Big Ten leaders vote to approve settlement in House v. NCAA antitrust case
Big Ten Conference university presidents and chancellors voted to approve a potentially historic settlement in the landmark House v. NCAA case, marking the next step toward college sports green-lighting an industry-shifting revenue-sharing model.
The news was first reported by Yahoo Sports. The Big Ten joins the ACC and Big 12 as power conferences that have already voted to approve the settlement terms.
Each power conference is expected to vote on the settlement over the next few days, in anticipation of the NCAA’s Board of Governors potentially approving the agreement later this week. Attorneys for plaintiffs have set a hard deadline of Thursday for defendants – the NCAA and power conferences – to agree to settlement terms.
A potential settlement would entail the NCAA and all 32 Division I conferences paying $2.77 billion in damages. It also would enable schools, at their discretion, to share as much as $22 million in revenue with athletes, according to a copy of the proposed settlement summary obtained by On3.
What’s next? In the coming months, U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken will need to certify the settlement agreement, and represented athletes in the case will have the opportunity to opt-out.
The nation’s two super conferences – the Big Ten and SEC – wield extraordinary leverage in college sports. What changes they advocate for in college sports, they typically get, and there is little other leagues can do to curb their substantial influence.
Most Big Ten schools ready for revenue-sharing world
Not all schools in the Big Ten have similar resources. Nevertheless, Big Ten schools are well positioned to partake in revenue-sharing efforts with their athletes in large part because of the league’s lucrative media rights deal and the substantial dollars they will receive as part of the College Football Playoff’s new revenue-distribution model.
In a revenue-sharing world, the Big Ten – and SEC – will continue to widen the already mammoth gap between the two super conferences and other power leagues. They are both positioning themselves as the two dominant forces, much like the AFC and NFC are in the NFL.
Why House case posed existential threat to NCAA
Industry leaders face few attractive options in the face of a class-action lawsuit that sources say poses an existential threat to the NCAA. If the NCAA chooses to take the case to trial in January, it could face a possible $4.2 billion damages bill.
Still, some pushback has existed among stakeholders, in part, because they do not see a clear way the settlement provides protection from further lawsuits from future college athletes.
The settlement is expected to include an annual mechanism allowing future college athletes to opt-out from or object to settlement terms. That element won’t necessarily protect the NCAA from future litigation. But it could make it more difficult for larger (and far more costly) class-action suits to take hold.
On top of questions over protection from further litigation, many college leaders are grappling with how to budget appropriately in the new age of revenue sharing.
One industry source told On3: “Most ADs are like, ‘OK, we know it’s coming. How do I practically apply that to my day-to-day budgeting? How many years is it spread out? What are the requirements for spending? Can it be paid through a third-party group? Do I have to cut sports?’ Everyone is discussing that.”