Now to a major headline in the sports world and
an update in the case that could reshape college athletics.
The NCAA Board of Governors voting to approve terms of
what is expected to be a multi billion dollar settlement
in the class action antitrust lawsuit against the NCAA.
The settlement is expected to include about
$2.7 billion in back pay damages to former Division One
athletes,
plus a future revenue sharing model between power conference schools
and athletes.
So for more on this case and what it means
for the future of collegiate athletics,
I'm joined now by Michael McCann,
legal analyst and Senior Sports Legal Reporter at Sportico.
Michael, thank you so much for joining us tonight.
I want to start with what this case is all
about,
Essentially this idea that amateurism is somehow illegal.
How would this settlement do away with that system and
move towards something that's more of a pay for play
scenario?
Yeah, it basically has two big components that move away
from amateurism.
One is that players will be paid for the past,
so damages in terms of money they could have made
in name,
image and likeness, money they could have made had video
games been allowed by the
NCAA, money they could have made had they received a
share of television revenue when they go on TV,
just like pro athletes do.
The other big piece is the going forward part.
And the going forward part is that colleges can opt
in,
conferences can opt in as well to pay players,
to share revenue with them,
to have direct pay. And that will be,
of course, a radical change from the traditions of college
sports that many would say it's the change that's warranted
given that coaches can make millions of dollars and all
other sorts of ways in which money is made in
college sports.
Now, the athletes, at least at some schools,
will get a direct stake.
Do we expect most schools to opt in for this
when we're talking about that idea of back pay?
I mean, we're talking about dating back payments to 2016
possibly.
Who could actually see that sort of back pay?
And where does the back pay money actually come from?
Yeah, And the back pay money will will disproportionately go
to some athletes more than others.
So certainly football and basketball will get a bigger share
than other sports.
The money will come from a variety of sources.
But the NCAA itself is a major provider of resources.
And then the schools and a lot of schools that
are not defendants in the litigation are going to have
to pay part of it,
including schools that maybe aren't making a fortune in sports.
So they're they're certainly not happy about this,
particularly given that there are all sorts of changes going
on in colleges in terms of revenue there.
There's a Cliff in terms of population of of college
age students coming up.
So these are real challenges for schools.
But the schools that I think are are certainly big
football schools will probably opt in because they're going to
want to compete.
They're going to want to get the best players because
college football generates a lot of revenue.
Michael, you have cautioned previously that there are some red
flags with this settlement.
In your view, what are the concerns with the settlement
term sheet?
Well, what is that? What they agreed to is not
going to be a final deal.
I think that's always a key caveat that they're agreeing
to certain concepts,
big concepts, But there are all sorts of details that
have to be worked out,
including how it will all comply with Title Nine.
Title 9 being a federal law
that commands sex acts with sex equity in terms of
pay,
so that essentially male athletes aren't getting more than women
athletes.
That's of course an important civil rights law.
This settlement is going to have to comply with that.
There are other things that are going to have to
be figured out,
including what directly is paid.
So one big hurdle is will they work out the
details before they present the final offer to the judge.
Then of course, the judge,
Judge Wilkin, will have to review it.
She's going to have to make sure that it's equitable,
that it's reasonable, that it doesn't disproportionately benefit some members
of the class.
So she'll have to review that and ultimately she'll likely
accept it.
But the settlement could be appealed to the federal,
the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.
This happened in the NFL concussion settlement where there was
an appeal to the Third Circuit and then to the
United States Supreme Court.
So there are those hurdles.
Then, of course, there's the possibility of lawsuits that this
is this case,
this settlement is a contract.
It's not precedent and it's not negotiated with the players
union.
And that's important because when a management and labor agree
to a deal,
it's typically exempt from antitrust law.
There's no players union in college sports.
They're not recognized as employees,
at least yet. So all of these restraints on pay
could be challenged in court.
Then, of course, member schools could say,
wait a second, we didn't agree to this.
You rush this through NCAA,
these top, the power conferences rushed it through.
We're having to foot the bill.
We didn't get a fair say.
They could seek potentially restraining orders.
So they're all sorts of areas of turbulence that could
present themselves.
Wow, fascinating stuff. Thank you so much for your analysis
and insight here.
Michael McCann, legal analyst and senior sports legal reporter at
Sportico.
Thank you. Thank you.