I notice a lot of discussion about NIL. So I want to be sure that everyone is aware that the judge in the House v. NCAA antitrust case has given preliminary approval to a settlement. The settlement provides for a payment of $2.78 billion (yes, 'billion") to past athletes to compensate them for not being able to benefit from NIL. It would allow colleges to spend up to $22 million annually to pay athletes. In addition, it allows NIL deals between collectives and athletes only when the NIL agreements serve "a valid business purpose" rather than being disguised pay-for-play schemes.
The settlement says nothing about two important matters: (a) whether the effect of Title IX's ban on gender discrimination; and (b) unionization of college athletes. We will have to see what happens on both fronts.
Here's a fairly understandable summary of the agreement and the timetable. As you can see, the changes are scheduled to take effect with the 2025-2026 season.https://www.bradley.com/insights/pu...d-bring-significant-changes-to-college-sports
The settlement says nothing about two important matters: (a) whether the effect of Title IX's ban on gender discrimination; and (b) unionization of college athletes. We will have to see what happens on both fronts.
Here's a fairly understandable summary of the agreement and the timetable. As you can see, the changes are scheduled to take effect with the 2025-2026 season.https://www.bradley.com/insights/pu...d-bring-significant-changes-to-college-sports
