5 takeaways from the NCAA deciding that colleges can finally pay athletes (2024)

Per ESPN, the NCAA and the power conferences will settle three federal antitrust cases against it, House v. NCAA, Hubbard v. NCAA and Carter v. NCAA, to the tune of $2.8 billion dollars.

“The NCAA will pay more than $2.7 billion in damages over 10 years to past and current athletes, according to sources,” ESPN’s Murphy and Thamel wrote. “Sources said the parties also have agreed to a revenue-sharing plan allowing each school to share up to roughly $20 million per year with its athletes. All Division I athletes dating back to 2016 are eligible to receive a share as part of the settlement class.”

The decision reportedly means that future athletes cannot sue the NCAA for other potential antitrust violations.

While colleges will be able to pay its athletes with this ruling, Murphy and Thamel add that said athletes still won’t be considered employees of their respective universities.

“The agreement does not resolve all the pending legal issues that have revolutionized the business of college sports and destabilized the multibillion-dollar industry,” the two reported. “Athletes and their advocates are still fighting to become employees or find other ways to collectively bargain in the future, which could reshape a revenue-sharing agreement.”

While three federal antitrust cases would get settled in this eventual ruling, one will remain over a Colorado football player wanting the NCAA to change how it restricts athletes having a financial stake in television rights revenue.

“There is at least one other pending antitrust lawsuit not covered by this week’s agreement. Former Colorado football player Alex Fontenot is suing the NCAA for restricting how it shares TV rights revenue with players,” Murphy and Thamel reported. “The NCAA and the attorneys in the House case argued that Fontenot’s claims should be consolidated with the other lawsuits because they are very similar. However, a judge in Colorado denied that request Thursday morning.”

However, that case could get settled pending how the other cases resolve.

“Garrett Broshuis, Fontenot’s attorney (who helped negotiate a major settlement on behalf of minor league baseball players in recent years), told ESPN that they are monitoring this week’s agreement closely,” Murphy and Thamel added. “They might consider opting out once they see the terms of the deal, which would make the peace the NCAA and its conferences hope they are buying very short-lived.”

Murphy and Thamel shared how some athletic directors are already seeing hurdles for how to fully implement this new reality of compensating their athletes.

“Several athletic directors told ESPN that they are hopeful the settlement lays the groundwork for a system in which success on the field is less dependent on which schools can spend the most money,” the two reported. “Sources said some of the challenges to solve include figuring out how to distribute the revenue-sharing money in a way that meets market needs while complying with Title IX laws and whether schools can regain control of the marketplace for college athletes, which has been outsourced during the past three years to booster collectives, which pay athletes via name, image and likeness endorsem*nt deals.”