Latest news with #ClaudiaWilken
USA Today
21-07-2025
- Business
- USA Today
President Trump aiming to establish national standard for NIL in college athletics
When Judge Claudia Wilken ended the five-year dispute between the House and NCAA on June 6, the world of collegiate athletics ushered in a new era marked by compensation and controversy. The settlement officially allowed athletes to accept direct payments for their name, image and likeness heading into the new athletic year. It also included a $2.8 billion payout to former Division I student-athletes who were previously not allowed to be compensated from NIL. While the chapter officially closed, the popular consensus was that this long saga of controversy might never reach the finish line. That belief has resurfaced with pending implications to limit the amount of money college athletes can be paid. First reported by CBS News Senior White House and Political Correspondent Ed O'Keefe, President Donald Trump plans on signing an executive order that will establish a "national standard" for the NCAA and NIL. If President Trump's new planned order is finalized, it could establish a requirement for federal authorities to state whether athletes would be considered employees of their respective schools, according to reports from ESPN. The acquired draft of the order also asks the Secretary of Labor and the National Labor Relations Board to "determine and implement the appropriate measures with respect to clarifying the status of collegiate athletes." According to the potential executive order, the employment status of college athletes should "maximize the educational benefits and opportunities" that universities can provide through athletics. While the order would not be able to grant some antitrust protections to govern NIL, it could establish the rumored commission to ensure fairness and stability. The implications of such a ruling appear like an attempt to limit schools from becoming powerhouses in college athletics, just based on how much money the school has. Regardless of the arguments floating around the matter, a limit on NIL spending is required to maintain balance. Power Five programs across the country are losing recruiting battles due to not being able to keep up with other programs' spending, which quickly deteriorates the hopes of reaching the apex of college sports for storied programs that have been historically successful. The NIL battle on Capitol Hill has been a lengthy debate that seemed to have no end in sight. After the House v. NCAA five-year war, collegiate athletics was derailed and placed on a new track. The final destination continues to be pushed further away, however. At the moment, the exact rules and regulations that will comprise President Trump's new order are still to be determined. Until then, the speculation will continue to spread as the future of college athletics continues to hang in the balance. Contact/Follow us @AggiesWire on X (formerly Twitter) and like our page on Facebook to follow ongoing coverage of Texas A&M news, notes and opinions. Follow Dylan on X: @dylanmflippo.
New York Times
11-07-2025
- Business
- New York Times
Plaintiffs' lawyers in House v. NCAA settlement to get roughly $750 million in fees
The federal judge who presided over the recently approved House v. NCAA settlement awarded legal fees on Friday that will pay out roughly $750 million to the plaintiffs' lawyers over the 10-year life of the agreement. The landmark settlement, which resolved a trio of class-action antitrust lawsuits against the NCAA and its power conferences, will result in nearly $2.8 billion in backpay damages to former college athletes and a new financial model that allows schools to begin directly sharing revenue with college athletes over the next decade, capped at $20.5 million per school in 2025-26. Advertisement On Friday, U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken granted legal fees and costs that will pay the plaintiffs' lawyers nearly $525 million, and will allow those lawyers to apply annually for additional fees related to the forward-facing revenue sharing model. Those future fee payments, which will be calculated as a percentage of the money schools spend in revenue sharing, are expected to total roughly $250 million over 10 years. Attorneys Steve Berman and Jeffrey Kessler served as co-lead counsel for the plaintiffs. 'The Court finds that the fees just described are fair and reasonable,' Wilken wrote in a motion. Wilken also granted service awards to class representatives in the lawsuit, including $125,000 each to former college swimmer Grant House and former college basketball player Sedona Prince, as well as $50,000 to former college running back Chuba Hubbard. The judge noted that the benefits and compensation distributed to Division I college athletes as a result of the settlement are expected to exceed $19 billion in value over the course of the 10-year agreement. The defendants — the NCAA and power conferences — recently created the College Sports Commission as part of the settlement terms, an organization that will oversee and enforce the revenue sharing model, as well as a clearinghouse for additional third-party name, image and likeness (NIL) deals. Schools were allowed to begin direct revenue sharing with athletes on July 1. On Thursday, the CSC released new guidance on the 'valid business purpose' and 'range of compensation' requirements for any third-party NIL deals that should further restrict payments from booster-led collectives to college athletes. These restrictions have led some in the industry to argue that individual athletes could ultimately earn less in NIL compensation as a result of the settlement, which could result in additional antitrust complaints against the defendants and CSC. The settlement is currently facing multiple appeals that will not impact the forward-facing revenue sharing but could pause the distribution of backpay damages.
USA Today
08-07-2025
- Politics
- USA Today
NCAA settlement instituting revenue sharing system faces seven different appeals
The recent $2.8 billion settlement of three athlete-compensation antitrust cases against the NCAA and the Power Five conferences is set to face seven appeals to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based on filings made by a deadline that passed the night of Monday, July 7. None of the appeal notices were accompanied by a motion seeking to put at least a temporary stop to the going-forward aspects of the agreement, which included schools being allowed to pay athletes directly for the use of their name, image and likeness, beginning July 1. Also, beginning July 1, schools that choose to make NIL deals with their athletes are no longer subject to sport-by-sport scholarship limits. But those restrictions have been replaced by roster limits, subject to exceptions for certain athletes who were on teams during the 2024-25 school year and recruits who had been assured of roster spots for the 2025-26 school year. There were 73 valid, timely objections filed out of nearly 390,000 current and former athletes covered by the litigation while U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken considered whether to grant final approval to the settlement. She granted that approval on June 6. Among the athletes being represented in appeals are current Florida State quarterback Thomas Castellanos, who is involved with two appeal efforts; former two-time national women's lacrosse player of the year Charlotte North; former wrestler Sebastian Rivera, who won a bronze medal at the Paris Olympics and now is an assistant coach at Columbia; and former men's basketball player Braeden Anderson, who now works as an attorney. The full range of issues that will be argued in the appeals remains to be seen because the appeal notices followed a standard format and were not accompanied by a legal argument. But based on the objections that the appealing parties made to Wilken previously, they are likely to include: ▶The applicability of Title IX, the federal gender-equity law, to the settlement's sport-by-sport allocations of damages money that heavily favors football and men's basketball players. ▶Whether the settlement's annual per-school cap on new benefits that can be provided to athletes, including the NIL money paid directly from the schools to the athletes, constitutes another illegal limit on athlete compensation. ▶The fairness of the damages allocations to walk-on athletes who sometimes ended up becoming more prominent than their teammates on scholarship, and to some athletes in lower-revenue sports. ▶The adequacy of the plaintiffs' lawyers' representation of the interests of athletes other than football and men's basketball players and the adequacy of the notice and claims submissions process for athletes. Other than the lawyers who filed the first notice of appeal on June 11, many of the lawyers for the appealing parties have either been willing to provide only brief and general comments about their planned arguments to USA TODAY Sports, or they have been unavailable for comment. But Patrick Bradford, an attorney representing Castellanos and Anderson, said in an interview July 8: "This is a settlement that will pay kids less than the market would bear and say, 'That's OK.' " Bradford raised the possibility of pursuing the matter to the Supreme Court, if necessary. Steve Berman, one of the lead lawyers for the plaintiffs, said in an email July 8: 'We remain 100 percent optimistic of our chances of success and are disappointed that these objectors are appealing given the thoroughness and soundness of Judge Wilken's decision. Most of the objectors have not appealed and we thank them for not joining in any effort to hold up payments to the student (a)thletes which is what the appealing objectors are doing.' The appeals could significantly delay the start of payments of damages money to tens of thousands of athletes and to the plaintiffs' lawyers, who have requested that they be awarded hundreds of millions of dollars from the total settlement pool. These payments are set to occur over a 10-year period. As approved by Wilken, the settlement says that in the event of appeals of this nature, the NCAA and the conferences would begin making damages payments, but the money would be held in escrow — not paid to athletes or lawyers — until appeals are completed. Initial scheduling instructions from the 9th Circuit for five of the appeals that were filed called for written arguments to be filed by various dates in September by those appealing and for responses to be filed by various dates in October. However, no scheduling instructions have been issued yet for two appeals. Berman said plaintiffs will ask the 9th Circuit to consolidate the appeals, so they follow a single calendar. According to the 9th Circuit's website, oral arguments in appeals of civil cases occur approximately six to 12 months from the notice of appeal date, or approximately four months from completion of briefing. The site said 'most cases are decided within 3 months to a year after submission,' so even if the 9th Circuit chooses not to hold oral argument in this case, it's unlikely a ruling will be issued before early 2026.
Yahoo
21-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Schools can now directly pay college athletes after landmark $2.8 billion settlement
College athletes will undergo yet another historic change. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken approved the $2.8 billion settlement in the House v. NCAA case on Friday, which allows schools to directly compensate student-athletes. Advertisement Under the new agreement, each participating Division I school can distribute up to $20.5 million annually to athletes, with that cap increasing over the next decade. The NCAA logo at the Division I Men's Golf Championships in 2025. NCAA Photos via Getty Images Moreover, it will provide $2.8 billion in payback to former athletes dating back to 2016, addressing past restrictions on NIL, to some extent. Judge Wilken's approval in court also addressed concerns regarding roster limits that would've likely impacted walk-on athletes. The settlement introduces the 'Designated Student-Athletes' tag, which is intended to allow those impacted by roster changes to return or transfer without worrying about being penalized. Advertisement NCAA President Charlie Baker discussed the settlement in a lengthy open letter. 'Many looked to April's hearing about the House settlement as a culmination of sorts, but the court's final approval of the settlement in fact marks a new beginning for Division I student-athletes and for the NCAA,' Baker wrote. 'For several years, Division I members crafted well-intentioned rules and systems to govern financial benefits from schools and name, image and likeness opportunities, but the NCAA could not easily enforce these for several reasons. 'The result was a sense of chaos: instability for schools, confusion for student-athletes and too often litigation. Sometimes member schools even supported that litigation — some of which spurred hastily imposed court orders upending the rules,' he continued. The NCAA logo is shown on signage before the Division III Men's Ice Hockey Championship held at University Nexus Center on March 30, 2025 in Utica, New York. NCAA Photos via Getty Images Baker additionally acknowledged the challenges ahead involving more change, noting: Advertisement 'Going forward, the defendant conferences will be responsible for implementing several elements of the settlement, including the design and enforcement of the annual 22.5 percent cap (approximately $20.5 million in year one) for financial benefits a Division I school may direct to student-athletes,' he outlined. 'In addition, the court maintains jurisdiction over the implementation of the settlement, and the plaintiffs will continue to track progress.' Baker hailed this as positive, adding, 'The defendant conferences are also responsible for launching and enforcing a series of rules regarding the third-party NIL contracts student-athletes may enter into. With these reforms, along with scholarships and other benefits, student-athletes at many schools will be able to receive nearly 50 percent of all athletics department revenue. That is a tremendously positive change and one that was long overdue.' Baker concluded by pointing out that 'change at this scale is never easy.' Changes are set to take effect beginning on July 1.
Yahoo
14-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
How the House V. NCAA Settlement Impacts Gonzaga Basketball
How the House V. NCAA Settlement Impacts Gonzaga Basketball originally appeared on Athlon Sports. College athletics is officially in a new era after the long-awaited House vs. NCAA settlement came to fruition on Friday after approval from judge Claudia Wilken. Advertisement The biggest change - and it is a seismic one - is the ability of colleges to pay student-athletes directly, which goes into effect on July 1. Programs from the power conferences - defined as the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12, ACC, and Pac-12 - are all participating while any other D1 schools can choose to "opt in" and must do so formally by June 15, after which a full list of participating schools will be made public. Nov 15, 2024; Spokane, Washington, USA; Gonzaga Bulldogs guard Dusty Stromer (4) controls the ball against the UMass Lowell River Hawks in the second half at McCarthey Athletic Center. Mandatory Credit: James Snook-Imagn Images James Snook-Imagn Images An official number has yet to be finalized, although early reporting indicates each school will have a maximum of roughly $20.5 million to spend across all their student-athletes per year. That number - which others have estimated is closer to $23 million - will rise by 4% each year and will be reevaluated every three years. Advertisement It's important to note that number is the maximum and likely won't be spent by everyone, although it potentially creates an advantageous situation for Gonzaga. Many schools are expected to roughly follow the following formula when splitting up their $20 million: 75% to football, 15% to men's basketball, 5% to women's basketball, and 5% to everyone else, which would equal about $15 million for football, $3 million for men's basketball, $1 million for women's basketball, and just $1 million for the school's 15-20 other programs combined. So even if Gonzaga doesn't come up with a full $20 million each year, they will easily be competitive with programs that sit in the $2.5-$4M range. And once the Pac-12 media deal is revealed - with some reports expecting it to happen this week - fans will have a better sense of how competitive the Zags could be. At the very least, Gonzaga should have a big advantage over their peers in the Pac-12 who will be feverishly raising money to make (or keep) their football teams competitive, while the Zags can spend a huge chunk of their money earned from the media deal on men's basketball. And even if they allocate more money to the olympic sports, that will help those programs compete right away in the Pac-12 and potentially out-recruit other big name programs. Advertisement However, big name programs will still have ways to get their recruits more money through NIL deals from third parties, which are still allowed but will be more strictly monitored starting July 1. The new NIL Go system, created by an independent body called the College Sports Commission, requires student-athletes to submit a form for every third party NIL opportunity worth more than $600 dollars. They will then evaluate each request based on "the deal's performance obligations, the SA's athletic performance and social media reach, the local market, and the market reach of his or her institution and program." In other words, this group will try to prevent scenarios where a team pays a player $1M officially but has a third party offer the same player $4M to do a single social media post. However, as seen above, the language around this evaluation is kept quite vague and it won't stop big name programs from finding workarounds. The next steps for college athletics could include collective bargaining between student-athletes, universities, and the NCAA, with direct employment a possibility down the line as well. Advertisement Even with so much still to be determined, and some concerning downsides to the impact on olympic sports and smaller conference schools, it's not hard to see the positives of the House settlement for Gonzaga in conjunction with the move to the Pac-12. Related: Pac-12 Media Rights Deal is Being Finalized as Schools Sign Grant of Rights and Membership Agreements This story was originally reported by Athlon Sports on Jun 10, 2025, where it first appeared.
