Attorneys seeking approval of the $2.8 billion legal settlement for college sports pointed to nearly 102,000 athletes who signed up to receive damages from the action, while batting down objections to what they described as the “intergalactic paradigm shift” the settlement will create across the NCAA.
In a motion filed in federal court Monday, plaintiff attorneys in the House settlement also noted that only 343 of nearly 390,000 people covered by the class-action lawsuit had opted out, while only 73 had submitted objections to the court.
Meanwhile, 101,935 had either filed a claim form or updated their payment information, which gives them a chance to receive a portion of the nearly $2.8 billion to be divvied among those who played before the NCAA approved name, image and likeness deals in 2021.
Judge Claudia Wilken is set to rule April 7 on whether to finalize terms of the settlement of the lawsuit filed against the NCAA and five conferences.
In addition to the $2.8 billion in backpay, the lawsuit also gives schools permission to pay up to $20.5 million in NIL cash directly to the players, beginning next school year. Currently, those NIL payments come from third parties, which would still be allowed under terms of the settlement.
In their 60-page brief, lead attorneys Steve Berman and Jeffrey Kessler referenced a 2015 appellate court ruling that called potential $5,000 payments to players — which the court rejected — a “quantum leap” from what had previously been permissible.
“If those rejected $5,000 payments would have been a quantum leap, this settlement represents an intergalactic paradigm shift,” the attorneys wrote.
They went on to argue why the judge should reject the dozens of objections filed in the case, saying:
— Any losses imposed because of new roster limits, which will increase the number of scholarships but trim overall roster spots, are “outweighed by the $20 billion worth of direct compensation and benefits that the settlement will yield for class members over the next ten years.”
— That because the House settlement is, at its core, an antitrust matter, it should not be used to resolve concerns about Title IX. But if Title IX is determined to apply to revenue sharing — a position the Trump Administration has rejected — “there is nothing in the settlement that prevents schools from allocating additional funds to women athletes.”
— There is no merit to objections that not all athletes were fairly represented in the lawsuit and that walk-ons who produced big results were entitled to more than they were receiving in damages.
— That the fact there have been no objections to the plaintiff attorneys’ request for around $475 million in fees “indicates the strength of the settlement obtained.”
The motion was filed the evening before Tuesday’s U.S. House committee hearing on NIL. There, Illinois athletic director Josh Whitman, who is chair of the NCAA Division I Council, and South Carolina football coach Shane Beamer testified favorably about the settlement while also urging Congressional action on a law that would standardize rules across the country.
“There’s a role Congress can play to create a level playing field and prevent schools from choosing whether to comply with a federal court order or abide by state law,” Whitman said.
The attorneys noted that Wilken had rejected most of the previous objections when they were filed in advance of her preliminary approval in October.
The judge will have a chance to hear from some of those objectors at the hearing in April, but also from the plaintiff attorneys, who wrote about the idea that ’by its nature, any settlement is a compromise.”
“This is why the courts have recognized that class member objections to a settlement based on an argument that even more or different benefits might be achieved are not a basis for withholding approval,” they wrote.
The NCAA also issued a statement supporting the settlement, saying it will “expand transformational change now underway in college sports by bringing the permissible benefits for student-athletes to nearly 50% of athletics revenues and eliminating scholarship limits.”
___
Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here. AP college football: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-football-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/college-football