By Malcolm Butler
Much has been written nationally over the past months about the federal courts deciding the direction of the future of college athletics.
The decision could totally reshape what is already a form of college athletics that we would not have recognized a decade ago.
The NCAA, P5 conferences and lawyers representing a class of Division I athletes filed detailed terms of an antitrust lawsuit on Friday. It has provided a sneak peak as to what may be coming as soon as next academic year.
In late May, all parties agreed to settle a trifecta of lawsuits that include House vs. NCAA, Hubbard vs. NCAA, and Carter vs. NCAA – all pertaining to the way universities and colleges compensate student-athletes.
The filing on Friday included how student athletes that competed from 2016 through 2021 will share $2.78 billion in damages that the NCAA has agreed to pay. Why that five-year span?
“Because July of 2021 is when we started to have the ability to compensate (student athletes) from an (Name, Image, Likeness) standpoint,” said Louisiana Tech AD Ryan Ivey. “So, the statute of limitations for back-pay runs through those dates.”
Student athletes who competed during those years must join the lawsuit in order to possibly receive compensation.
“There is a process where any student athlete who played during that time can submit their information to the plaintiff’s attorney,” said Ivey. “And there is a formula that would tell how much they would get out of this settlement.”
Those who are in the know on this subject believe upwards of 90 percent of that $2.78 billion total will go to former P5 student athletes that played football and men’s basketball. The other 10 percent will go to everyone else.
“People aren’t going to make as much money as they may think off of this,” said Ivey.
Forty percent of the $2.78 billion will come from the NCAA reserve fund and 60 percent will come from the conferences and their schools.
That will have a direct impact on university athletic departments around the country as each school will pay a portion of the $2.78 billion through a decrease in their yearly conference revenue share over the next 10 years.
According to Ivey, the portion that the conferences and their member institutions must pay is determined by the average distribution over the last 10 years.
What does that mean for a school like Louisiana Tech?
“Our portion is going to be approximately $3 to $3.25 million over the next 10 years,” said Ivey. “So, that will be $300,000 to $325,000 per year. We are paying that through revenue distribution reduction.”
Although Ivey admitted the decrease in revenue distribution over the next decade is a concern, he does believe the settlement provides a path for moving forward.
“Ultimately, the biggest concern in my opinion is how do we move forward,” said Ivey. “We must find a clear pathway to get some stability within college athletics. I think the settlement is the only way to get some stability at least for the next 10 years.
“Now what happens beyond that I don’t know. But at least for the next 10 years there should be some safe harbors within the NCAA. You should see reduced litigation. When you look at the biggest issues we have faced over the last two to three years, it has stemmed from litigation because of transfers or NIL or whatever it may be.”
That money that Louisiana Tech must surrender doesn’t go directly to former Tech student athletes, according to Ivey. Instead it goes to the total pot that will then be dispersed across the country to the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.
What about the future impact of the settlement?
The settlement also sets up new roster limits for a number of college sports, something that will have an economic impact as well.
In the current system, many sports are considered head count sports, equating to full scholarships for their participants (football, men’s and women’s basketball, volleyball to name a few). Other sports are classified as equivalency sports where coaches have X number of scholarships to spread across their roster (baseball, softball, track and field to name a few).
Under the new proposal in the settlement, roster caps will be placed on teams and the universities can elect to fully fund every one of those scholarships if they choose. Conferences around the country will have the ability to put further limitations on roster caps if they choose, according to Ivey.
Conference USA presidents will be meeting in the future to discuss those possibilities.
A head count sport like football will have a roster cap of 105 in the new proposed model. In the current model, FBS programs had 85 full scholarships but could roster an unlimited number of students athletes (with the addition of walk-ons).
Many programs would roster around 125 to 135 players. With this new legislation, football programs can only roster up to 105, but they can now fully fund each one of those scholarships if they choose. However, they can also choose to fund less than 105 and would have the ability to hand out partial scholarships to certain student-athletes.
“So, you would be able to give half a scholarship to a student athlete with the roster cap being 105 for football, which is very similar to the FCS model,” said Ivey. “Basically, everything within the roster cap limits is going to be up to institutional discretion. Each institution is going to have to determine what they have the financial resources to be able to manage that piece.”
Ivey said the roster caps would start on July 1, 2025.
“My assumption is it will have to be finalized before (this) January because they will have to go through the process of changing the manual and putting all this in the manual,” said Ivey. “You have NCAA convention in January. You have NCAA Council it will have to go through. And then the government’s process of what we have. I would think this fall we will start to see these things trickle out.”
In an equivalency sport like baseball, the current model allowed for just 11.7 scholarships that coaches were able to spread across their roster. The new model will put a cap on the roster at the proposed number of 34, but schools will have the ability to fully-fund all 34 scholarships if they choose.
The proposed numbers for cap limits that have been publicized so far for sports that Louisiana Tech has include football (105), men’s and women’s basketball (15), baseball (34), softball (25), volleyball (18), tennis (10), golf (9), men’s and women’s cross country (17 for each), soccer (28), bowling (11), men’s and women’s track and field (45 for each) to name a few.
According to a story in Yahoo Sports, there are about 500 scholarships available in all 40-plus sports in the current NCAA model. Under the new roster limits, that number is now at more than 1,200.
So how will universities across the country handle funding, especially at the mid-major level? There is some talk of the NCAA doing away with the minimum of 16 sports to play at the FBS level, which would open up the door for schools to cut teams.
“I do know there are some conversations surrounding what that sports sponsorship minimum should be or should we even have a sports sponsorship minimum,” said Ivey. “I wouldn’t even want to speculate on whether that would or would not occur. I do know NCAA President (Charlie) Baker has come out and said the goal of this is not to eliminate sports or reduce opportunities.
“Title IX still very much a real thing. So, when will need to make sure we follow those guidelines which goes to opportunities and proportionality and all kinds of aspects that govern that. I don’t know if you will see a ton of reductions in sports.”
Ivey pointed to the role that college athletics plays in aiding campus with diversity and enrollment.
“We focus on helping with enrollment,” said Ivey. “We have other opportunities. There are there that we utilize athletics to help with campus at large. If you are reducing those opportunities and you are eliminating sports, then you are really going against the fundamental mission of the institution.”
Ivey talked about college athletic departments understanding who they are in the scope of resources and expectations on winning.
“If we are trying to win national championships in every sport, then we are either going to have to really increase our financial investment in what we are doing or we are going to have to eliminate sports in order to increase financial investment in certain sports that we want to try to do that. I don’t think any of us want to get into that situation.”
One of the biggest challenges may be defining what success looks like for non-Power 5 programs across the country, according to Ivey.
“How do we define success,” said Ivey. “What is that definition of success for Louisiana Tech. That is going to mean different things to different people. That is the first thing that we have to do. I do think there are opportunities with this.
“I think there will be opportunities even with roster caps. I think you will see some parity across some sports. If the roster cap for football is 105, then these high-resourced programs won’t have 125 or 135 players anymore. So where do those 25 players go? Now there is opportunity there for us.”
With the Ohio State’s of the college world boasting athletic budgets of $275 million and even the Liberty’s within Conference USA sitting at $75 million, Ivey said Louisiana Tech has to find its niche to succeed.
“Embracing who we are,” said Ivey. “We cannot be all things to all people. Ruston is this small rural community that has this great feel for supporting and taking care of our student athletes. Creating that environment. Creating the culture within the programs and within the department that make student athletes want to be here. That want to play here. That want to be a part of it. That have pride in what we do.
“And have coaches that want to come coach here and staff that want to come work here. If we can set that culture and that environment, then I do believe we can thrive in the current situation.”
With the landscape of college athletics constantly evolving, the future will be tremendously impacted by the final ruling in NCAA antitrust lawsuit in the coming months.
