After a lengthy wait, the House v. NCAA settlement was finally approved Friday night by a federal judge. The settlement changes the landscape of college sports, shifting how current athletes are compensated and delivering back damages to players from 2016 to present day.

According to Alabama athletics director Greg Byrne, the changes will be enormous.

“I tell our coaches and our students, ‘The three most significant events in the history of college athletics are, first, the NCAA’s foundation (1905), second, the adoption of Title IX (1972) and all the opportunities that were created because of it, and, third, the House settlement,’” Byrne said in an interview with ESPN, published on Saturday.

As schools prepare for the changes, here’s what the settlement means for Alabama.

Alabama can directly pay players

The most obvious change stemming from the settlement, is that Alabama and other schools can pay players now. For the length of the 10-year settlement, colleges can share revenue with athletes, with the “cap” rising every year.

For the first year, starting July 1, schools will be able to share around $20.5 million according to most estimates. Different colleges can opt in to the full amount, or distribute a lesser number.

According to a statement from athletics director Greg Byrne, Alabama will be spending the full allowable amount.

“Alabama Athletics has been planning for this day and making decisions that best position our department for long term success,” Byrne said in a statement posted to social media on Saturday. “Approval of the House settlement offers stability going forward, which is something that is much needed.

“We’re extremely proud of the world-class resources our student-athletes receive and will now add to that by offering new scholarships while fully funding revenue sharing.”

More scholarships are coming

The settlement eliminates scholarship limits across sports. Instead, roster limits will be the order of the day.

That means the Crimson Tide can add scholarships for various sports. Ahead of the settlement, Byrne said he expected UA to fund around 40 additional scholarships.

That’s a hefty jump. However, it’s not as many as some of Alabama’s SEC peers, including Texas and Georgia

“Chris Del Conte is one of my best friends, the AD at Texas” Byrne said during a March appearance on the Will Cain Show. “They’re a bit of an outlier in terms of how they’re managing the scholarship number because they have the financial flexibility to do that. I’m Alabama, which people think we’re flush. We don’t have that same flexibility, OK?

“We’ve had some challenging conversations with some of our coaches in saying,’ You’re gonna have this number of scholarships to work with. There will be schools that have more than you do.‘”

Walk-ons are still allowed… for now

According to Alabama’s 2024 NCAA revenues and expenses report, the Crimson Tide football team had 142 participants during the fiscal year, which ran from July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024. Many of those were walk-ons, something that would be eliminated under the House settlement.

However, the main sticking point in Wilken approving the settlement, was letting the walk-ons continue their college career. So, for now, they can remain on Alabama’s, or any other school’s, roster.

Even with the roster limit going to 105 for football, Alabama can, but isn’t required to, keep any player whose spot was expected to be eliminated to get under the number, provided it submits a list of such players within 30 days. UA can also keep any player whom it recruited for the upcoming 2025-26 school year.

Head football coach Kalen DeBoer had discussed the walk-on uncertainty at SEC spring meetings.

“We have a full team on campus right now, and I believe still a lot of those guys that are walk-ons actually have their name in the portal because they have to be able to adjust,” DeBoer said in May. “We’ve fortunately got some guys that really want to be at Alabama in those walk-on roles, and if the roster size was reduced they, and we, would have to adjust accordingly.”

NIL will change

The introduction of revenue sharing doesn’t mean NIL is going away. However, it will likely change.

Byrne made sure to note that the Crimson Tide’s NIL collective is sticking around.

“Our student-athletes have the distinct benefit of Yea Alabama, which focuses on creating authentic NIL opportunities powered by both the Alabama and student-athlete brands,” Byrne said in his statement Saturday. “Crimson Tide Sports Marketing and Learfield will also continue to cultivate local and national opportunities that greatly benefit our student-athletes.”

NIL will be more regulated under the new system, at least until someone challenges it in court. Players will have to report deals over $600 with any party besides their schools, and the College Sports Commission, a new entity, will evaluate whether they align with what the commission perceives as market values and have legitimate business purposes.

On Friday, Judge Claudia Wilken approved the House v. NCAA settlement, which will allow colleges to directly pay athletes and usher in the era of revenue sharing. Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti released a statement regarding the monumental settlement.

“We look forward to implementing this historic settlement designed to bring stability, integrity and competitive balance to college athletics while increasing both scholarship and revenue opportunities for student athletes in all sports,” Petitti wrote.

Wilken’s approval finally came almost 59 months after the initial suit was filed. The long waiting period has given Power Four conferences such as the Big Ten to prepare for the paradigm shift.

Beginning July 1, schools will allowed to share $20.5 million with athletes, with football expected to receive 75%, followed by men’s basketball (15%), women’s basketball (5%) and the remainder of sports (5%). The amount shared in revenue will increase annually.

Power Four football programs will have roughly $13 to $16 million to spend on rosters for the 2025 season. Many schools have front-loaded contracts ahead of the settlement’s approval, taking advantage of contracts not being vetted by the newly formed NIL clearinghouse.

“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.”

To enforce this new era, the NCAA is creating the College Sports Commission. Major League Baseball executive Bryan Seeley will serve as the commission’s CEO, the commission announced late Friday.

“I am honored to serve as the first CEO of the College Sports Commission at this pivotal moment in the history of collegiate athletics,” Seeley said in a statement. “I look forward to implementing a system that prioritizes fairness, integrity, and opportunity, while preserving the values that make college sports unique. I am energized by the work ahead and excited to begin building out our team.”

While the near five-year waiting period from the time the lawsuit was filed to Wilken’s final approval gave institutions time to prepare for the changes ahead, there are still many unknowns. Notably, many have questioned how the NCAA will prevent teams from seeking state legislature that circumvents the new rules.

The College Sports Commission will address issues such as these. Only time will tell how Wilken’s historic ruling will ultimately affect college athletics.

On3’s Pete Nakos and Nick Schultz also contributed to this report.

Judge Approves Landmark NCAA Settlement, Paving Way for Revenue Sharing originally appeared on Athlon Sports.

A federal judge on Friday approved a historic settlement that will allow colleges to begin directly paying student-athletes, signaling the most significant shift in the history of college sports and effectively dismantling the amateurism model that defined the NCAA for more than a century.

Advertisement

U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken, who has long presided over high-profile NCAA cases, gave final approval to the House v. NCAA settlement, nearly five years after Arizona State swimmer Grant House and others filed suit seeking to end restrictions on athlete compensation. Under the agreement, schools can distribute up to $20.5 million annually to athletes, beginning as soon as July 1. Additionally, $2.7 billion will be paid out over 10 years to thousands of former athletes.

The ruling completes the transition that began with Wilken’s earlier decisions, including her 2014 ruling in favor of Ed O’Bannon, and the NCAA’s 2021 decision to allow athletes to profit from their name, image and likeness. The new revenue-sharing model pushes even further, professionalizing college athletics and placing much of the power in the hands of the four major conferences.

While athletes in high-revenue sports like football and men’s basketball stand to benefit significantly with some reportedly landing NIL deals worth more than $10 million, the settlement could reduce opportunities for walk-ons and Olympic sport athletes. In response, Wilken mandated a process to allow athletes cut during early implementation to be reinstated.

Related: Kentucky Basketball Beats Cap Proposal With NIL Power Play

Key dates include the June 11 launch of the NIL Go portal, a June 15 opt-in deadline for non-defendant schools, and the start of revenue sharing on July 1. Schools must also comply with new roster limits by their sport’s season start or by Dec. 1 for winter and spring sports.

Advertisement

Related: Michigan Running Back’s Groundbreaking NIL Deal Redefines College Football

Despite the sweeping changes, legal uncertainty remains. Varying state laws and the absence of a federal NIL framework leave room for future litigation. NCAA President Charlie Baker continues to push for national legislation and antitrust protection to stabilize the rapidly evolving landscape.

Still, attorneys behind the settlement argue it delivers what athletes have long deserved, which is a share of the billions their efforts generate from TV deals, merchandise, and championships. As the 2025–26 academic year begins, the college sports model will look unlike anything seen before.

This story was originally reported by Athlon Sports on Jun 7, 2025, where it first appeared.

College athletics continues to change in the NIL era. On Friday evening, Judge Claudia Wilken approved the House v. NCAA settlement. This decision will lead to revenue sharing and roster limits throughout college athletics. 

College athletics will now have a salary cap of around $20 million. Football programs could have anywhere between $13 and $16 million to spend on their teams for the 2025 season. 

“Despite some compromises, the settlement agreement nevertheless will result in extraordinary relief for members of the settlement classes,” Judge Wilken shared. “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.”

The settlement will also create a new NIL clearinghouse for third-party NIL deals of $600 or more. The new clearinghouse, “NIL Go,” must approve all contracts meeting that restriction.

If the NIL deal is not approved, the school could be fined, or the athlete could be ineligible for the upcoming season, creating massive implications for NIL contracts. 

It was reported that 70% of past NIL deals would have been denied under the new settlement and NIL guidelines, but 90% of deals with public companies would have been approved. 

Under the new settlement, roster limits will also be phased into college athletics. The proposed roster changes include 105 for football, 15 for men’s and women’s basketball, 34 for baseball, 28 for men’s and women’s soccer, 25 for softball, and 18 for volleyball. 

Paul Finebaum did not hold back from calling out the NCAA and its inability to govern college athletics, belittling the organization to just “tournament directors,” and he’s not wrong. 

“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,” Finebaum said on Sportscenter. “They literally have no jurisdiction whatsoever other than to be tournament directors.”

The NCAA has lost virtually all control over member schools, allowing them to do almost anything they want. The NIL era is often referred to as the “Wild West,” and that is because the NCAA’s controlling power is diminishing more and more every day. 

How could the settlement affect Tennessee athletics?

The settlement and future outcomes could impact Tennessee athletics’ approach moving forward, including the possibility of being kicked out of the SEC if they comply with state law, which contradicts the NCAA. 

Membership contracts are currently being introduced throughout Power Four conferences, challenging Tennessee’s new state law stating that state institutions and their NIL collectives can continue to pay above the proposed salary cap. 

It also states that schools cannot sue the College Sports Commission, which will be the group enforcing the new rules under the House settlement. 

If Tennessee, or any other Power Four school, chooses not to sign the agreement, it could be kicked out of its conference and blackballed from joining other conferences. 

Tennessee Athletic Director Danny White seemed to be optimistic about the House settlement and its effectiveness in college athletics moving forward, but believes collective bargaining is the key to leveling the playing field across all sports.

“There’s been a lot of speculation around collective bargaining,” White shared. “Every sports organization in our country has collective bargaining for a reason. It’s very complicated. These are students. We don’t have just one sport. We have twenty and only two of which are profitable. It’s a really complicated situation that we have been deep in for 3-4 years. I think everyone is search for answers.

“There’s a lot to transpire to see how that plays out. But as you and I have discussed, I think collective bargaining is maybe where we land down the road. But in a competitive space like this, everyone’s trying to win.”

The House settlement decision isn’t the only major decision courts have to make regarding college athletics. There are also decisions waiting to be made regarding athletes’ eligibility, with the possibility of changing the original four years of eligibility to five years of eligibility. 

That could drastically change what college athletics looks like moving forward and could even help Tennessee, as Jordan Gainey and Zakai Zeigler have both expressed interest in returning to play one more season for Rick Barnes if it is passed. 

Tennessee could benefit from multiple sports from the results of the house settlement and potentially add a fifth year of eligibility for college athletes. 

The Vols want to continue being championship contenders across various sports, and the revenue sharing and NIL caps could help Tennessee compete with the blue bloods of college athletics moving forward.

Associated Press

A federal judge has approved terms of a sprawling $2.8 billion antitrust settlement that will upend the way college sports have been run for more than a century. In short, schools can now directly pay players through licensing deals — a concept that goes against the foundation of amateurism that college sports was built upon.

Some questions and answers about this monumental change for college athletics:

Q: What is the House settlement and why does it matter?

A: Grant House is a former Arizona State swimmer who sued the defendants (the NCAA and the five biggest athletic conferences in the nation). His lawsuit and two others were combined and over several years the dispute wound up with the settlement that ends a decades-old prohibition on schools cutting checks directly to athletes. Now, each school will be able to make payments to athletes for use of their name, image and likeness (NIL). For reference, there are nearly 200,000 athletes and 350 schools in Division I alone and 500,000 and 1,100 schools across the entire NCAA.

Q: How much will the schools pay the athletes and where will the money come from?

A: In Year 1, each school can share up to about $20.5 million with their athletes, a number that represents 22% of their revenue from things like media rights, ticket sales and sponsorships. Alabama athletic director Greg Byrne famously told Congress “those are resources and revenues that don’t exist.” Some of the money will come via ever-growing TV rights packages, especially for the College Football Playoff. But some schools are increasing costs to fans through “talent fees,” concession price hikes and “athletic fees” added to tuition costs.

Q: What about scholarships? Wasn’t that like paying the athletes?

A: Scholarships and “cost of attendance” have always been part of the deal for many Division I athletes and there is certainly value to that, especially if athletes get their degree. The NCAA says its member schools hand out nearly $4 billion in athletic scholarships every year. But athletes have long argued that it was hardly enough to compensate them for the millions in revenue they helped produce for the schools, which went to a lot of places, including multimillion-dollar coaches’ salaries. They took those arguments to court and won.

Q: Haven’t players been getting paid for a while now?

A: Yes, since 2021. Facing losses in court and a growing number of state laws targeting its amateurism policies, the NCAA cleared the way for athletes to receive NIL money from third parties, including so-called donor-backed collectives that support various schools. Under House, the school can pay that money directly to athletes and the collectives are still in the game.

Q: But will $20.5 million cover all the costs for the athletes?

A: Probably not. But under terms of the settlement, third parties are still allowed to cut deals with the players. Some call it a workaround, but most simply view this as the new reality in college sports as schools fight to land top talent and then keep them on campus. Top quarterbacks are reportedly getting paid around $2 million a year, which would eat up about 10% of a typical school’s NIL budget for all its athletes.

Q: Are there any rules or is it a free-for-all?

A: The defendant conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC and Pac-12) are creating an enforcement arm that is essentially taking over for the NCAA, which used to police recruiting violations and the like. Among this new entity’s biggest functions is to analyze third-party deals worth $600 or more to make sure they are paying players an appropriate “market value” for the services being provided. The so-called College Sports Commission promises to be quicker and more efficient than the NCAA. Schools are being asked to sign a contract saying they will abide by the rules of this new structure, even if it means going against laws passed in their individual states.

Q: What about players who played before NIL was allowed?

A: A key component of the settlement is the $2.7 billion in back pay going to athletes who competed between 2016-24 and were either fully or partially shut out from those payments under previous NCAA rules. That money will come from the NCAA and its conferences (but really from the schools, who will receive lower-than-normal payouts from things like March Madness).

Q: Who will get most of the money?

A: Because football and men’s basketball are the primary revenue drivers at most schools, and that money helps fund all the other sports, it stands to reason that the football and basketball players will get most of the money. But that is one of the most difficult calculations for the schools to make. There could be Title IX equity concerns as well.

Q: What about all the swimmers, gymnasts and other Olympic sports athletes?

A: The settlement calls for roster limits that will reduce the number of players on all teams while making all of those players — not just a portion — eligible for full scholarships. This figures to have an outsize impact on Olympic-sport athletes, whose scholarships cost as much as that of a football player but whose sports don’t produce revenue. There are concerns that the pipeline of college talent for Team USA will take a hit.

Q: So, once this is finished, all of college sports’ problems are solved, right?

A: The new enforcement arm seems ripe for litigation. There are also the issues of collective bargaining and whether athletes should flat-out be considered employees, a notion the NCAA and schools are generally not interested in, despite Tennessee athletic director Danny White’s suggestion that collective bargaining is a potential solution to a lot of headaches. NCAA President Charlie Baker has been pushing Congress for a limited antitrust exemption that would protect college sports from another series of lawsuits, but so far nothing has emerged from Capitol Hill.

___

AP college sports: https://apnews.com/hub/college-sports