NCAA, college leaders file landmark agreement in antitrust cases; here's what was settled and what's next
In the wake of a settlement in the House, Hubbard and Carter cases, the courts now hold significant oversight over what college sports will look like in the future.
Will the Matador Club still be able to provide NIL deals above and beyond the revenue sharing from the athletic dept?
"One of the biggest looming uncertainties as part of the settlement agreement is its impact on third-party, booster-backed collectives. Collectives provide millions to athletes in, what many believe to be, cash incentives disguised as endorsement deals for the use of their name, image and likeness (NIL).
Language in the settlement seeks to eliminate or greatly reduce what many college leaders describe as “phony” NIL payments from booster organizations to athletes. The settlement does this through an assortment of rules and an enforcement mechanism that is protected through the court. For instance...
- Boosters — or any third-party entity or business, for that matter — are expressly prohibited from striking NIL deals with athletes unless they can prove the agreements are genuine with rates that align with “similarly situated individuals with comparable NIL value” who are not players at that school, the settlement reads.
- All third-party NIL deals of a $600 value or more must be approved by a newly created clearinghouse that is expected to vet the agreements for authenticity by using fair market value standards. For those deals not approved, the NCAA, conferences and/or a new third-party enforcement entity has authority to deem athletes ineligible and/or to fine schools for violations, as they do now.
- However, unlike now, those punishments can be appealed to an agreed-upon neutral arbitrator. The arbitration process, according to the settlement, is designed to be a more accelerated and neutral procedure than the NCAA’s current infractions situation, where committees of school representatives determine matters. The arbitrator must rule within 45 days of the beginning of the arbitration process, but an extension is possible. The arbitrator’s ruling is “final and binding,” according to the settlement.
- During arbitration, enforcement penalties — for instance, a player ruled ineligible — will be stayed until a ruling. Arbitrators have the power to request the production of documents and witness testimony. It’s unclear if that entails subpoena power."