Schools Can Pay Their Athletes—and College Sports Will Never Be the Same

The landmark House settlement seeks some equilibrium on the playing field. But plenty of questions—and some denial—remains

By Jason Gay of The WSJ. Excerpts:

"a settlement has been approved allowing schools to directly pay their athletes.

This isn’t a salary, technically. This is compensation from schools to athletes for use of their “name, image, likeness,” but it’s not a measly NIL like a burly offensive lineman getting all the bratwurst he can eat. This is a real paycheck, directly from the college."

"The settlement of this class action—House vs. NCAA, in which current and former athletes sought name, image and likeness opportunities and a share of athletic department revenue—had been in the works for a while. 

On Friday, a federal judge signed off on the $2.6 billion settlement, which includes back pay to litigants but also creates a revenue-sharing system “in which each Division I school will be able to distribute roughly $20 million a year to their athletes,” the Journal reported."

"The bulk of those $20 million allotments are expected to go to high-revenue sports like football and men’s basketball—that’s where the money’s coming from, after all. Other beneficiaries may be growing sports like women’s basketball and softball."

"The revenue sharing payments will come from the schools, and third party NIL deals over $600 will be subject to review by “NIL Go,” an oversight group overseen by Deloitte.

The idea here is to put outside NIL deals under a microscope—find out what player deals are legitimate arrangements, and what are booster largesses masquerading as NIL."

"Enforcement will be a headache. So will the invariable league challenges."

"the proportion of revenue (22 percent) given to athletes"  

Related posts:

Are lucrative deals for college athletes doomed? (2025) 

The University of North Carolina is trying to turn its student-athletes social media stars (2025)

March Madness will cost $17.3 billion in lost work (2023)

Supreme Court Rejects NCAA’s Tight Limits on Athlete Benefits, Compensation (2021) 

March Madness Is a Moneymaker. Most Schools Still Operate in Red (2021)

NCAA Takes Another Court Hit on Athlete Compensation: The Ninth Circuit ruled that the organization’s restrictions violated federal antitrust law  (2020)

The NCAA wants an antitrust exemption from Congress so it can oversee name, image and likeness deals (2020)

Cost of attendance stipends in college sports  (2018)

How The Economics Of College Sports Might Be Distorted  (2017)

All is not well (financially) in the world of college football (2015)

Public universities spend more per athlete than they do per student (2013)

Will Moving To NCAA Division I Status Pay Off For The University of the Incarnate Word? (2012)

There's A New Book On The Economics Of College Sports  (2011)

What Economists Say About "March Madness" (2009)

The Flutie Effect: When The Teams Win, More Students Apply To The College. (2008)

Basketball on Office Monitors Madness for Business (2008) ("streaming all 63 final college basketball games free, will cost American businesses about $1.7 billion in lost productivity" plus computers  servers might crash)