As the summer University of Dayton Magazine went to press, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California affirmed final approval to a settlement in the House v. NCAA litigation, determining the landscape for how college sports will operate in a new era.
“The settlement represents a step in the right direction, an important move toward restoring accountability and structure to a broken system that has lost the trust of many,” said Neil Sullivan, vice president and director of athletics at UD.
“We’re ready to meet the moment and aggressively move forward with our fans and community by our side.”
The class-action antitrust lawsuit was filed in 2020 by more than 40,000 current and former student-athletes against the NCAA and the Power Five conferences. An argument was made that since athletes help generate media revenue, they should share in it more than before, through scholarships and other support.
“While this approval marks significant progress, we recognize it is not the finish line. We remain hopeful that accountability does not end with the settlement’s approval, but begins with defendant conferences fulfilling their terms and transforming words into meaningful and lasting change,” Sullivan said. “We’re ready to meet the moment and aggressively move forward with our fans and community by our side.”
As part of this settlement, the NCAA will implement new roster limits for all Division I sports. NCAA rules previously included both scholarship limits and roster limits. Scholarship limits, it was argued, constituted a restraint of trade. (Many pro sports have salary-cap agreements worked out between players and owners as part of collective bargaining agreements.) The new agreement abolished scholarship limits and changed roster limits, with some sports gaining roster spots; others, losing them. For example, baseball will institute a new roster limit of 34, all of which can be funded by scholarships. Previously, schools could give the equivalent of 11.7 baseball scholarships.
Athletes already on rosters or verbally committed for 2025–26 are grandfathered in and exempt from these caps for their remaining eligibility.
Direct payments will begin July 1 to current student-athletes, and back pay dating back to 2016 (a date fixed by statute of limitation) will start for former student athletes. Over 10 years, schools will pay out about $2.75 billion in back pay.
Sullivan wrote in a letter in late April to Flyer basketball season ticket holders, “It is estimated that Division I college athletes will now be eligible to receive benefits collectively approximating 51% of future athletic revenues — comparable to professional sports.” Most of the benefits are likely to stay with the sports that generate them, basketball and power conference football.
“The settlement allows institutions to make payments to student-athletes up to a capped amount (currently about $21 million per school, per year across sports),” Sullivan wrote.
Flyers basketball, Sullivan said recently, has provided about $6 million per year to UD’s other sports. That revenue is now staying with basketball.
“Our strategy,” he wrote to season ticket holders, “to build our compensation pool and reallocate costs will be grounded in four primary areas:
Besides revenue sharing, players will still have the opportunity for name-image likeness (NIL) income. Dayton 6th will continue to function as a marketing agency in partnership with the University but, Sullivan wrote, “UD will hold the primary contractual relationship with the players. Dayton 6th may engage in NIL agreement with student-athletes but only for a valid business purpose to promote goods and services provided to the general public with payments at fair market value rates.”
The NCAA has been working with Deloitte, a Big Four accounting firm and the world’s largest professional services firm, to design an NIL enforcement system.
“We are choosing to face this moment head-on and find opportunity in the disruption. We have the strength of our history, strength of our fans and our community.”
Season ticket holders receiving Sullivan’s letter had probably been anticipating it with one big question: How much is the cost increase in the seating program? Sullivan, after pointing out that this is the first increase in seven years, wrote that increases fall in a range of 7% to 12% and that “seats in the 400 level, where an Arena Seating Program contribution was not previously required, will now be part of the program at $25 per seat, or just over a dollar per game.” The increases will not be devoted to the administration or non-basketball operations.
In his concluding paragraph, he wrote, “We are choosing to face this moment head-on and find opportunity in the disruption. We have the strength of our history, strength of our fans and our community.”
A version of this article appears in print in the Summer 2025 University of Dayton Magazine, Page 66-67. EXPLORE THE ISSUE — MORE ONLINE