Gregg Katano’s Post

'NCAA, leagues back $2.8 billion settlement, setting stage for current, former athletes to be paid' "The NCAA and the nation's five biggest conferences (Atlantic Coast Conference, Big Ten Conference, Big 12 Conference, Pac-12 Conference and Southeastern Conference) announced Thursday night that they have agreed to pay nearly $2.8 billion to settle a host of antitrust claims, a monumental decision that sets the stage for a groundbreaking revenue-sharing model that could start steering millions of dollars directly to athletes as soon as the 2025 fall semester." "They signal the end of the NCAA’s bedrock amateurism model that dates to its founding in 1906. Indeed, the days of NCAA punishment for athletes driving booster-provided cars started vanishing three years ago when the organization lifted restrictions on endorsement deals backed by so-called name, image and likeness money. "The suit also argued that athletes were entitled to a piece of the billions of dollars the NCAA and those conferences earn from media rights agreements with television networks." "Major college athletics is about to become more like professional sports than ever before." ----------------------------------------------------------------- Joint Statement from: NCAA President Charlie Baker, ACC Commissioner Jim Phillips, Ph.D., Big Ten Commissioner Tony Petitti, Big 12 Commissioner Brett Yormark, Pac-12 Commissioner Teresa Gould, SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey "The five autonomy conferences and the NCAA agreeing to settlement terms is an important step in the continuing reform of college sports that will provide benefits to student-athletes and provide clarity in college athletics across all divisions for years to come. This settlement is also a road map for college sports leaders and Congress to ensure this uniquely American institution can continue to provide unmatched opportunity for millions of students. All of Division I made today's progress possible, and we all have work to do to implement the terms of the agreement as the legal process continues. We look forward to working with our various student-athlete leadership groups to write the next chapter of college sports." #NCAA #collegesports #college #sports #athletes

The NCAA, the Power Five conferences and lawyers for the plaintiffs in three antitrust cases concerning the compensation of college athletes on Friday filed documents asking a federal judge in California to provide preliminary approval of a proposed settlement that would include a nearly $2.8 billion damages pool for current and former athletes and dramatically alter other fundamental aspects of how the association’s top level of competition is governed. Division I schools would be able to start paying athletes directly for use of their name, image and likeness (NIL), subject to a per-school cap that would increase over time. NCAA leaders would seek to engineer rules changes eliminating longstanding, sport-by-sport scholarship limits and replacing them with a new set of roster-size limits. In the first academic year after final approval of the settlement the roster limit in football, for example, would be 105. Some Power Five schools recently have had rosters of more than 125 players, according to data compiled by USA TODAY Sports through open-records requests. And while athletes would continue to have the ability to make NIL deals with entities other than their schools, the settlement would allow the NCAA to institute rules designed to give the association greater enforcement oversight of those arrangements. The NCAA also would be allowed to have rules requiring athletes to make progress toward a degree in order to receive the payments proposed under the settlement.

The NCAA, power conferences, and plaintiff athletes filed their proposed settlement agreement in the House case this past Friday. Much has already been written about the proposed settlement agreement, so I will provide three thoughts on a single aspect – the future role of collectives in college athletics.   1.       It looks to me like the NCAA, power conferences and their institutions, and athletes are attempting to use the House settlement agreement as a de facto collective bargaining agreement to implement market controls. At the professional sports level, collective bargaining exempts the parties from antitrust laws when they agree to terms or behaviors that would otherwise artificially manipulate a free market (e.g., salary caps). The parties here are not collectively bargaining given the NCAA’s (and universities’) ongoing stance that college athletes are not employees. It will be interesting to see if this approach succeeds in binding the hands of third-party collectives who are not parties to this settlement, and whether a collective’s inability to sign an athlete to a higher-value deal (thereby losing out on the athlete for themselves and their institution) could be construed as an antitrust injury. 2.       The proposed House agreement limits the amount collectives could pay to the fair market value of athletes’ NIL rights. Under the precise language of the agreement, collectives could not enter into NIL agreements with athletes "unless the license/payment is for a valid business purpose related to the promotion or endorsement of goods or services provided to the general public for profit, with compensation at rates and terms commensurate with compensation paid to similarly situated individuals with comparable NIL value who are not current or prospective student-athletes at the Member Institution." Whenever I see the parties trying to police fair market values, I think of the NCAA’s pre-NIL attempts to put in place "guardrails," on how much the athletes could earn and how it quickly deviated from that path when the DOJ sent the NCAA a letter stating its restrictions "may raise concerns under the antitrust laws." 3. I find it interesting that the proposed agreement seeks to cap collectives’ payments to athletes at fair market value, but does not impose a similar limitation on institutions’ payment to athletes ("Member institutions… shall unilaterally decide/determine whether and how much of any benefits newly permitted by this Injunctive Relief Settlement to provide to any individual Division I student-athlete (up to the Pool amount)." Presumably, schools will pay to attract athletic talent, not for the FMV of any athlete's NIL rights.   I certainly expect collectives to challenge the proposed limitations.    

The monumental decision by the NCAA and the nation’s five largest conferences to settle antitrust claims for nearly $2.8 billion foreshadows significant changes in college athletics, particularly regarding the compensation of athletes. This groundbreaking settlement sets the stage for a new revenue-sharing model that could see millions of dollars directed to athletes as early as the 2025 fall semester. While specific terms of the agreement have not been disclosed, it signifies a shift away from the NCAA's traditional amateurism model established over a century ago, paving the way for athletes to receive compensation akin to professionals. As a result of this settlement, non-revenue-producing athletics programs may face considerable challenges. With schools potentially required to set aside significant portions of revenue to share with athletes, there could be a redistribution of funds within athletic departments. Schools in major conferences, estimated to bear the brunt of the settlement's financial impact, may need to reassess their budgets and prioritize funding for revenue-generating sports. Additionally, the freedom granted to schools to decide how compensation money is distributed among sports programs could lead to disparities between well-funded programs and those with limited resources, potentially impacting the sustainability of non-revenue-producing sports. #ncaa #collegesports #playsports #power5 #antitrust https://lnkd.in/gCjMXSKH

Boil this down to the basics: (1) A lot of revenue is being generated by revenue generating sports in college athletics; (2) For years, schools, conferences, and the NCAA have hid behind the notion of "amateurism" to not compensate the athletes (product) generating the revenue; (3) Smart athletes and lawyers figured out that what the schools, conferences and NCAA were doing was a clear antitrust violation; (4) the athletes that are generating the revenue should receive compensation for their production. How we get there is a challenge. But, congressional involvement seems like a bad idea. Letting the free market decide seems like a much better solution than congressional interference. My $0.02. #sportsbiz #collegesports https://lnkd.in/ew2f682n

The debate over classifying college athletes as employees is intensifying, with significant implications for the NCAA and the sports industry. Two pivotal cases, Johnson v. NCAA and Carter v. NCAA, challenge the NCAA's amateurism model. Key Legal Developments - Johnson v. NCAA: This case argues that student-athletes should be considered employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). A ruling in favor could reshape the classification of athletes, as previous rulings have denied such status. - Carter v. NCAA: This antitrust lawsuit, filed by athletes from Duke, Stanford, and TCU, seeks to dismantle the NCAA's amateurism framework. If certified as a class action, it could result in damages exceeding $2.75 billion for the NCAA, highlighting the exploitation of athletes who generate over $1 billion annually in revenue. Financial Implications - Potential Damages: A ruling against the NCAA could lead to over $2.75 billion in back-pay damages over ten years. - Revenue Sharing: Starting in the 2025-26 academic year, a proposed settlement could allocate 22% of average revenues from Power Five programs for athlete compensation, potentially exceeding $20 million per school annually. Impact on College Sports The outcomes of these cases could redefine college athletics: - Employee Status: A ruling in favor of athletes could grant them rights to collectively bargain and access workers' compensation. - Amateurism Under Threat: The ongoing legal challenges are questioning the viability of the NCAA's amateurism doctrine, which has been central to college sports for over 60 years. As these cases progress, their implications for athlete rights and the NCAA's business model are profound. The decisions made in the coming months could reshape the future of college athletics. #JohnsonvNCAA #CartervNCAA #AthleteRights #FairPayForPlay #CollegeAthletes #NCAAReform #AthleteCompensation #RevenueSharing #FutureOfCollegeSports #NCAAChanges #CollegeAthletics #AmateurismDebate #AthletesAsEmployees #SportsRevolution #StudentAthleteRights #FairLaborStandards #AthleteEmpowerment

The NCAA, the Power Five conferences, and lawyers for the plaintiffs in three antitrust cases concerning the compensation of college athletes on Thursday completed approvals of a proposed settlement that would include a nearly $2.8 billion damages pool for current and former athletes and fundamentally alter how current and future athletes are paid for playing their sports. "Ecstatic to get this done," Steve Berman, one of the plaintiffs' lead attorneys, told USA TODAY Sports said as he was transmitting a letter to the court overseeing the cases. "When we started this, I never dreamed of this day. It's a revolutionary moment in college sports." @Steve Berkowitz, author of the story for USA Today, writes that: "According to a summary of proposed settlement terms first reported by Yahoo Sports! and ESPN and later obtained by USA TODAY Sports, the NCAA would fund the damages pool over a 10-year period and schools would begin sharing future revenues with athletes. More than half of the money for the damages pool would come from reductions in the NCAA’s distributions to all Division I schools and conferences. Anyone else wonder if this is a win or loss for "amateur college athletics? What are your thoughts? https://lnkd.in/euB9Wi6d #usatoday #nil #ncaa

So much has changed in college athletics since I was a student-athlete. It's been hard to keep up with what's going on with NIL deals and how those will factor into the future of college athletics. Luckily, Littler's Ben Pope, Ben McMichael and James Fielding provide insight into federal proposals to regulate name, image and likeness (#NIL) deals for college athletes in this article. #employmentlaw

The NCAA's settlement paving the way for athletes to potentially be paid marks a significant shift in the landscape of college sports. Historically, prior to launching the NIL rules, the NCAA has maintained strict amateurism rules, prohibiting student-athletes from receiving compensation beyond scholarships. This settlement signals a major policy change and acknowledges the evolving perspectives on athlete compensation. Overall, the settlement represents a transformative moment in college sports, reflecting broader societal changes regarding labor rights and fair compensation. #college #sports #ncaa #settlement https://lnkd.in/efX--wD4

Will schools finally pay student-athletes? What a historic settlement means for the NCAA and players. More than 14,000 athletes from 2016 to 2020 are expected to receive more than $2.7 billion in damages, a testament to the fairness of the legal system. The NCAA and the five largest athletic conferences agreed to settle three antitrust suits brought by college athletes who claimed they were deprived of financial gain by only receiving scholarships in exchange for their play. If a judge in California approves the agreement, the NCAA would have to pay out more than $2.7 billion in damages over ten years to current and former athletes who are now a form of a so-called class of plaintiffs who represent the suit. The group consists of 14,000 players enrolled as student-athletes from 2016 to 2020. The settlement explains that it would institute a 10-year revenue-sharing plan to guarantee the active players and collective up to 22% of their schools’ share of media broadcasts and ticket sales. It was reported that it suggests that it would initially equal more than $20 million a year per school in most instances. Still, the figure could increase as much as lucrative TV deals, such as those signed with significant networks for broadcasting rights, are signed. If this is all approved, the plan will start in the fall of 2025. Yahoo Sports first reported this about the agreement. By: Rob Wile NBC News #NCAA #athletes #conferences  #NBCNews #YahooSports  #studentathletes #colleges