House Settlement Hearing - April 7, 2025

[Voice of the Quakers]

2 hours ago, Boring said:

That seems insane after decades of 9.9 scholarships, doesn't it? Seems like there will be a lot of guys who didn't even win state getting schollies if so many are being offered. 

Schools that opt to the House settlement may offer up to 30 full scholarships. Doesn't mean they will.

This is the part where we need to remind ourselves that schools opting in to the settlement - the Power 4/5 schools are mandated to accept to the settlement terms - are doing so to push money to their football and basketball players, not to non-revenue sports like wrestling. Looking at the terrain of D1 wrestling, I would be very concerned that MAC and SOCON schools will actually reduce their spending on wrestling to prop up their football and basketball teams.

[Boring]

2 hours ago, ionel said:

We eliminated many walk ons when went to 9.9.   What happened to all those Nebraska football black shirts? 

I think Nebraska got rid of all the blackshirts when they realized that not only does their defense truly suck balls, but has for decades. 

You know what the "N" on Nebraska's helmets stand for? Nawledge. 

[ionel]

3 hours ago, Boring said:

I think Nebraska got rid of all the blackshirts when they realized that not only does their defense truly suck balls, but has for decades. 

You know what the "N" on Nebraska's helmets stand for? Nawledge. 

Roster size was limited same in wrestling it reduced in some cases eliminated walk ons.  

[Wrestleknownothing]

The judge is pushing back on roster limits to the extent they impact currently rostered athletes.

https://www.si.com/fannation/name-image-likeness/nil-news/house-v-ncaa-judge-wilken-threatens-reject-settlement-over-roster-limits

 

Edited April 24 by Wrestleknownothing

[BlueWolverine]

On 4/19/2025 at 2:54 AM, Cornell Kevin said:

It surprises me a little that they came back with absolutely no modifications on the roster limit as the judge had strongly suggested.  She even said on April 7th something along the lines that if it wasn’t worked on that they risked her declining the entire deal. With that being said, I don’t see her doing so.  I think it will pass. 

Seems like the judge was surprised too and didn't appreciate that approach. Now they'll cave on phased roster limits, and it'll pass.

[Voice of the Quakers]

13 hours ago, BlueWolverine said:

Seems like the judge was surprised too and didn't appreciate that approach. Now they'll cave on phased roster limits, and it'll pass.

I am surprised the judge has pushed back on this. Both plaintiffs and defendants initially agreed to the roster limits with no grandfathering. (The plaintiffs appear to have changed their mind since the April 7 meeting.) If i have learned anything in my nine years working in the DC policy world, it's rare for a a judge or government official to get in the way of a negotiated agreement. 

Good news for all of those athletes who were told over the past six months to beat it.

Bad news for all of those incoming freshmen who are about to be told they have to find a new team.

[Wrestleknownothing]

 

 

[Wrestleknownothing]

I found this paragraph in The Athletic's article interesting:

While the plaintiff and defendant lawyers believe Wednesday’s revisions will satisfy Wilken’s requests, the objectors who Wilken ordered be included in the most recent discussions do not endorse these revisions. Shortly after the revisions were filed, Wilken issued an order granting those objectors until May 13 to respond, and the settlement lawyers until May 16 to then reply to those responses.

[Voice of the Quakers]

50 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

I found this paragraph in The Athletic's article interesting:

While the plaintiff and defendant lawyers believe Wednesday’s revisions will satisfy Wilken’s requests, the objectors who Wilken ordered be included in the most recent discussions do not endorse these revisions. Shortly after the revisions were filed, Wilken issued an order granting those objectors until May 13 to respond, and the settlement lawyers until May 16 to then reply to those responses.

No one actually expects the Power 4 schools to go back to cut athletes and released recruits and say welcome back. The revised settlement says they can, but they won't.

The good news is that these "Designated Student-Athletes" will not count against roster limits at any D1 school (see link below). They should be able to find new teams at the non-Power 4 schools - many schools will be happy to take on another tuition-paying student. (I would expect the vast majority of these DSAs NOT to receive athletic scholarships.) 

While there may be some more objections or tweaks here and there, the settlement is supposed to take effect July 1. Nothing like a deadline to get people moving in the world of policy. For better or worse, our new NCAA sports world is right around the corner.

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/45044548/attorneys-handling-ncaa-settlement-propose-do-roster-limits

 

 

 

[Voice of the Quakers]

Notre Dame just signaled to the judge it would like to move forward with the settlement 

https://x.com/swimswamnews/status/1920610027691184185