The Proposed House Settlement: Recruiting, Rosters & Compensation

“What’s the number?” It’s one of the most frequently asked questions recruits pose to college coaches today. And it’s become a significant question coaches are directing to their athletic directors in the face of the proposed House settlement. These coaches want to know the number of players they will be able to have on their team and how much money they can provide to a player.

The time is now to address the confusion and discuss how your athletics department can prepare.

Current Scenario

This past summer, countless recruited high school football players traveled to various colleges and universities to decide where they will attend college and play football next year. While many of these recruits have already committed to their chosen schools, it’s unlikely any of them have been provided with a clear financial picture.

This lack of clarity isn’t due to any misleading information. Instead, it’s because the model for financial aid and team composition is still uncertain and subject to change. This creates additional stress for collegiate athletics business personnel and coaches alike due to the objections filed on the settlement proposal that could potentially alter the terms.

The revenue share cap amount may not be known until the May 15 deadline to submit the NCAA’s Membership Financial Reporting to plaintiff’s counsel. The latest delay could also modify the proposed roster caps, leaving personnel unable to know the resources available to them or even how many athletes the can carry on their teams.

“Coaches are recruiting now for 2025-2026 athletes and need to know what resources are available to them,” said one Power 4 athletics CFO. “Waiting until the May 15 deadline to make their calculations is not enough time in my book.”

Proposed Changes in the Collegiate Model

The proposed House v. NCAA settlement, presented to Judge Claudia Wilken on July 26, 2024, includes significant changes to the collegiate model. Some of these changes encompass:

• The number of players each team can have;
• The structure of scholarships in some sports; and,
• Allowing athletic departments to pay student-athletes for their individual name, image, and likeness (NIL).

Since the settlement filing, multiple athlete groups have submitted objections to the court. It’s unclear how these objections will impact the Sept. 5 hearing for preliminary approval or whether more athletes will come forward with objections.

Impact on Football Teams

Current rules apply for the 2024 football season. Teams will operate without a limit on the number of players they can have, while scholarships are capped at a maximum of 85. Most teams are expected to have 120-130 players, with 85 of them on scholarship.

If Judge Wilken accepts the proposed House settlement, 2025 teams will need to reduce their rosters to a maximum of 105 players — all of whom could receive partial or full scholarships. Conferences could also impose roster caps below that maximum.

Implications for Recruits

Unfortunately, the financial picture might not become clearer in time to aid recruits in their decisions for the next fall. The Division I signing period for football’s 2025 recruiting class is Dec. 4-6, 2024, with a second period running from Feb. 5 to April 1, 2025.

Some high school athletes should prepare for the possibility of not receiving a full scholarship immediately. Coaches may prioritize college experience over high school talent and may not allocate their full scholarship budget right away, particularly if their athletic department does not have the resources to fully fund the additional scholarships.

However, I anticipate opportunities will be built into aid agreements to earn more over time based on performance. Currently, athletic scholarships can be increased based on athletic performance during the award period and may also be awarded retroactively.

Evaluating Player Value

Evaluating the value of different positions and talent levels within a position requires a multifaceted approach. For instance, assessing the worth of a center compared to a guard or a second/third-string player involves considering various factors. Is a second-string left tackle more valuable than a second-string guard? Does a player with more starts hold greater value?

Additionally, the grading of players during practice and games impacts their overall value. These factors, combined with others, provide a framework for assessing the worth of each player within a team.

What Can Be Done Now?

While we can’t change uncertainty, some steps can be taken now to prepare for changes under the House settlement. As you transition to this new model, James Moore’s NIL Advisory Services team is ready to assist in a number of ways, including:

• Scenario planning to assess risks and rewards under various models, with or without third parties
• Education and facilitation of conversations with campus partners
• Compliance preview and review inclusive of NIL v. House settlement provisions
• Holistic player compensation model and considerations
• Benefit pool requirement analysis and strategy
• Direct payment logistics strategy
• Financial forecasting of revenue share and other impacts to the industry under various scenarios
• Revenue and expense accounting evaluation for NCAA financial reporting purposes

With our 60 years of expertise by your side, you can make more confident decisions on recruiting, roster management and compensation in your athletics department.

All content provided in this article is for informational purposes only. Matters discussed in this article are subject to change. For up-to-date information on this subject please contact a James Moore professional. James Moore will not be held responsible for any claim, loss, damage or inconvenience caused as a result of any information within these pages or any information accessed through this site.