How the House v. NCAA settlement could reshape athletic programs
The House v. NCAA settlement will dramatically benefit football and men’s basketball athletes—but for non-revenue sports, the future is far less certain. While schools may now allocate over $20 million annually to athletes beginning July 1, 2025, funding this compensation could come at the expense of program diversity.
Power Five institutions like Georgia, USC, and Michigan are well-equipped to absorb these costs through lucrative TV rights and sponsorship deals. In contrast, smaller schools—or even prominent ones with limited football revenue—may be forced to make hard choices. The $2.78 billion in backpay disproportionately favors revenue athletes, with 81% allocated to football and men’s basketball players (NCAA Financial Report, 2025).
Meanwhile, sports like swimming, track, and gymnastics—critical for Title IX compliance—depend on subsidies and donor support. Roster limits replacing scholarship caps pose a serious threat to these programs, especially as schools prioritize maximizing revenue-sport talent. This shift has already sparked protests from advocacy coalitions and athletes like Gracelyn Laudermilch, a high school swimmer who helped prompt the court’s phased rollout of roster changes as noted by the Athletic…