The ACC has “joined the Big 12” as the second named party in House v. NCAA to vote to settle that case and related antitrust cases, according to sources cited by Pete Thamel of ESPN.com. The ACC presidents “voted in person” in Charlotte at their meetings yesterday, while Big 12 presidents and chancellors voted virtually yesterday afternoon to “unanimously approve,” with departing members Texas and Oklahoma abstaining. There will be four more votes this week -- three more from the Power 5 leagues and one from the NCAA BOG. The Pac-12 will “vote as a full 12-team league, as currently constructed,” as it was when the House v. NCAA case was filed. Sources have said consistently that there is “little resistance on the conference level, and the NCAA is also expected to pass the settlement measure.” The key parts of the settlement include the NCAA paying for more than $2.7B in back damages over a decade, about $1.6B of which will be withheld from schools. There is also roughly $20M in “permissive revenue sharing" that is expected to begin in fall 2025. This revenue sharing will “give athletic departments the direct ability to pay the players, a massive paradigm shift for college athletics” (ESPN.com, 5/21).
NOT DONE YET: USA TODAY’s Steve Berkowitz noted lawyers for the plaintiffs in a fourth case signaled yesterday that they “are seeking to keep the association and the conferences embroiled in a similar litigation.” That fourth case is set for a hearing tomorrow in Colorado before U.S. District Judge Charlotte Sweeney -- who is “considering the association’s and conferences’ request to have the matter transferred to California,” where it “likely would be folded into the cases moving toward settlement.” Berkowitz noted lawyers on both sides of the three cases seemingly headed toward settlement “expressed confidence” that “they will prevail on having the fourth case moved to California.” But if the bid to move the fourth case is rejected, it “could continue in Colorado.” Berkowitz noted if that happens, the NCAA, the conferences and the plaintiffs’ attorneys in the cases seemingly headed toward settlement may have to deal with lawyers who wrote in a filing yesterday evening that “it seems likely” that one of their plaintiffs “will opt out of any such settlement to continue to litigate their claims in this case ... plaintiffs expect that many other athletes will opt out as well and could seek to join this case to seek better and fairer terms for athletes” (USA TODAY, 5/21).
LITTLE GUY IMPACTS: YAHOO SPORTS' Ross Dellenger wrote the settlement framework approved yesterday by the NCAA Division I BOD has the NCAA funding 41% of the damages ($1.1B) while the schools will fund 60% ($1.65B) over a 10-year payback period. Dellenger noted the “schools’ portion” is the part at issue. The power conferences will pay about $664M in contributions to the damages while the other 27 non-power conferences will pay $990M. Such a split in damage payments “sparked a coalescence of the leaders of the 22 non-FBS conferences.” Dellenger noted they sent to the NCAA a two-page letter
