The week after: Early fallout of the House v. NCAA settlement

Ring the bell.

Last Friday — June 6, 2025 — the House v. NCAA settlement ruling was made that guarantees $2.8 billion in damages to be repaid to former student-athletes and also promises revenue sharing to current and future student-athletes.

It has been only one week since the groundbreaking ruling was made.

In these seven days, more lawsuits, bills and problems have bubbled to the surface that will need further counseling.

Here’s a brief rundown of the movement we’ve seen in just a week:

There is more legislation on the way
Two new House bills have already been introduced in the last week as a result of the new House ruling. With questions of revenue sharing getting answered in the ruling, there are still major questions regarding the future of NIL legislation. Both of the bills proposed — the SCORE Act and the SPORTS Act — have a similar backbone to hopefully address the major questions and concerns of NIL.

Both of the bills include:

• Replacing state NIL laws with a national standard
• Anti-employment clause ensuring that student athletes will not be employees
• Academic, medical and well-being resources and protections

The “power” conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC and Pac-12) released a statement that openly endorsed the SCORE Act and could be a step closer to clearer and more uniform regulations.

International athlete concerns
NCAA President Charlie Baker brought up to reporters that schools have brought forth their concerns that international athletes could potentially violate their student visas if they get paid through revenue share.

The F-1 visa is the most common student visa that international student-athletes obtain. First-year visa members are not allowed to be employed off-campus unless it is under special circumstances. However, on-campus employment is allowed up to 20 hours per week as long as classes are in session.

Since athletes under revenue share are not considered “employees”, it is still uncertain whether or not these regulations would apply to them if they receive money from schools.

The first Title IX appeal has been placed
The distribution of revenue was calculated by Dr. Daniel Rascher, who did the bulk of the work on the economic estimations and formulas that provide the backbone for the House ruling.

Using Rascher’s formula, the courts established that 90 percent of the revenue sharing will be distributed to football and men’s basketball players, five percent to women’s basketball players and the remaining five percent is to be shared amongst the other sports.

While Judge Claudia Wilken explicitly said that this was an antitrust case and not a gender-equity case, she did say that athletes are free to sue on Title IX grounds in the future.

This could be seen coming from a mile away.

Although the final percentage is uncertain, it was clear even before the settlement that Title IX would play a role in future legislation and regulation of revenue sharing.

NIL Clearinghouse Process Revealed and Early Concerns
With the House ruling, the Injunctive Relief Settlement (IRS) allows the NCAA to prohibit some third-party NIL payments to class members.

The NCAA is using Deloitte to audit every single NIL contract for student athletes over $600 to ensure that these deals are done in good faith and at “fair market value”.

For this auditing to occur, athletes must submit their contracts to Deloitte’s “NIL Go” clearinghouse, which was revealed earlier this week. From there, Deloitte can deem any deal to be “above fair market value” and deny the request of an athlete’s third-party NIL compensation. There are bound to be many lawsuits that arise from this, as “fair market value” has, for as long as society has existed, always meant the value that someone is willing to pay for it.

Who is Deloitte to tell a third-party person/company how much they’re willing to pay an athlete?

Again, these are just a handful of issues that have presented themselves in the last week.

With one court ruling down, there seems to be a slew of court rulings to come.

With students still battling for their legal rights and the NCAA scrambling to regulate everything, it is very clear who the winners are in all of this…

The lawyers.