football will fully commit to the settlement terms. But a $20.5 million obligation to athletes, both recurring and expected to increase, will strain even the richest athletic programs.

To meet any new expense requires a revenue increase, expense reduction or both. In 2026, SEC schools will receive more TV money from ESPN, which currently pays more than $800 million to televise the league’s sporting events. The SEC reportedly could make another $50-$80 million if it were to go from eight to nine conference games. Expanding the College Football Playoff from 12 to 16 games would produce another financial windfall.

Other schools, such as UCF, have also been fundraising, asking fans or boosters to donate to the Competitive Success Fund to help meet the goal of $20.5 million for its revenue pool.

On a smaller scale, athletic departments are reducing expenses on the margins. UF’s University Athletic Association required every department and sports program to cut its budget by 5%, saving a few million in the process.

Prices for tickets and other costs at events are sure coast to coast to rise, too. Student fees for athletics also could. Tennessee plans to charge football ticket holders a “talent fee” to go to athletes. Layoffs could sadly become part of the equation.

Who’ll get paid, and who’ll get stiffed?

SEC schools will commit $2.5 million to new scholarships, leaving $18 million in revenue sharing with athletes. Some schools are reluctant to share plans, but Georgia publicly offered a framework: 75% for football ($13.5 million); 15% for men’s basketball ($2.7 million); 5% for women’s basketball ($900,000) and the remaining 5% for other programs.

While the amount for football should be fairly standard, it could get tricky elsewhere. South Carolina finished last in the SEC in men’s basketball, but won two of the past four women’s titles (2022, 2024) and lost to UConn in the 2025 title game. LSU won the 2023 women’s title, while the men lost in the first round of the NIT. Gamecocks coach Dawn Staley and LSU’s Kim Mulkey should command, and could demand a bigger piece of the pie.

Examples are sure to abound at schools with traditions of success across the board. Lawsuits are likely to follow. With rev share disproportionately smaller for female athletes, some could claim violations of Title IX law instituted in 1972 to ensure equal opportunity at educational institutions. Conversely, football could argue it generates most of the revenue.

At UF, athletic director Scott Stricklin said athletes at each of the school’s 21 sports programs will benefit financially from either revenue sharing, increased scholarship money or Alston payments, based on a federal ruling awarding money to athletes to meet academic expenses.

How will NIL collectives operate?

The launch of name, image and likeness legislation spawned organizations to facilitate sponsorships or fund-raise to pay athletes. Pay-for-play quickly became the modus operandi. The fact that collectives operated independently of the athletic departments allowed tens of millions to flow to top athletes without oversight or accountability.

Even the Jaden Rashada fiasco at UF, involving a $13.8 million promise to a high school quarterback, did not stem the flow of cash, curtail aggressive dealmaking or stop athletes and their camps from going to the highest bidder.

Now that NIL payments will be vetted, collectives will have to market athletes, help big-money donors get creative and generate many three- and four-figure deals, not focus on five-, six- and seven-figure ones. In short, collectives will be asked to do what was intended, but ultimately ignored due to a lack of rules amid a high-stakes competition to attract talent.

Who comprises the College Sports Commission?

The College Sports Commission was created to oversee the implementation of the House settlement. Its membership consists of representatives from the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC and Pac-12. The CEO of the organization is Bryan Seeley, a former Major League Baseball executive.

The CSC answers to a board of directors, which consists of conference commissioners from the Power 4 leagues: ACC, Big Ten, Big 12 and SEC.

“There will be a separate governing body, the College Sports Commission, which will oversee this,” said UCF athletics director Terry Mohajir. “It’s going to have its own CEO that will basically oversee the enforcement, and there’ll be a chief investigator officer. We need a level playing field.”

How would buyout clauses work in revenue-sharing?

Buyout clauses are a standard feature in many NIL deals, as companies and collectives aim to address potential complications that may arise when an athlete decides to transfer to another team or organization. This same idea will also be integrated into revenue-sharing agreements. If an athlete transfers, they could risk losing a portion of their earnings. The new school they move to would then be responsible for covering the buyout amount, which would also count against their revenue-sharing cap.

“That’s going to be messy the first year or two as everybody figures out the math behind all of this,” said Kristi Dosh, author of “The Athlete’s NIL Playbook.” “You can’t give all your revenue sharing pool to your athletes who are coming in the fall because if you do that, you’re not going to have any money left over for the [transfer] portal. Your money doesn’t replenish until July 1, 2026. From a budgeting perspective, everybody’s just making educated guesses.”

According to an FAQ released during the approval of the House settlement, if an athlete receives $100,000 from a school (A) and receives $50,000 at the beginning of the academic year, but chooses to transfer to school (B), that institution would have to reimburse school (A) $50,000. It would be deducted from school B’s revenue-share pool.

© 2025 The Sentinel (Carlisle, Pa.). Visit www.cumberlink.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Hugh Freeze Makes Concerning Admission on Auburn’s NIL Budget originally appeared on Athlon Sports.

It has not been a good week to be an Auburn Tigers fan.

On Wednesday, five-star recruits Earnest Rankins and Cederian Morgan committed to the Florida State Seminoles and the Alabama Crimson Tide, respectively, with each prospect having Auburn on their shortlist heading into the week.

Advertisement

Auburn is not only struggling to land commitments, but they are also failing to keep those who had previously pledged their allegiance to The Plains. With 2026 four-stars Denarius Gray and Shadarius Toodle denouncing their commitments from Auburn in the past week, the Tigers are now ranked 89th regarding the 2026 recruiting class, per 247Sports.

Auburn houses just six hard commits, highlighted by four-star edge rusher Hezekiah Harris and four-star quarterback and former Penn State Nittany Lions commit Peyton Falzone.

For head coach Hugh Freeze, who finds himself in the crosshairs of fans after the program’s latest setbacks, he believes the NIL era is to blame. According to Justin Hokanson of On3, Freeze says Auburn is “really low” on NIL funds compared to other top programs that are in play for their recruits.

Advertisement

Freeze also emphasized that his staff continues to operate under the rules and guidelines presented by the NCAA and Congress, which he feels other teams may not be as law-abiding. Nevertheless, Freeze has a belief in the program’s direction, with a top-ten recruiting class in 2026 not out of the picture.

Auburn AD John Cohen hints that August 1 — the first day players can sign NIL deals — as a chance for the Tigers to flip recruits.

Related: Auburn Lands Former 5-Star Recruit Out of Transfer Portal

This story was originally reported by Athlon Sports on Jul 3, 2025, where it first appeared.

The post Jeremiah Smith signs lucrative new NIL deal with Adidas appeared first on ClutchPoints.

Ohio State football wide receiver Jeremiah Smith came into his freshman season with the Buckeyes with a lot of hype, and he more than delivered. Smith was not only one of the best freshman receivers in the country, but he was one of the best players in college football in general. He is a star who will be playing football for a long time, and he will be repping Adidas for the foreseeable future. Smith recently inked an NIL deal with the iconic brand.

A lot of people are seeing this and thinking about the fact that the Ohio State football team is a Nike school. When Smith is playing for the Buckeyes, he will still be wearing all the team Nike gear. He is an Adidas athlete now, however.

Advertisement

Many people expected Smith to sign a deal with Nike at some point, but he went with Adidas. He is excited to be partnering with a brand that he has admired for a long time.

“I’ve been wearing Adidas since I was a young kid, 11, 10 years old,” Smith said, according to an article from The Athletic. “To be a part of the brand is something special.”

At Ohio State, there is a tradition for new players where they begin practice with a black stripe on their helmet. Losing that stripe officially makes them a Buckeye. Losing the black stripe was a special moment for Smith, and now he has gained three more.

“One of the most memorable moments from last season was losing my black stripe and officially becoming a Buckeye,” Smith said in a statement. “Fast forward a year and I’m blessed to be adding three, joining the fastest brand in football. It’s crazy to be partnering with a brand that has such a talented roster of players and that I’ve been wearing since I was a young kid. We’re not done yet.”

Advertisement

Jeremiah Smith came into college and was immediately one of the most electric players in college football. If he was eligible, he would’ve been a first-round NFL Draft pick this year. The scary thing is, Smith won’t be eligible after this season either. The college football world still has two years to go before teams can finally stop worrying abouut him. Smith put up absurd numbers for the Ohio State football team during his freshman season, and he helped the Buckeyes win a national championship. Big things are in store for the next two years.

Related: LSU football way-to-early bold predictions for 2025 season

Related: Florida State’s Antonio Cromartie Jr. boldly states goal to surpass his dad

Ole Miss coach Chris Beard explained the value of neutral site games in building a solid NCAA Tournament resume recently. He noted that scheduling a neutral site contest is often only a one-year commitment compared to agreeing to a home-and-home with another team in the nonconference.

The coach also pointed out that neutral site games also get more weight to determine whether the game is a Quad 1 game or lower. Facing a team with a top 50 RPI at a neutral location is considered a Quad 1 game, compared to only a top 30 RPI team for home games.

“One reason is that instead of starting a two-year series, you can play somebody like that in one-time pop,” Beard explained. “Obviously, there’s some money generating ways through those games as well. I think one of the equations now is we’re all looking for Quad 1 games. We’re trying to stay away from the Quad 3s and even the Quad 2s.

“In some cases, the game is more valued. So for us last year, I think I’m accurate in saying this, the Colorado State game ended up being a Quad 1 game for us because of the season they had.”

The Rebels played Colorado State in November of this past season in Southaven, Mississippi. They came away with an 84-69 victory that ended up being one of their 10 Quad 1 wins on the year. It helped them to earn a No. 6 seed in the NCAA Tournament, where they advanced to the Sweet Sixteen.

In the SEC for the 2025-26 season, Arkansas has already announced a neutral site game against Duke for Thanksgiving Day. The nonconference schedule for Ole Miss has still yet to be finalized, but it wouldn’t be surprising to see the Rebels add another neutral site game to their slate.

Chris Beard is getting ready to enter his third season in Oxford and has led the team to at least 20 wins in each of his first two years. He’s had success at his previous stops at Texas Tech and Texas as well, leading the Red Raiders to a national championship appearance in 2019.

He knows part of putting his team in a position to do so is creating a challenging schedule that can help prepare them for their path through March Madness. A big part of doing that is being willing to go out on a limb and play away from home, which Beard has shown a willingness to do.

Last Updated on July 2, 2025

After more than a decade-long hiatus, college basketball video games appear to be on the verge of a major comeback, thanks to the massive success of EA Sports College Football 25. According to a memo obtained by Extra Points, EA Sports has submitted a proposal to revive its College Basketball video game series, with a tentative release date set for 2028.

The memo, sent on July 26, 2025, by the College Licensing Company (CLC) to conference offices, outlines that a Request for Proposal (RFP) was issued in November 2024. Of the five companies that expressed formal interest, three submitted official bids. CLC is recommending that conferences approve EA Sports’ bid, which includes a comprehensive, standalone simulation game featuring all NCAA Division I men’s and women’s basketball programs.

EA Sports Emerges as the Leading Bidder

Unlike competing proposals that included college content within broader sports titles or leaned more toward arcade-style action games, EA Sports pledged to build a full-fledged, standalone college basketball simulation featuring every men’s and women’s Division I basketball team.

Their vision would mirror the depth and features of their football game, incorporating modes such as Dynasty, Ultimate Team, Road to Glory, and Team Builder. Following the success of College Football 25, EA Sports plans to capitalize on the momentum of both games and explore opportunities for fans to enjoy both experiences.

As with College Football 25, real athletes would be included in the game via licensing agreements, facilitated through Compass and One Team Partners. The inclusion of real player likenesses and live service content—such as downloadable updates and optional paid add-ons—will expand and enhance the user experience while creating new revenue opportunities for participating institutions.

A New Release Strategy

Although a new college football video game is slated to come out each year according to the current licensing agreement along with other major video game titles supporting professional sports such as NBA2K, EA Sports FC and Madden, EA Sports proposed a more flexible release schedule for College Basketball, departing from the typical annual sports game cycle.

Over a six-year licensing term, the company commits to launching a minimum of three titles, with the option to release up to six. In years without a full new release, EA will offer roster and team updates via downloadable patches, while still paying 50% of the “release year” minimum royalty guarantee (MRG).

This shift acknowledges historical market differences—college football video games have traditionally outsold basketball titles by a 3:1 ratio—and provides an opportunity to test a consumer-preferred model that prioritizes quality over quantity.

There has been no clarification on which platforms would support the potential game.

Addressing the Complexities of Licensing

Unlike college football, where the NCAA is not a central rights holder, basketball poses unique licensing challenges. The NCAA owns key trademarks like “March Madness” and “The NCAA Tournament,” making their inclusion essential for a fully immersive experience.

The memo states EA Sports plans to secure licenses from individual schools, players, conferences, trophies, and the NCAA itself. However, the NCAA will not appear in the game’s title. The working name referenced in the memo is EA Sports College Basketball.

Royalties would mirror the revenue model used in College Football 25, distributing payouts to schools and conferences based on player usage metrics within the game.

What’s Next?

While EA Sports has not yet issued a public announcement, conference officials have been asked to approve the proposal by July 18. This would allow EA to begin collecting the assets necessary for development, putting them on track for a 2028-29 release.

It’s important to note that development timelines are fluid and subject to change. Still, the strength and clarity of EA’s proposal, along with its past success in the college sports space, suggest the return of a college basketball video game is not just possible—it’s likely. EA Sports and CLC have yet to comment on the proposal.