Why female athletes are challenging the NCAA’s $2.8bn settlement | College sports
For decades, university athletes spent fighting for the right to earn money from their names, images and similarities (zero). They won in 2021. Now, the NCAA settlement of $ 2.8 billion will compensate for hundreds of thousands of former athletes who have missed these gains. However, not everyone thinks the agreement is fair.
Eight female athletes He applied for appeal this weekDefending that the agreement violates the IX, the US law prohibits gender -based discrimination in education. They say the way the money is divided, they prefer football and male basketball players to a large extent, they change women more than $ 1 billion.
He paused all the objections and potentially delayed more than a year. However, NCAA’s plan to allow schools to pay directly to existing players as of July 1 will continue.
What does all of these mean for the future of athletes and college sports? What’s going on …
What about NCAA settlement?
NCAA agreed to pay $ 2.8 billion to compensate for athletes who have been banned from generating revenue from their names, images and similarities (Nile), including things such as video game views, Jersey sales or social media sponsorships. The settlement covers athletes dating back to 2016.
It also cleanses the path of a major change: from July 1, 2025, colleges will be allowed to share income directly with existing players and up to $ 20.5 million per school per year.
A great change from NCAA’s traditional amateurism model argues that athletes should be compensated only by scholarships, not salary or approval income.
Who appeals the agreement and why?
Eight female athletes competing on football, volleyball and track applied appeal. His names include six athletes from Kacie Feeding (VanderBilt) and Kate Johnson (Virginia) and Charleston College.
They argue that the agreement violates the IX, the federal law that prohibits gender -based discrimination in education. In particular, they say that the settlement gives 90% of the money to men in football and basketball and deprived women of $ 1.1 billion in justified compensation.
What is the title IX and how is it applied here?
The title is the 1972 US law that requires equal access and treatment for men and women in federal educational programs, including athletics, including athletics. College should offer comparable resources, scholarships and participation opportunities in male and women’s sports.
Women athletes argue that compensation should be equal for these prohibitions, as the Nile bans affect both sexes equally, and that the use of historical TV revenue (supporting men’s sports) ignores the systemic obstacles faced by women in marketing and media.
What did the judge say about the IX argument?
US regional judge Claudia Wilken approved the agreement last week and rejected the title IX -based objections by saying that they had fallen out of the scope of the antitröst case. Female athletes do not agree and now they want the Ninth Circuit Court to intervene.
By the way, what happens to money?
Due to appeal, no refund will be distributed to the court rules. This delay may take several months or longer. According to NCAA’s bullet lawyer, the organization will continue to finance the settlement pool, but the money will be solved until the money is solved.
The current payment formula is based on past media revenue and license data. Because football and male basketball, especially through TV contracts made money for schools.
Critics say that the approach was cooked in decades of inequality, because in the first place, the same marketing exposure and investments were rejected.
What are the wider concerns about this settlement?
Some are concerned that schools will cut “out -of -income” sports such as wrestling, swimming or gymnastics to finance the income sharing of schools with the best athletes. Others are afraid that this will undermine the balance of education and competition by bringing university sports closer to a professional small league system. Nevertheless, others say that without opening IX guidance, women can continue to marginalization even after an amateur.
What will happen next?
The ninth circuit will now examine the appeal application. While the guidelines said that the guidelines are until 3 October and that they will be pushed for speed, the objections in this court are known to take 12 to 18 months.
Until the case is resolved, athletes playing between 2016 and 2021 will not be refunded. However, whether NCAA is ready or not, the income sharing period comes.
