NCAA House Settlement A No Go - Unless roster limits are adjusted

Why should we care that slow or untalented (other sports) athletes are being cut? Being on a roster isn't a right.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/house-v-ncaa-case-judge-threatens-to-reject-settlement-over-roster-limits-sets-hard-deadline/

That's been her priority throughout the late stages of this. It's obvious she wants roster limits grandfathered in so current collegians aren't thrown away. The two sides were beyond stupid last week to essentially ignore all of her recent emphasis.

14:00 guys will get cut. Washington may cut 4 minute milers. There are some runners who competed at nationals this year who wouldn't be on a team had the new rules been in effect when the guys were developing.

Conferences will set their own internal rules based around the House numbers. Technically, no roster limits but only 15 XC scholarships and every roster spot is a full ride. Want to walk on? Sorry, kid! We’re out of money and the conference won’t allow us anymore spots.

Further, athletic aid contracts are for a single academic year. Looking at my kid’s agreement right now. No AD is going to contractually guarantee four years of athletic aid. Need to cut someone? Just non-tender them.

I can appreciate what the judge is trying to do but she is just delaying the inevitable. As a previous post stated, being on a collegiate roster is a privilege and you are only on the team if the coach wants you on it.

They will go with a 2 yr transition period, and grandfather in a few athletes.

Athletes will have option to take up their new school ( preferred ), stay at old school for 1-2 more years. Possibly even a financial payment issued to screwed athletes.

The cost of doing this is peanuts compared to total settlement. Ironically, lawyers for students are against this. They just want their share of 2.7 billion now, with no more work.

Bigger problem was idea of allowing future athletes to sue ncaa. Whole idea was to eliminate future lawsuits.

No. Schools like Ohio State and Nebraska have no intention to fund 17 XC scholarships. They will continue with the current walkon plan.

I really empathize with the parents fighting to keep their kids on rosters, but I have a class of 2025 kid who based his recruiting around this settlement. Great power 4 schools with huge distance rosters told him any other year we'd love to have you but we're already looking at cutting athletes. What's done is done but he signed at a weaker power 4 for very little money because the future looked so uncertain. It's really insane that an entire system is being flipped upside down because of greed on the part of so many people. And now a judge makes everything even more messy and uncertain when all these kids just hang in the balance.

My guess is that specific kids won’t be guaranteed roster spots. How can that work because cuts happen regardless?

They’ll have to just come back with gradually decreasing roster sizes, which actually helps the class of ‘25 because there will be more spots next year.

I feel bad for the kids but this judge is supposed to be ruling on this class action suit (were these former SAs harmed) not how the colleges intend to find the money to pay for it. Roster limits should not be an issue she weighs in on.

The truth is (and she probably knows) there will be future lawsuits filed by future athletes who feel this settlement doesn't provide them enough anyway.

The only way around all these lawsuits is for congress to pass carve out laws for college sports.

Also not sure why she cares if the kid has a roster spot or not... the kid is guaranteed their scholarship amount even if they aren't on the team. isn't the point of college an education?

Again, I feel bad for the kids but the judge should not object to the settlement because of roster limit issues

This has not been clarified. Some schools only guarantee 1 yr of continued aid to cut athlete vs. rest of undergrad/or 4-5 years.

Clarification of this would help with judge, as then transfer to continue sports becomes choice of athlete.

Actually Many Student Athletes are in College to increase their chances of Having Success in Athletics, And Coaches Recruit to win Conferences and NCAA Championships. A Long time ago The I believe Kentucky Basketball Coach Said he Recruits the best High School Athletes Knowing Many will leave in a Year or 2 To Enter The NBA Draft, Knowing he has to Recruit another Great Recruiting Class To Win, The NBA,NFL, See NCAA as a Farm System to develop the Future Stars in Their Leagues, Track is the same Way Most Of The American Athletes Were Developed in College To be Successful in Track And Field, Successsful Coaches want to Win NCAA's and also Have Their Athletes good Enough to Get A Really Good Contract, so they don't have to work and the Athlete can Totally Focus on Getting Better and Hopefully Win Medals at Olympics And World Championships, Set American and World Records etc. Coaches do send their Athletes to the Tutoring Center so the Athlete Can be successful in a class they are struggling with so they can stay eligible.

Seems like a pretty easy way to get a change of venue motion approved in a higher court as this judge seemingly cannot make up her mind/make any judgement that even remotely has any sort of detriment to the student athletes.

Don't push this until April of a May academic calendar when this was basically done in September and then change your mind on stuff you have previously agreed upon ( while at the same time stupidly trying to let every further graduating class file suit with the NCAA). Obviously she's pretty biased

Either the value of an NCAA roster spot is nothing so we have to pay all the kids or it's incredibly valuable so we cannot have limits it can't be both

Scholarship guys aren't getting cut.

It sounds like the judge is actually doing what judges should do and is protecting the rights of innocents who are collateral damage to the avarice of those pushing the settlement. In a nutshell, third tier football athletes are getting paid at the expense of athletes even being able to participate in a sport. The whole lawsuit was couched in terms of equity but really its just contingency fee greed. NCAA football players are not professional athletes and are rewarded via full scholarships at schools they may have struggled to have gotten in to. If there was an open tiered system of professional football (like English soccer) most of these football players would be in the lower leagues making very little. The part that seems to escape the Plaintiffs is that they are not professional athletes. They are specifically amateur athletes in colleges, rewarded directly via scholarship. So, you squeeze a little revenue sharing, framed as equity, and negatively impact scores of other athletes who have spent years developing in their sport. Good for the judge for seeing through it all.

Spots are incredibly valuable which is why they're being limited.

Correct, being on a roster is not a right. However, in a class action lawsuit, all class members collective interests must be addressed. Thousands of class members losing their roster spots does not align with how class action lawsuits are supposed to be settled. The NCAA sure as poop better figure this out, because if they don't, they are looking at 8 to 10 times the damages should the case go to trial.

I agree. Can you imagine how many wealthy parents have kids playing lacrosse or field hockey or soccer who will get cut? Some of those parents are corporate lawyers.