NIL

What the House v. NCAA Settlement Means for the Future of NIL and College Sports

Published

6 months ago

June 12, 2025

What the House v. NCAA Settlement Means for the Future of NIL and College Sports

The wait is over. On June 6, 2025, Judge Claudia Wilken of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California approved the $2.576 billion class action settlement in House v. NCAA.

Subscribers to this blog and the Highway to NIL Podcast are familiar with our coverage of the objections to the settlement, the April 15 settlement hearing, the NCAA’s rule changes, and the future of NIL enforcement. As our coverage has documented, the path to settlement approval has not been linear, but now the long-anticipated seismic shift in college sports is upon us, and the NCAA, institutions, and student-athletes can shift their full focus to the new reality of student-athlete compensation for the use of their name, image, and likeness (NIL).

This post recaps the key terms of the settlement, the court’s legal reasoning on several contested issues, and what this means moving forward.

The Settlement Terms

The settlement resolves antitrust claims brought by current and former Division I athletes against the NCAA and five major conferences (Pac-12, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC, and ACC). The plaintiffs challenged longstanding NCAA rules that limited or prohibited:

Compensation from third parties for NIL;
Compensation from schools or conferences for NIL, including broadcast NIL;
Compensation from schools or conferences for athletic services (i.e., “pay-for-play); and
Limits on scholarships per sport (scholarship caps).

Key elements of the settlement include:

$2.576 billion in damages distributed over 10 years to compensate athletes harmed by past restrictions.
Future direct payments to athletes through a 10-year Injunctive Relief Settlement (IRS), allowing schools to share up to 22% of their athletic revenue with athletes — an estimated $1.6 billion in new compensation annually.
Elimination of scholarship caps, potentially enabling more than 115,000 new scholarships.
Modified NIL restrictions, narrowing NCAA authority to prohibit NIL payments only from highly affiliated third parties (Associated Entities or Individuals), with arbitration protections for athletes.
Adoption of roster limits for Division I teams, balanced by protections for athletes displaced due to immediate implementation.

The Court’s final approval allows the injunctive relief provisions to take immediate effect, with monetary relief contingent on the exhaustion of any appeals.

Court’s Key Findings and Legal Reasoning

Roster Limits

The parties sought approval to impose roster limits as part of this new compensation model. This term of the settlement faced many objections because of the impact it would have on the roster spots of current non-scholarship or partial-scholarship student-athletes. The court acknowledged concerns raised by objectors about the potential for athletes to lose their existing roster spots. During the April 15 settlement hearing, the judge encouraged the parties to consider phasing in the roster limits.

Ultimately, the parties came to an agreement. In short, they agreed to exempt athletes “who have or had a roster spot” on a Division I team during the 2024-2025 academic year (including those who transferred) and those recruited athletes who will enroll in college for the 2025-2026 academic year and have been promised a Division I team roster spot for the coming academic year. These roster limit exemptions extend to conference roster limits and apply to schools where athletes are currently enrolled or will be enrolled if they transfer.[1]

Judge Wilken approved the provision, noting:

The settlement was modified to ensure that athletes displaced by the immediate imposition of roster limits would not count against future roster limits at any Division I school and would retain eligibility to transfer back to their original school.
These adjustments, while stopping short of fully guaranteeing roster sports, balanced fairness to current athletes with the practical need to restructure team sizes in light of new compensation realities.

Collective Bargaining/Athlete Employment Status

Another concern for the settlement objectors focused on whether the new settlement framework would convert athletes into employees of their schools or the NCAA. It does not, and in fact, never proved to be an issue of concern for the court. The court found:

The settlement explicitly does not resolve or waive potential claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act or similar labor statutes.
The House settlement addresses antitrust violations but preserves the possibility of future litigation over whether athletes should be treated as employees with full labor rights.
As a result, approval of the settlement does not preempt collective bargaining efforts or employee classification cases pending elsewhere.

Antitrust Law Compliance

Some settlement objectors argued that the proposed settlement would replace one set of rules that violate antitrust laws with a new set of rules that also violate antitrust laws. This argument is, in part, why supporters of the NCAA are pushing for federal legislation that would exempt “that would grant the NCAA an absolute liability shield to establish and enforce its rules.”[2]

In reviewing the settlement for potential antitrust violations, Judge Wilken found that the provisions that objectors challenged on anticompetitive grounds do not per se violate antitrust law. She ruled that the settlement achieved extraordinary relief compared to the uncertain outcomes at trial. In prior cases such as O’Bannon v. NCAA and NCAA v. Alston, plaintiffs had only partially succeeded in challenging NCAA compensation rules. Based on that precedent, the judge concluded:

The settlement achieved greater and more certain benefits than could be expected from full trial success.
Procompetitive justifications offered by the NCAA (such as preserving amateurism and competitive balance) were not strong enough to outweigh the demonstrated harm of the prior compensation restraints.
By allowing schools to directly compensate athletes while preserving limited NIL restrictions tied to genuine business purposes, the settlement struck an appropriate balance under antitrust principles.

Title IX

Some objectors argued that the settlement violates Title IX because its damages allocations favor male class members over female class members and because its terms do not require benefits and compensation provided to class members under the injunctive relief settlement be made in compliance with Title IX.

The court overruled these objections. In so doing, the court found that the objectors did not cite to legal authority establishing that Title IX applies to damages awards distributions or that damages distributions made by a claims administrator are subject to Title IX. The court also noted that schools would be free to allocate payments to student athletes in a manner that complies with Title IX and that it could not conclude that Title IX violations would occur. The court declined to weigh in on whether payments schools make to student-athletes under the settlement had to comply with Title IX or not, but noted that if any parties believed a school’s payments violated Title IX, class members would have the right to file suit.

Impact on NIL and the Future of the NCAA

The injunctive relief terms — allowing revenue sharing and rule changes — took effect immediately upon the court’s approval. But the monetary payments from the $2.576 billion fund will begin only after all appeals are resolved and the judgment becomes final.

Judge Wilken’s approval ushers in an era of revenue sharing in college sports. Moving forward:

Schools can now share a significant portion of their revenues with athletes — effectively normalizing pay-for-play within an antitrust-compliant structure.
Athletes retain broad NIL rights, with only targeted, limited restrictions on payments from associated boosters or entities.
Scholarship limits are eliminated, enabling broader access to financial aid and greater roster flexibility.
The framework is designed to coexist with potential future developments in employment law or collective bargaining.

The House v. NCAA settlement represents a historic turning point. For the first time, athletes will be able to directly share in the revenues their performances generate (or social media dictates) —an outcome long resisted under the NCAA’s amateurism model. While the door remains open for further legal challenges about athlete employment status, this settlement fundamentally changes the business of college sports. Institutions, athletes, and stakeholders alike must now prepare for a future where compensated college athletes are the norm, not the exception.

[1] For a detailed analysis of the final roster limits provision, see the “Navigating Roster Limit Challenges: Updates to the House v. NCAA Settlement Agreement” blog post on the NIL Revolution Blog.

[2] Libit & McCann, House Bill Seeks to Protect NCAA From Athlete Rights Drive, Sportico (May 8, 2024), https://www.sportico.com/leagues/college-sports/2024/house-bill-ncaa-protect-the-ball-act-fry-moore-1234778281/.

NIL

Major SEC program emerges as candidate for $2.4 million college football quarterback

Published

4 minutes ago

December 19, 2025

Your Sports Nation

Brendan Sorsby, a redshirt junior who split his first two years at Indiana before transferring to Cincinnati in 2024, posted an efficient, productive 2025 season.

In 12 games, he threw for 2,800 passing yards with 27 passing touchdowns and five interceptions, plus 580 rushing yards and nine rushing scores, making him among the more complete dual-threat QBs in the country.

Unfortunately for the Bearcats, he informed Cincinnati of his intent to enter the NCAA transfer portal on Monday and is also awaiting an NFL draft grade while he gauges options.

Brendan Sorsby’s public NIL profile ranks him among the higher-valued transfer assets nationally, with a reported valuation of around $2.4 million, ranking 12th among all NCAA athletes in 2025.

As college football’s winter transfer market quickens, Tennessee has now been connected to Sorsby, according to reporting by On3’s Pete Nakos.

Cincinnati Bearcats quarterback Brendan Sorsby. — Fort Worth, Texas, USA; Cincinnati Bearcats quarterback Brendan Sorsby (2) throws the ball during the second half against the TCU Horned Frogs at Amon G. Carter Stadium. | Jerome Miron-Imagn Images

The link arrives as the Vols’ quarterback picture for 2026 grows murky, creating a plausible landing spot for a veteran signal-caller.

Tennessee starter Joey Aguilar closed the 2025 regular slate with 3,444 passing yards, 24 TDs, and 11 INTs, but the depth chart behind him has thinned.

Backup Jake Merklinger has reportedly told staff he plans to enter the portal, and the only experienced alternatives are true freshmen and early enrollees such as George MacIntyre and incoming five-star signee Faizon Brandon.

That combination leaves Tennessee weighing whether to chase an established transfer or roll with youth.

Several other programs, including Big Ten and Big 12 teams, have also been linked to Sorsby, notably Indiana, Oregon, Penn State, and Texas Tech.

Sorsby’s decision will likely hinge on three factors: NFL feedback on his draft prospects, immediate playing opportunity, and a clear path to a starting role.

Tennessee checks two of those boxes: potential playing time if depth erodes and a high-usage offense, though competition from programs willing to offer larger NIL guarantees remains a factor.

Expect conversations and movement to heat up with the portal opening on January 2, 2025.

NIL

Ohio State football has set a new record with its unanimous All-American selections

Published

2 hours ago

December 19, 2025

Your Sports Nation

COLUMBUS, Ohio — Receiver Jeremiah Smith, safety Caleb Downs and defensive tackle Kayden McDonald have earned first-team All-American honors from all five major publications this postseason, officially making them unanimous selections.

In doing so, the collection of stars helped Ohio State football set a record.

The Buckeyes now have a college-football best 42 unanimous All-Americans in program history.

Alabama, which entered the season with a record 41 unanimous selections, had none. Notre Dame, which was tied with OSU at 39 coming into the season, had two (Jeremiyah Love, Leonard Moore).

This is the first time Ohio State has ever had three unanimous selections in the same year.

Five major All-American publications
Walter Camp Football Foundation
Associated Press
American Football Coaches Association
Sporting News
Football Writers Association of America

Downs is the first defensive player in program history to earn multiple unanimous All-American honors.

He’s in his second campaign at OSU after transferring from Alabama. Along with his All-American honors, Downs won the Lott IMPACT Trophy and Jim Thorpe Award this year.

Smith is also in his second season with the Buckeyes after arriving as one of the most highly-touted recruits in program history. He’s lived up to the hype, highlighted by his 80 receptions for 1,086 yards and 11 touchdowns this season.

McDonald has been a fixture in the middle of Ohio State’s defensive line, collecting 57 tackles, three sacks and two forced fumbles. He’s anchored a unit allowing only 84.46 rushing yards per game.

Link

NIL

Joel Klatt admits his viral NCAA Tournament stance ‘was a terrible take’

Published

3 hours ago

December 19, 2025

Your Sports Nation

FOX Sports analyst Joel Klatt drew instant scrutiny this week when he made the claim that the only reason the Group of Five was in the College Football Playoff was the threat of litigation. He also suggested, in a parallel vein, that the NCAA basketball tournament isn’t an effective way to crown a champion in the sport.

He railed against Cinderellas a bit and just generally came off seeming a touch antagonistic toward both college basketball and the G5. On Thursday, he apologized for his delivery.

“I had an interesting take. It was a bad take. It was a terrible take,” Joel Klatt said on The Joel Klatt Show. “I have this take about the NCAA Tournament that is a bad take. And it’s a hot take. But it’s what I believe about the NCAA Tournament.

“Now, to be fair, what I said on their show on Monday morning early was sloppy and worded wrong. So it was kind of like I landed the plane but it was in a corn field and so like we had to hit the eject and the plane didn’t crash necessarily. Here’s the deal: I did not articulate what I wanted to articulate.”

He later spent a few minutes on his podcast further outlining his thoughts on Thursday morning. But has his stance really changed?

“Here’s the take: The NCAA basketball tournament, if the objective was to crown the best basketball team of the college basketball season, then it’s a bad format,” Klatt said. “And because of that, then it’s not fair, is what I said. And I said it is a joke and it’s the dumbest, and that’s obviously going to grab headlines. That’s stupid of me to use those terms.

“But the structure of the NCAA basketball tournament, its objective is entertainment, it’s meant to be a gauntlet. So the point is the best college basketball team for the year doesn’t always win the NCAA basketball tournament. That tournament is set up to just crown its own champion. It’s a made-for-TV, entertainment event. And it’s great. And by the way, I do love the NCAA basketball tournament. But if you’re asking me if it’s structured properly to crown the best team of the season, then the answer is no.”

Klatt would admit his opinion is unpopular. But he was unflinching in defending the heart of his point, even if not his delivery of the initial comments.

“Now… it’s a hot take. It’s a bad take,” Klatt said. “Not everyone’s going to share that with me, because everyone loves the entertainment value of Cinderellas in the NCAA basketball tournament. But there’s the thing, if you’re actually honest with yourself, you love the Cinderellas early, but late, you want to see the best teams playing against each other. You want to see incredible regional finals. You want to see Kentucky and Duke with (Christian) Laettner hitting it at the buzzer. Why? Because that’s greatness. So I root for good teams to become the participants late in the tournament.”

Here’s where the argument starts to come back around to the Group of Five and the College Football Playoff a little more. The links that were perhaps missing or not well-enough established in Joel Klatt’s initial go-round were filled in.

“In college football, ours is much more selective. We have 12 teams of 130-whatever in college football,” Klatt said. “So once we’re down to 12, well, now we don’t really want Cinderellas. And I will maintain that opinion. You can disagree and more power to you.”

As for the NCAA basketball tournament, perhaps it was just a case of Joel Klatt conflating two ideas and two different opinions that didn’t need to intersect. Maybe.

Still, the analyst stuck to his guns on his overall points. Especially with the G5 in the playoff.

“The way I said it on Monday morning was so dumb. Dumb take,” Klatt said. “And I prefaced it by saying it’s like the hottest of all takes. There’s 68 teams in the NCAA basketball tournament. So yeah, people love the Cinderellas, but you want the great teams playing late. That makes it awesome in the Final Four and the regional finals. And I’m saying we’re already at that point in college football.”

So what should the Group of Five do if they’re no longer welcome in the playoff? Well, Klatt suggested an alternative. It’s likely to be controversial. But it’s not something totally out of the realm of possibility, either.

“By the way, I’m not a Group of Five hater,” Klatt said. “I think it would be better for the Group of Five if they played their own championship, so that we could celebrate them. Focus on them. More teams could be involved, more fanbases could be involved. That would be awesome. I think that would be great for everyone. Not having to go up to Autzen and face one of the best five teams in the country. That’s impossible for JMU. … I will just say I think it would be better if they played their own playoff.”

Link

NIL

Marshall Faulk adds Les Miles’ son to football staff

Published

4 hours ago

December 19, 2025

Your Sports Nation

Link

NIL

Texas’ Michael Taaffe reveals ‘different’ approach to navigating NIL

Published

5 hours ago

December 19, 2025

Your Sports Nation

During his time at Texas, Michael Taaffe built an impressive social media following with more than 80,000 followers across Instagram and X. That platform is important in the NIL era – but Taaffe took a “different” approach.

Taaffe didn’t ink many high-profile deals during his time at Texas. He was part of Sonic’s activation along with some Longhorns teammates and Texas A&M players, and he joined Seat Geek’s initiative ahead of last year’s College Football Playoff.

SUBSCRIBE to the On3 NIL and Sports Business Newsletter

Instead, Taaffe’s focus remained on the big picture, which included his efforts with Texas Against Fentanyl. That’s why he wasn’t necessarily active in the NIL space with deals.

“I think NIL, for me, has been a little bit different because there’s opportunities that I have taken to get a little cash in the wallet, in the pocket,” Taaffe told On3 via Zoom on behalf of Allstate. “But I think, would you much rather have this little success? This little financial success that at the end of the day, when you have to go buy a house, when you have to get a car, when you have to pay rent, this little success isn’t going to matter in the long-term? Or, would you rather have success and significance to the University of Texas that will last 100 years? I chose that route.”

Taaffe focused on giving back throughout his time at Texas. His efforts in substance abuse prevention helped him win the Wuerrfel Trophy, the premier award for community service. He helped raise nearly $60,000 for Texas Against Fentanyl through a fundraiser, which he said helped cover the organization’s yearly budget.

Taaffe’s efforts went beyond substance abuse awareness, though. He also helped raise more than $100,000 for the Texas Flood Relief Foundation after the flooding at Camp Mystic earlier this year and has visited the Dell Children’s Hospital to distribute food.

But while other athletes star in ads or promote different products through NIL, Michael Taaffe wanted the ability to have a platform to make a difference. He understands why his peers have a different approach, though. It just didn’t fit with his goals.

“I don’t fault anybody for the routes they take,” Taaffe said. “But I just knew that I believe being significant is way more important than being successful.”

Link

NIL

Michael Wilbon claims Kalen DeBoer will leave Alabama for Michigan with loss in College Football Playoff opener

Published

5 hours ago

December 19, 2025

Your Sports Nation

The College Football Playoff gets underway Friday night as Alabama heads to Norman to take on Oklahoma. But to ESPN’s Michael Wilbon, there’s even more at stake for Crimson Tide coach Kalen DeBoer.

DeBoer’s name has been the subject of rumors throughout the offseason in the coaching carousel. Most recently, he received questions about the opening at Michigan following Sherrone Moore’s firing for cause, though he made it clear he intends to be at Alabama in 2026.

However, Wilbon didn’t sound as convinced. He predicted Alabama would not only lose to Oklahoma on Friday night, but DeBoer would also be on a flight to Ann Arbor to take the Michigan job afterward.

“Let me tell you about … two schools that could be in the coaching carousel after [Friday night],” Wilbon said Thursday on Pardon The Interruption. “Because when Alabama loses to Oklahoma – let me say it again, when Alabama loses to Oklahoma – the coach of Alabama, half the people in the state will want to run him out. And he’ll be on the carousel – oh, wait, that’s a G5 being flown to Ann Arbor, Mich., where he has said, ‘Oh, no. I ain’t got no interest in that.’ He’ll have interest [Friday night].

“And then, Alabama will be in the coaching carousel because they’ll be looking for a coach. … The Alabama coach is going to have a job-on-the-line situation in 24 hours and then, headed to Michigan once he loses. And then, Alabama’s looking. Then, what are you going to say?”

During a press conference this week ahead of the College Football Playoff opener, Kalen DeBoer was directly asked if he intended to be Alabama’s head coach next season. He responded, “Yes.”

Earlier in that press conference, DeBoer received a question about the rumors surrounding him. He again spoke highly of his tenure at Alabama so far and made it clear he’s happy in Tuscaloosa.

“A lot of the same things I said before, a couple weeks ago, when asked really the same question, just feel completely supported,” DeBoer said. “My family loves living here. Just all the things that we continue to build on, love the progress. Haven’t talked with anyone, no plans of talking with anyone. So just, I think that’s a lot of what I said a couple weeks ago, and continues to be the same thing.

“Feel strong about it. And our guys, if there’s been any distraction, I haven’t seen it, haven’t felt it. I’m really proud of the way they’ve handled whatever noise is out there. And again, we probably all season long, have dealt with enough noise to where it wouldn’t surprise me on how they handle this.”

Link