The House v. NCAA settlement payouts consist of a $2.78 billion back-damages fund for Division I athletes who competed between June 15, 2016, and September 15, 2024, plus a separate forward-looking system letting schools share revenue directly with current athletes starting July 1, 2025. Federal Judge Claudia Wilken granted final approval on June 6, 2025. No back-pay checks have been issued yet: eight female athletes filed a Title IX appeal in the Ninth Circuit that has frozen the damages distribution while the revenue-sharing side moves ahead on schedule.1In re College Athlete NIL Litigation, Case No. 4:20-cv-03919-CW
Who Qualifies for a Back-Pay Payout
The damages class covers Division I athletes who competed between June 15, 2016, and September 15, 2024, and did not receive name, image, and likeness compensation during that window. Class members can review their estimated payments and file claims through an online portal at collegeathletecompensation.com, administered by Verita Global LLC. Some categories pay out automatically once an athlete confirms contact and payment information; others require a formal claim.
The claim deadline was October 1, 2025. If you fall within the class period and haven’t checked the portal, your window to submit a claim has closed. Even athletes who filed on time are still waiting, because the damages fund is on hold pending the appeal.
How the $2.8 Billion Is Divided
The fund is weighted toward the sports that generate the most broadcast revenue. Football players receive 75% of the pool, men’s basketball players 15%, women’s basketball players 5%, and athletes in all other sports the remaining 5%. Within each sport’s pool, payments are calculated across four categories: broadcast NIL, videogame NIL, athletic services compensation, and lost third-party NIL opportunities.
The NCAA is paying roughly $2.78 billion over ten years. About $1.1 billion comes from NCAA reserves and insurance policies. The other $1.6 billion will be withheld from future NCAA revenue distributions to member schools at roughly $280 million per year, with the defendant power conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12, and SEC) responsible for 40% of that amount and non-defendant conferences covering the remaining 60%.
Estimated Payout Amounts by Sport
Individual payments vary widely by sport, school, years of eligibility used, and claim category. The figures below are averages the settlement administrator has projected.
Football and Men’s Basketball at Power Five Schools
Athletes in these two sports at Power Five programs are the largest beneficiaries. The average broadcast NIL claim comes to roughly $91,000. Athletic services compensation adds an average of about $40,000. Videogame NIL payments run up to $4,000 per athlete. A single football or men’s basketball player who used four years of eligibility at a Power Five school during the class period can therefore see six-figure totals when the categories are combined.
Women’s Basketball
Women’s basketball players average around $23,000 for broadcast NIL claims and about $14,000 for athletic services. Lost-opportunity damages, which cover third-party NIL deals athletes could have signed but for the NCAA’s rules, can reach as high as $300,000 depending on the individual player’s marketability and circumstances.
Other Sports and Non-Power Five Programs
Athletes outside football and basketball can file claims if they can demonstrate lost third-party NIL opportunities. Specific subcategories exist for Big East men’s basketball, where payments average roughly $6,700 per athlete, and for top non-Power Five programs in both men’s and women’s basketball. The 5% “all other sports” pool spreads across a much larger population of athletes than the football and basketball pools, so individual amounts are correspondingly smaller.
Why No One Has Been Paid Yet
Five days after Judge Wilken approved the settlement, eight female athletes filed an appeal in the Ninth Circuit challenging the damages allocation as a violation of Title IX. They are Kacie Breeding of Vanderbilt; Lexi Drumm, Emma Appleman, Emmie Wannemacher, Riley Hass, Savannah Baron, and Elizabeth Arnold of the College of Charleston; and Kate Johnson of the University of Virginia.
Their core argument is that directing 75% of the fund to football and 15% to men’s basketball shortchanges female athletes by roughly $1.1 billion. Judge Wilken took the position throughout the litigation that the antitrust case did not concern Title IX, though she acknowledged the possibility of future Title IX litigation over school-to-athlete payments.
The appeal has paused the distribution of back-pay damages entirely. The Ninth Circuit consolidated multiple related appeals. The opening brief from the Breeding objectors was filed on October 29, 2025, with reply briefs due by February 18, 2026. As of early 2026, no oral argument date had been set. Until the Ninth Circuit rules, no athlete in any sport receives back-pay money, regardless of when they filed a claim.
Revenue Sharing for Current Athletes
The forward-looking half of the settlement is a separate mechanism, and it is already paying. Starting July 1, 2025, Division I schools that opted into the settlement may pay athletes directly from athletic department revenues, capped at roughly $20.5 million per school for the 2025-26 academic year. That figure represents about 22% of average Power Five athletic revenues. The cap rises about 4% each year and is projected to reach $32.9 million per school by 2034-35.
Schools decide how to divide their revenue-sharing pool among their own athletes. Reports indicate most FBS programs plan to direct roughly 90% of the money toward football and men’s basketball, though the settlement does not require any particular allocation. Payments often take the form of NIL licensing agreements tied to school media deals. Athletes receiving these payments are limited to four years of them. Existing benefits, including full cost-of-attendance scholarships, generally do not count against the cap.
As of June 30, 2025, 319 Division I institutions, about 82% of the total, had opted in. Every school in the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12, and SEC is participating, along with all FBS programs except the three service academies, which are barred by military regulations. The Ivy League and Patriot League opted out in full, as did schools including UMBC, Fairleigh Dickinson, and Saint Peter’s. Schools that opted out must continue to follow the 2024-25 NCAA scholarship limits. Programs can change status annually by notifying the NCAA by March 1.
Third-Party NIL Deals and the $600 Threshold
The settlement also created oversight for outside NIL deals athletes sign with businesses and collectives. Any third-party NIL deal worth $600 or more must be reported through NIL Go, a Deloitte-built software platform that launched on June 11, 2025. The system evaluates whether a deal reflects fair market value and serves a legitimate business purpose, flagging transactions that look like recruiting inducements rather than real endorsements.
In its first six and a half months of operation, NIL Go cleared 17,321 deals worth $127.2 million and rejected 524 deals valued at $14.9 million. About 52% of submissions were resolved within 24 hours and 73% within a week. By the end of 2025, more than 35,300 athletes and 4,200 representatives had registered on the platform, and ten deals were in arbitration. Enforcement runs through the College Sports Commission, a new body separate from the NCAA and funded by the power conferences, led by former MLB investigations chief Bryan Seeley.
Roster Limits Replacing Scholarship Caps
Schools that opted in now operate under roster limits rather than the old sport-by-sport scholarship caps. Football moved from an 85-scholarship limit to a 105-player roster cap. Men’s basketball went from 13 scholarships to a 15-player roster. Women’s basketball stayed at 15. Baseball jumped from 11.7 scholarship equivalencies to a 34-player cap. Men’s soccer went from 9.9 equivalencies to 28 spots. Softball rose from 12 to 25. Within those ceilings, schools may offer full or partial scholarships to any player on the roster.
After objectors argued the new caps would cost current athletes their spots, Judge Wilken required a modification. Athletes on 2024-25 squad lists or promised spots before April 7, 2025, were designated exempt from the new limits for the remainder of their college eligibility. Athletes who had already transferred because of the caps were allowed to return to their original schools.
What the Settlement Does Not Decide
The settlement does not resolve whether college athletes are employees. Judge Wilken explicitly noted that question was not adjudicated. The Johnson v. NCAA case, which argues athletes should be classified as employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act, remains active. The settlement includes a provision allowing defendants to seek modifications if a future ruling classifies athletes as employees under federal or state law.
The settlement also does not answer whether future revenue-sharing payments must be divided equitably between male and female athletes under Title IX. Guidance issued by the Biden administration in January 2025 said Title IX applies to all compensation schools provide to athletes; the Trump administration rescinded that guidance on February 12, 2025. Schools are navigating the uncertainty on their own while the Ninth Circuit considers the back-pay appeal, and federal legislation that would give the NCAA an antitrust exemption and settle the employment question has not advanced.