Writer: Darryl Jacobs
ESPN & CBS Sports Networks
The House v. NCAA settlement represents more than a legal breakthrough — it’s about correcting longstanding economic disparities and recognizing the contributions of athletes who’ve driven the industry without fair reward. The House v. NCAA settlement is not just about legal reform in college sports. It’s about economic justice, racial equity, and, finally, giving credit where it’s long been due. For decades, the powerhouse of NCAA Division I sports has been built mainly on the backs of athletes, particularly Black student-athletes in football and men’s basketball, without adequately recognizing their actual value.
Suppose this case is approved and implemented as proposed. This will usher in a new era in collegiate athletics. Athletes will finally be compensated for the billions of dollars they help generate. However, a new twist could stall that progress and reinforce the inequities this case seeks to dismantle.
Where Does It Stands?
Recently, attorney Laura Reathaford objected to the proposed settlement. Her argument? If Judge Claudia Wilken signs off on the agreement, she should also delay its implementation until all appeals are exhausted—a process that could take months or even years. That pause, if granted, would effectively freeze the benefits athletes have been fighting for, and many schools would continue operating as though nothing has changed.
Meanwhile, other legal objections and ramifications have been raised. The main concern is that even if the deal is approved, it will not protect the athletes already being cut due to shifting financial priorities in athletic departments. These objections spotlights the need for a comprehensive solution that not only compensates athletes but also safeguards their future in the face of changing economic landscapes.
Who’s Most Affected? Black Athletes.
Let’s be honest: the face of college football and basketball—the sports that drive media deals, merchandise sales, and alumni engagement—is predominantly Black. Yet, these same athletes, as well as others regardless of their ethnicity. have historically received no share of the revenue they help generate.
According to NCAA data:
· Black athletes comprise over 55% of Division I men’s basketball and nearly 50% of Division I football.
Many of the Power Five schools, which makes up the five major athletic conferences in college sports, Black athletes represent a greater proportion of the athletic population than the general student body. This disparity underscores the need for a more equitable system that recognizes and rewards the contributions of these athletes. This discrepancy is not accidental! It
reflects a longstanding system in which Black talent is celebrated on the field but often excluded from boardroom decisions and economic participation.
What Would the Settlement Do?
If approved and enacted:
· Depending on the sport, athletes could receive revenue-sharing payments ranging between $50,000 to $100,000 annually.
· It would formally restructure how schools handle Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) rights and athlete payments.
· Athletes would gain greater financial autonomy and protection, particularly in sports where injury risks are high and pro careers are far from guaranteed.
Imagine the possibilities. That income, especially for athletes from socioeconomically challenged communities, could mean helping their families, paying for off-campus housing, or saving for the future. It could fundamentally change the student-athlete experience and their futures. This settlement holds the promise of a brighter future for these athletes.
The Risk of Delay
By delaying this settlement will undoubtedly impact African American athletes, who already face limited economic opportunities compared to their counterparts. It continues to allow the status quo to persist — where coaches sign multi-million-dollar contracts, universities negotiate nine-figure TV deals, and athletes risk their health for a scholarship.
Meanwhile, some schools have started cutting rosters and adjusting scholarship models, assuming the settlement will progress. If the deal is stayed or reversed, athletes who were pushed out may not be invited back. And as one legal objection pointed out, schools have “no intrinsic incentive” to reverse those cuts. This means many athletes—mostly Black—could lose roster spots and scholarships based on a settlement that has yet to be finalized.
This Is a Social Justice Issue
The stakes are more than legal or financial — they’re deeply personal and profoundly racialized. For decades, we’ve asked Black athletes to fuel an industry without sharing its rewards. The House settlement doesn’t solve everything but represents an important step toward fairness. To deny or delay that progress is to reaffirm a system rooted in inequity that celebrates the labor but silences the voice of those who do the work.
My Take
As someone who has spent my life in sports — as a college head coach, broadcaster, executive, and advocate — I believe this moment is about recognition, not just remuneration. We’re watching a generational shift unfold. We must move forward with urgency and integrity, otherwise we risk turning a landmark opportunity into another missed opportunity. This is not just a sports issue, it’s a societal issue that we all need to address.
The system is evolving slowly and not without resistance. But the question remains: Will college sports finally honor the actual value of its athletes? Or will it find a way to delay, dilute, and defer justice again?
Darryl Jacobs is an ESPN & CBS Sports Network Commentator/Analyst, former successful college head coach, athletic administrator, and professional sports executive with over two decades of experience in collegiate athletics and professional sports.
About Post Author
