The approval for a landmark antitrust case allowing college athletes to receive direct payments from colleges is temporarily delayed. During the lengthy final approval hearing, Judge Claudia Wilken of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California requested modifications to the settlement’s provisions regarding roster limitations, resulting in at least a week’s postponement.

“Basically, I think it’s a good settlement,” said Wilken. “Don’t quote me. I think it’s worth pursuing…”

The case, labeled House v. NCAA, could allow colleges to start paying players millions starting on July 1. However, Judge Wilken raised concerns about new roster limits, projected to displace almost 5,000 athletes across NCAA sports. This has led to discussions on how to best manage the roster sizes, as schools have already commenced cuts ahead of potential settlement approval.

Judge Wilken suggested that current athletes should be ‘grandfathered in’, allowing them to remain on rosters until they graduate, temporarily extending rosters beyond limits until a solution is devised between NCAA attorneys and plaintiffs.

The $2.8 billion settlement stands to not only compensate prior athletes but also structure a future revenue-sharing model, marking a historic shift in NCAA governance for collegiate athletes, potentially averting countless future lawsuits tied to financial disparities within college sports.

What is House v. NCAA?

The House case stems from a 2020 lawsuit initiated by current and former athletes challenging the NCAA’s restrictions on revenue-sharing. If approved, it would resolve three antitrust litigations collectively aimed at ensuring fair payment for collegiate athletes.