The House v. NCAA Settlement: A Game-Changer for College Athletes
Big news dropped in the world of college sports – student-athletes are finally getting their fair share. On June 6, U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken approved a $2.8 billion settlement in the class action antitrust lawsuit, House v. NCAA. The agreement not only opens the door for NCAA schools to share revenue with current Division I athletes, but also provides compensation for former athletes and eliminates long-standing NCAA limits on scholarships.
The House v. NCAA settlement stems from an antitrust lawsuit filed by Division I college athletes who argued that the NCAA’s rules restricting athlete compensation violate antitrust laws. Specifically, the plaintiffs claimed that the NCAA’s long-standing prohibition on revenue sharing and strict limits on scholarships unfairly prevented athletes from earning a fair share of the billions generated by college sports. The case consolidated multiple similar lawsuits, making it one of the most significant legal challenges to the NCAA’s amateurism model.
The settlement addresses four major categories of NCAA-imposed restraints on student-athlete compensation. First, it targets restrictions on broadcast NIL (BNIL), which limited compensation for athletes whose name, image, or likeness appeared in live game broadcasts. Second, it removes restraints on third-party NIL deals, such as endorsement contracts or the use of athletes’ likenesses in video games. Third, it dismantles existing restrictions that prevented universities and conferences from directly sharing a portion of revenue with student-athletes, opening the door to new forms of school-funded compensation. Finally, it lifts the NCAA’s caps on the number of scholarships that Division I programs can offer in each sport. In addition to these forward-looking changes, the settlement includes a compensation fund for former student-athletes who competed during a specific time period and were impacted by these restrictions.
This settlement marks a turning point for the structure of college athletics. For the first time, NCAA schools will be allowed — and in some cases, expected — to share revenue directly with student-athletes. That means more money in players’ pockets going forward, especially in high-revenue sports such as football and basketball. It could also reshape recruiting, as programs with bigger budgets and more willingness to share revenue may have a competitive edge in attracting top talent. In addition, the removal of scholarship limits may affect roster sizes, forcing coaches and schools to reconsider how they build their teams and distribute playing opportunities. Schools will have to continue reassessing how they allocate resources across teams and programs.
The ripple effects of this settlement are just beginning. Conferences will have to decide whether to opt in, and schools face tough choices about how to fund revenue sharing. Title IX concerns are already surfacing — a group of female athletes has filed a lawsuit claiming the model disproportionately benefits male athletes in revenue-generating sports. At the same time, schools must navigate how to stay compliant with both antitrust laws and gender equity requirements. Recruiting could also shift, as compensation becomes part of what athletes consider when choosing where to play. One thing is clear: the NCAA’s amateurism model is no longer intact, and college sports are entering entirely new territory.