Crucial House settlement still on hold with judge demand needed to avoid denial |
Brandon Rink
-
- Wednesday, April 23 2025
An entire college sports landscape is watching intently as the House settlement is still in question.
The sweeping deal is set to pave the way for a number of changes from revenue sharing with athletes to roster limits, as well as settle lawsuits that could very well bankrupt the NCAA and bring a very different wave of change to college sports if let to go to trial. Going into April, the perception was that the settlement was something of a formality, but Judge Claudia Wilken has thrown a wrench in that. On Wednesday, she issued an order threatening a denial of the settlement if they cannot rework it without "the immediate implementation of the roster limits provisions that will cause harm to certain members of the Injunctive Relief Settlement Class." Dabo Swinney, a former walk-on, has been an outspoken critic of the roster limit on football rosters specifically, which can go up to 120 players currently with 85 on scholarship and would go down to 105 but with the ability in the near future possibly to have all 105 on scholarship with the settlement. Wilken said that she wanted the roster limits section of the House settlement reworked for current athletes on the first official look at the settlement in April, but the NCAA and power conference defendants had not tweaked that as of this week. From Yahoo's reporting: However, in a filing last Monday, the named defendants (NCAA and power conferences) in the case, as well as plaintiff lawyers, refused to change the roster limits — a very public pushback against the desires of a sitting federal judge. She didn’t take it lightly. “The Court will delay denial of final approval to permit the parties to attempt to modify the settlement agreement,” she wrote, “so that members of the Injunctive Relief Settlement Class will not be harmed by the immediate implementation of the roster limits provisions.” Perhaps, attorneys banked on the settlement’s sheer numbers — more than 88,000 claims made to just 600 opt-outs/objections — in convincing the judge to approve the deal. Now, she is offering them an ultimatum: Change the roster limits as I originally asked or have your precious settlement denied. "We are playing chicken with a damn federal judge," said one high-ranking college leader. The lawyer for the plaintiffs said they're ready for a fight in court if the NCAA doesn't acquiesce. "We appreciate the court's guidance and thoughtful review of this monumental case," plaintiffs attorney Steve Berman said. "We are pleased that the court has rejected all of the objections but the roster issue, and we will work hard to convince the NCAA and the conferences to address the court's concerns. If we are unable to do so, then we are off to trial and we will return to fighting the NCAA in court with next steps." NCAA and power conferences’ statement on the court ruling today.https://t.co/0jimcvoZLg pic.twitter.com/GduEfhul7g I have a hard time seeing this as a dealbreaker considering the alternative to settling. But they tried to hold their ground and the judge said, 'Nope.' https://t.co/1n3gfm3Rmi There are 134 teams with budgets already set with rev share in mind, players expecting money in the fall that can only come from rev share… they have zero leverage anymore. They need a deal. https://t.co/iNBkdPgsTe
Upgrade Your Experience!
Unlock premium boards and exclusive features (e.g. ad-free) by upgrading your account today.
Upgrade Now!
