NCAA settlement plan for roster limits gets do-over to save players who lost spots on teams
Attorneys handling the $2.8 billion NCAA settlement proposed a massive do-over Wednesday when it comes to roster limits, offering athletes who lost their spots a chance to play without counting against the new caps for as long as they have eligibility.
Under court order to come up with an updated plan, the attorneys in court filings suggested that schools compile lists of all the players they cut in anticipation of the settlement being approved — a number that certainly could be in the hundreds and perhaps far more.
Those 'Designated Student-Athletes,' as they're called in the new legal filing, can be invited back to compete for roster spots — no guarantees — or go to new schools. FILE - A basketball with a March Madness logo rests on a rack before a First Four game between Illinois and Mississippi State in the NCAA women's basketball tournament, March 15, 2023, in South Bend, Ind. (AP Photo/Michael Caterina, File)
Either way, those athletes they won't count against the new roster limits that are coming under the plan unveiled last fall and given initial approval by U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken last October.
The proposal would also give the exemption to high school recruits who were promised spots that were later rescinded and would last for as long as those players are eligible in college.
Wilken has already signed off on the key components of the settlement, which includes allowing each school to share up to $20.5 million each year directly with their athletes and the more than $2.7 billion in back pay that will go to players who said the NCAA and five biggest conferences wrongly kept them from earning name, image and likeness money.
The latest proposal capped a two-week scramble after Wilken sent attorneys for both sides back to the negotiating table, saying the roster limit details of the plan as written were unacceptable.
The plan calls for replacing scholarship limits (85 for football and 9.9 for men's wrestling, for example) with roster limits (105 for football, 30 for wrestling). A school can offer scholarships to every player on a team, but that will cost money and most predict that walk-ons or partial scholarship athletes will be left out.
Wilken clearly sympathized with the hundreds of players who lost roster spots as schools began preparing to implement terms of the settlement. About a dozen told their stories during an April 7 hearing.
Wilken asked lawyers to rework that part of the deal. The NCAA's first response to Wilken's request — which included the idea of 'grandfathering in' current players to their roster spots — was to change nothing, arguing that undoing roster moves already in play would create more turmoil in an already chaotic process. Wilken told them to do it anyway or put the whole plan at risk.
The plaintiffs' attorneys said they did Wilken one better, not only giving schools a chance to bring back players they cut without it counting against their limit, but putting the exemption in play for a new school, as well.
'Plaintiffs believe that these changes to the settlement agreement exceed the protections that the court requested,' their court filing read.
The attorneys noted there is no guarantee that the athletes will win their roster spots back.
Winnipeg Free Press | Newsletter
Winnipeg Jets Game Days
On Winnipeg Jets game days, hockey writers Mike McIntyre and Ken Wiebe send news, notes and quotes from the morning skate, as well as injury updates and lineup decisions. Arrives a few hours prior to puck drop. Sign up for The Warm-Up
'While defendants insisted that the changes to the settlement agreement recognize that individual schools and their athletics departments retain discretion to independently determine which athletes will be on their rosters, that has always been the case; and it remains unchanged whether or not there are roster limits,' they wrote. 'The revisions to the settlement agreement ensure that class members who have or would have lost roster spots or promised roster spots as a result of the new roster limits will be in the same position as they would have been in if roster limits were never implemented, i.e., roster limits do not apply to them.'
The judge is expected to give opponents to the plan a brief window to file updated objections before her final decision. Steve Berman, co-lead counsel for the plaintiffs, predicted earlier this week that those objecting to the plan will not be satisfied with the new proposal.
The clock is ticking for the NCAA and its 1,200 member schools that have more than 500,000 athletes on various teams. Terms of the settlement were supposed to go into effect July 1 and football practice starts soon after.
___
AP college sports: https://apnews.com/hub/college-sports
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
9 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Carson Hocevar living the dream back home in Michigan as aggressive, headline-grabbing NASCAR driver
BROOKLYN, Mich. (AP) — Carson Hocevar grew up 80 miles west of Michigan International Speedway, where he attended his first race at the age of 5. As a kid in Portage, he dreamed of becoming a NASCAR driver that people talked about. The 22-year-old Hocevar got his wish. He knocked Ricky Stenhouse Jr. out of last week's race at Nashville and his aggressive style has created a buzz in a sport that traditionally has young drivers trying to find the line between aggressive and reckless driving. 'It's cool to be talked about,' Hocevar said Saturday, a day ahead of the FireKeepers Casino 400. 'Obviously, you want to be talked about maybe in a different light. 'But I mean, at least they're talking, right? And, I think that's big for me.' Hocevar called Stenhouse earlier in the week to discuss their contact on Lap 106 of 300 at Nashville, where Stenhouse was bumped from behind and sent into a wall. Both said the conversation was productive. 'I don't think he crashed me on purpose,' Stenhouse said. 'But I think he was super impatient. 'We've never had any issues. He's had plenty of issues with other people.' Hocevar, in his second full Cup season, was behind only winner Ryan Blaney at Nashville to match the career-best, second-place finish he had earlier this year. At the race in Atlanta, several drivers complained about Hocevar over the radio or some addressed their concerns face to face in pit lane. Blaney, who got turned by Hocevar in the final stage of the race, and Ross Chastain confronted him in February. Chastain sounded frustrated that Hocevar, who drives the No. 77 Chevrolet for Spire Motorsports, has not appeared to learn from his mistakes. His latest move was reckless, Chastain said. 'Yeah, 47 spun off his front bumper,' he said. 'Been there, done that.' Blaney has, too. 'You can say you're sorry all you want, but if you don't learn from them and make a change, then everyone thinks you're lying,' Blaney said. A new wrinkle NASCAR's 'In-season Challenge' will begin seeding drivers Sunday and at the following two races in Mexico City and at Pocono. The results will create a field of 32 drivers, who will race for a $1 million prize over a five-race competition starts June 28 at Atlanta. Single elimination will reduce the field to 16 in Chicago, eight at Sonoma, four in Dover and the final two on July 27 at Indianapolis Motor Speedway. The NBA has had success with a similar format. 'It's like the March Madness bracket,' said Blaney, whose No. 12 Ford finished first last week at Nashville. 'You want to do well to seed yourself against an easier opponent. 'It could be big. It could grow. I think it's a great idea. Why not try it? You're still going to have racing. It's just going to be a race within the race between all the guys.' Pressing priorities Denny Hamiln is prepared to leave his No. 11 Toyota behind this weekend to join his fiancé, Jordan, who is due to give birth to a baby boy — their third child — at any time. Hamlin, who is also juggling his role as the co-owner of a team suing NASCAR, said he would skip next week's race in Mexico City if necessary to witness the birth of his boy. Hendrick's drought Hendrick Motorsports has won a record 316 Cup races, but hasn't finished first at Michigan in more than a decade. Jeff Gordon's third win on the track was the team's ninth and that was way back on Aug. 17, 2014. 'It's just kind of surprising because I don't feel like it's a track that we struggle at by any means,' said Kyle Larson, who drives the No. 5 Chevrolet for Hendrick. 'Every time we've been here, we've been one of the fastest and up front. Thursdays Keep up to date on sports with Mike McIntyre's weekly newsletter. 'It's not a track like Nashville, where where we struggle.' Odds and Ends Larson at +300 is the betting favorite to win Sunday, according to BetMGM Sportsbook, followed by points leader William Byron (+375), defending race champion Tyler Reddick (+500) and Christopher Bell (+550). ___ AP auto racing:
CTV News
16 hours ago
- CTV News
A $2.8 billion settlement will change college sports forever. Here's how
A U.S. federal judge has approved terms of a sprawling US$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 per cent 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 battle 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 per cent 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: Since 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. Eddie Pells, The Associated Press
Winnipeg Free Press
17 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
A $2.8 billion settlement will change college sports forever. Here's how
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 battle 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: Since 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:
