The NCAA's national office could be footing the bill for a settlement expected to top $2.7 billion in the landmark House v. NCAA and other related antitrust cases, hoping to reshape and stabilize the college sports industry, sources told ESPN on Thursday.
Sources told ESPN this week that the parties have proposed that the NCAA national office, rather than its individual member schools or conferences, would pay to resolve past damages over a 10-year period. The NCAA payments would be paid to former college athletes who say they were illegally prevented from making money by selling the rights to their name, image and likeness.
The deal would come with a corresponding commitment from conferences and schools to share revenue with athletes going forward, sources said. The deal would establish a framework for power conferences to share revenue with their athletes in the future. Sources have told ESPN that schools anticipate capping athlete revenue sharing at nearly $20 million per year in the future. (That figure is derived from a formula that is expected to be, according to sources, 22% of an income metric still being discussed, which will be based on various income groups. It would be up to the schools to share that amount.)
The dollar value and timing, sources cautioned, are not established and could change due to the countless variables involved in the case.
Steve Berman, one of the lead attorneys for the plaintiffs, told ESPN that he believes the House case “makes a difference” after more than a decade of legal battles that undermined NCAA rules. Berman declined to comment on the details of the ongoing settlement talks, but said the plaintiffs' influence is growing as the case moves closer to trial.
“Our influence is a big cannonball that rolls down the hill and gains speed,” Berman said. “The longer they wait, the more they have to pay. It's that simple.”
The NCAA declined to comment.
Since a group of college sports and NCAA officials met with plaintiffs' attorneys at the Hyatt Regency at the Dallas-Fort Worth Airport on April 25, details of potentially reaching a settlement in the Camera have begun to be distributed to campuses. After interviews with more than a dozen university officials, industry sources and attorneys this week, ESPN learned that many details crucial to a deal remain unresolved, but both sides are moving toward a deal that could serve as a catalyst for the new business model. of university sports.
“They have things written down,” said one industry source. “It's not just lawyers and commissioners meeting and having a cocktail. This snowball is moving downhill. The horizon is about a month.”
The plaintiffs in the House case argue that the NCAA is violating the law by imposing restrictions on how athletes monetize their name, image and likeness. The case is scheduled to go to trial in January. If the NCAA loses the case at trial, it could owe athletes more than $4 billion in damages.
In addition to saving money, the NCAA is also motivated to reach a settlement in hopes of laying the foundation for a system that could help them avoid future litigation. An agreement alone might not provide that protection without additional help from Congress or a collective bargaining agreement with athletes.
The NCAA and its conferences are sued in at least two other federal antitrust cases challenging what remains of the association's amateurism rules. Those cases are also likely to be resolved as part of the House agreement.
Earlier this month, the plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment, asking the judge in the case to rule on several key arguments before trial. A summary judgment hearing is scheduled for September, and a ruling in favor of the plaintiffs could continue to increase their leverage in a negotiation.
An outstanding question in the potential settlement of the House case is whether a settlement would eliminate future antitrust lawsuits against the NCAA and its schools.
“I'm very concerned about the fact that a deal isn't really a deal,” an industry source told ESPN of the looming issues that need to be resolved before a deal is reached. “It doesn't have enough protections. If it were a comprehensive deal with congressional approval, I would feel a lot better.”
College sports leaders have been asking Congress to draft a new federal law for several years that, among other things, would protect them from future litigation.
Sources told ESPN that some school officials hope a House deal could spur action at the Capitol. Several members of Congress who have worked on legislation related to college sports in recent years declined to comment on the impact a deal could have on creating a new federal law.
As information has returned to campuses, the biggest concern is how protective the agreement would be against future antitrust lawsuits.
“You can't just resolve disputes,” said another industry source. “You have to be able to come away with something in return in addition to the deal. If you don't have the ability to structure the future, all we're going to do is shake hands and wait five minutes for the next presentation. “You don’t want to be waiting for the next lawsuit here.”
