Connect with us

Published

on

The college football regular season may be over, but don’t fret, the sport has saved some of the best matchups for conference championship week.

Beginning on Friday night in Las Vegas, teams will battle for not only conference bragging rights but spots in the College Football Playoff field as well.

USC is just one win away from a likely berth in the playoff but will have to get through Utah in the Pac-12 title game Friday night. The Utes handed the Trojans their only loss of the season back on Oct. 15, so revenge and a spot in the top four leave Lincoln Riley’s squad with plenty to play for in Las Vegas.

Speaking of plenty to play for, the surprising TCU Horned Frogs are one win away from a spot in the CFP after closing out the regular season 12-0. If the Frogs are able to beat Kansas State in the title game, they will become the first Big 12 team to break into the playoff field since the 2019 season.

Georgia is already in the playoff, and LSU is out after last week’s loss, regardless of what happens in the SEC title, but the teams will meet in Atlanta for the conference title. Georgia lost in last year’s SEC championship game before going on to win the national title.

In the night window, Michigan, in pursuit of its second straight Big Ten title, faces Purdue while Clemson and North Carolina meet for the ACC crown.

The Tulane Green Wave and UCF Knights also meet in a conference championship game on Saturday for who likely gets to represent the American Athletic Conference and the Group of 5 in a New Year’s Six bowl.

This is our last week of action before bowl season, so get all the top storylines from the best matchups below.


Pac-12 championship: No. 11 Utah (9-3) vs. No. 4 USC (11-1)
(Allegiant Stadium, Las Vegas, Friday, 8 p.m. ET, Fox)

Caleb Williams may be on the brink of winning the Heisman Trophy, but the last time these two teams met, Williams and his five touchdowns during the game somehow didn’t make him the most unstoppable player on the field. For at least one night in Salt Lake City, that honor belonged to Utah tight end Dalton Kincaid.

Over the course of 60 minutes, Kincaid pulled off his best Rob Gronkowski performance and dominated the USC defense to the tune of 243 receiving yards on 16 catches and one touchdown. The Utes’ offensive game plan became simple: When in trouble, target Kincaid.

“Anytime someone has their career game against you, there’s a level of embarrassment about it,” defensive coordinator Alex Grinch said this week. “If he makes big-time catches and we don’t tackle him … I know exactly what’s gonna happen on Friday. It’s gonna be the same damn thing.”

A lot has happened for both teams since that game. USC’s defense has continued to cover any weaknesses with its takeaways and red zone stops, while USC’s offense has skyrocketed as Williams has. Utah, on the other hand, is banged up. Cam Rising is dealing with an unspecified injury, while Kincaid himself missed the game against Arizona with a shoulder injury and was banged up again in last week’s win over Colorado.

Head coach Kyle Whittingham said he expects Kincaid to play on Friday night, but the Utes will likely have to rely more on the run game, just as they have in recent weeks. Until last week, the Trojans’ defense had struggled to limit teams on the ground, but last week’s game against Notre Dame was a different story — the Irish had only 90 rushing yards.

“Everybody doing their job and communicating and being on the same page, when we do that, we’re a hard defense to go up against,” linebacker Shane Lee said.

Lee is among several players who have pointed to that loss at Utah as a pivotal point in USC’s season. The way the loss landed but didn’t linger appeared to give everyone in the locker room the motivation to ensure they didn’t lose again.

“The vibe inside the room was completely different from times when I’ve lost before in college so far,” Williams said. “There were a lot more smiles.”

It is difficult, at this point in the season, to imagine Williams having an off game. And so, USC’s chances — to make it to the playoff and have a chance to win there — will likely come down to how effective, how “on the same page” and how consistent their defense is in these tougher, tighter games. After all, Utah was the one team all season that did something nobody else could: outscore USC.

The optimistic approach after the Utah loss proved to be fortuitous for the Trojans. They knew what they needed to do to bounce back, and so far, they have aced every test since. As they stand just 60 minutes from a conference title and a playoff berth, the question is: Can they keep it going? — Paolo Uggetti


Big 12 championship: No. 10 Kansas State (9-3) vs. No. 3 TCU (12-0)
(AT&T Stadium, Arlington, Texas, Saturday, noon ET, ABC/ESPN app)

Kansas State entered the season as a sleeper pick to win the Big 12. TCU was picked seventh in the conference. After one of the most unlikely seasons in recent history, this game could now be a referendum on TCU’s chances to make the College Football Playoff.

The No. 3 Horned Frogs are one of three undefeated teams in the FBS and, before a blowout win over Iowa State last week, survived a streak of seven straight wins by 10 points or fewer, which tied 1975 UNLV for the longest such string in the AP Poll era dating back to 1936.

So the Horned Frogs know how to win. And none of their five second-half comebacks were bigger than against Kansas State in Week 8, a 38-28 TCU win in Fort Worth after the Wildcats jumped out to a 28-10 lead in the second quarter. The 18-point comeback was TCU’s largest this season.

“We can say all we want about ‘We didn’t do this or didn’t do that,'” K-State coach Chris Klieman said this week. “Give TCU credit. They came back from being down and stayed the course and stayed in the fight. … The biggest thing I think that disappointed us is we couldn’t get off the field on defense. Thus our offense just never had the ball much in that second half.”

This is the eleventh time that the Big 12 title game features a rematch of a regular-season game. Of the 10 previous instances, the winner of the first game won six of them.

TCU coach Sonny Dykes said on Tuesday that he considers this similar to a different season, saying last year’s results don’t affect this season.

“There will be lot of cat and mouse stuff, probably a little more than you normally have, because of the familiarity,” Dykes said.

He said the K-State offense has “taken off” in the past four or five weeks as Will Howard has become more comfortable after coming in for an injured Adrian Martinez (including in the TCU loss), and he’s impressed with how offensive coordinator Collin Klein has utilized the many talents of running back Deuce Vaughn.

Vaughn currently has 1,295 rushing yards and 348 receiving yards this season after 1,404 rushing and 816 receiving yards last year. According to ESPN Stats & Information research, in the past 15 seasons, only one Power 5 running back, Christian McCaffrey, has had multiple seasons of 1,300 rushing yards and 300 receiving yards.

The Wildcats have a chance to play spoiler on Saturday. In the eight years of the CFP, there have been six times when a top-four team was going into the final week and didn’t make the final field. Five of those lost in conference championship games. The other was 2014 TCU, which was notably jumped by Ohio State when the Big 12 did not have a title game.

Dykes knows he won’t have home-field advantage this time, and said he’s always been impressed with Klieman’s team.

“They’re just a good football team. And physical,” he said. “That was a very physical football game. I think that’s a trademark of their program, and it has been for a number of years going back to Coach [Bill] Snyder, and Coach Klieman has kind of kept that tradition alive.”

They’ll need to be physical against TCU running back Kendre Miller, who ranks third in the Big 12 with 650 rush yards after contact this season. He had a season-high 113 against Kansas State earlier this season.

But Klieman knows they’ll have to watch for an explosive TCU team.

“Offensively, defensively, special teams … Collectively, they’re the fastest team we’ve played,” he said. “It’s going to come down to can we win some of these one-on-one matchups because we didn’t win enough one-on-one matchups [in] October, especially in the second half.” — Dave Wilson

play

0:47

Heather Dinich breaks down TCU’s chances to reach the College Football Playoff even if it loses to Kansas State.


SEC championship: No. 14 LSU (9-3) vs. No. 1 Georgia (12-0)
(Mercedes-Benz Dome, Atlanta, Saturday, 4 p.m. ET, CBS)

Harold Perkins Jr. has been a revelation for LSU this season. His 7.5 sacks rank third in the SEC, despite rushing the passer only 105 times. For comparison, the league leader, Alabama’s Will Anderson Jr., has 10 sacks on 310 pass-rush attempts.

And did we mention that Perkins is only a freshman? The former five-star linebacker from Texas was the jewel of coach Brian Kelly’s first recruiting class.

Georgia coach Kirby Smart remembers evaluating Perkins as a high school prospect.

“He was probably one of the most talented linebackers coming out that season on tape,” he said.

As the season’s gone on, Smart said, “He’s proven that.”

“He’s extremely explosive, athletic,” Smart added. “They do a very good job of utilizing his skill set.”

But, ahead of Georgia and LSU competing in the SEC championship game on Saturday, is it fair to look at Perkins’ production and wonder whether he’s the key to neutralizing the Tigers’ defense?

As LSU made a late-season push, Perkins was dominant. He had five tackles and a sack in a win over Ole Miss, and eight tackles and a sack in a win over Alabama. And during a slugfest at Arkansas in which the LSU offense struggled, Perkins single-handedly carried the team to victory with what might have been the game of the year, racking up eight tackles, four sacks and two forced fumbles.

Then you look at LSU’s losses, and there’s a common thread: Perkins didn’t fill up the stat sheet and didn’t affect the quarterback. In losses to Texas A&M, Tennessee and Florida State, he had no sacks and averaged two tackles per game.

But it wasn’t just Perkins who didn’t get after the quarterback in losses. The defense as a whole, which averaged 2.8 sacks and 11.7 quarterback hurries in nine wins, had no sacks and 15 total pressures in three losses.

The loss to the Aggies last week was especially embarrassing for LSU. Giving up 38 points to a lackluster offense was surprising. It was no secret what A&M wanted to do: hand the ball to Devon Achane. Still, Achane rushed for 215 yards and two touchdowns.

Kelly reflected on the loss and felt that the team had gotten away from what led it to a berth in the conference title game: marrying traits with talent.

Perkins, Kelly said, has to do the same thing.

“He’s very, very talented,” Kelly said. “But, like I said, I mean, it’s both: he’s got to bring his traits and talent together. If he brings both of those, he is an elite and special player.”

It will be an uphill battle on Saturday. Georgia, which is a heavy 17.5-point favorite, has given up the third-fewest sacks in the FBS this season (seven).

To have a chance of pulling off the upset, Perkins and LSU will have to find a way to get in the backfield and affect quarterback Stetson Bennett. — Alex Scarborough


ACC championship: No. 23 North Carolina (9-3) vs. No. 9 Clemson (10-2)
(Bank of America Stadium, Charlotte, Saturday, 8 p.m. ET, ABC/ESPN app)

Clemson has made its way back to the ACC championship game, but that is not exactly the major talking point headed into its matchup against North Carolina.

For the second straight year, the Tigers will be left out of the College Football Playoff, and questions about quarterback DJ Uiagalelei have begun to mount once again after he threw for 99 yards in a shocking 31-30 loss to South Carolina last week.

Though Clemson coach Dabo Swinney has once again defended Uiagalelei, saying he was “a long way from being the reason we lost the game,” it is fair to wonder which version of Uiagalelei we will see on Saturday. Especially since North Carolina has first-team All-ACC quarterback Drake Maye on the other side.

In addition, Swinney has also faced questions about whether running back Will Shipley has been given enough carries. Despite averaging 8.8 yards per rush against South Carolina, Shipley only had 15 carries — including just two on the final four drives of the game. Afterward, he candidly said, “As a competitor, hell yeah, I want the freaking rock with five minutes to go and the game on the line against our rival. That is me as a competitor, but that is not how it shakes out all the time.”

But beyond those questions, there are others about the overall program now that Clemson has missed the playoff for two straight seasons. Swinney told reporters Sunday that winning the national championship is not among its list of goals when the season begins.

“Our goals are win the opener, win the division, win the state, win the ACC and win the closer,” Swinney said. “Our goals are set up to allow us to compete at the highest level, but the reason that it doesn’t say win the national championship on there is because we don’t control that. We could win all of our games and somebody could say no, you don’t qualify. We do have an opportunity still to hit four out of five, and if we do that, we’re going to have another great year here and keep moving forward.”

Though there may not be national implications, the game is an intriguing one considering not only the story lines but their recent history. In 2018, North Carolina nearly upset No. 1 Clemson but opted to go for a 2-point conversion and failed with 1:17 left, losing 21-20. When the teams previously met in the ACC championship game in 2015, a disputed offside call on an onside kick allowed No. 1 Clemson to hold off the Tar Heels and win 45-37.

While playing in the ACC championship game is old hat for Clemson, North Carolina has not won an ACC football title since 1980. Only NC State has a longer conference title drought among current ACC schools.

“We’re trying to take steps in our program,” North Carolina coach Mack Brown said. “Four years ago, we won five games in two years, so every step that we take is a step closer to North Carolina football being relevant again. I thank (our guys) for getting us to this point. There’s only 10 teams that will play in Power 5 championships this weekend, and they’re one of 10 out of 131. So that’s pretty cool.” — Andrea Adelson


Big Ten championship game: Purdue (8-4) vs. No. 2 Michigan (12-0)
(Lucas Oil Stadium, Indianapolis, Saturday, 8 p.m. ET, Fox)

Purdue is 3-0 against AP top-5 teams under Jeff Brohm, which is an incredible mark.

Brohm and the Boilermakers have another opportunity to face a top-3 opponent on Saturday against No. 2-ranked Michigan in the Big Ten championship game. Purdue is the underdog in the game as the Wolverines are undefeated and coming off of a win against then-No. 2 Ohio State.

Brohm said there isn’t a secret formula to the success he and his teams have had against highly ranked opponents, but he knows it’s going to take a lot to take down Michigan.

“When you play those type of teams, you have a little luck on your side, you’ve got to play your very best,” Brohm said. “A lot of things got to go your way. You know, I do think that we will prepare hard, I do think that we will give it our best shot. I do think that as coaches, we got to put in a plan that has a couple of wrinkles here and there, that gives us an edge.”

Brohm has been watching the film and saw the Michigan team that came out and attacked Ohio State, outscoring the Buckeyes 28-3 in the second half of their game.

“Michigan’s played lights out this week. Very well coached, tremendous defense. I think their front four plus, basically, their front seven will be the most talented team we played to date,” Brohm said. “They’re big, they’re stout, they will rotate a lot of guys in, good in the secondary, just statistically one of the best defenses in the country. And on offense, the running game, the tight ends, the O-line, and now a really athletic, dynamic quarterback who can make plays outside the pocket.”

Michigan coach Jim Harbaugh said it finally sunk in that his team beat Ohio State and finished the season undefeated when he was traveling back home from the game. He said he tried to answer as many text messages as he could from supporters after the win, but he is focused on this game and what it means for the program.

A second Big Ten championship in a row, a berth in the College Football Playoff for the second year in a row and it seems like the Wolverines have been playing in must-win games like this for the past three weeks.

“The week before was the biggest game in the world, past game was the biggest game in the world to us,” Harbaugh said. “Now this game is the biggest game in the world to us and going about the preparation, the study of our opponent, the meetings, the practices and getting ready for this game. So, we can have the same feeling of winning and thrill of victory.”

Because Michigan has been in so many high-pressured situations, and because Purdue is the underdog, Brohm is looking at this game as one that Purdue doesn’t have to stress about. His team knows that no one picked them to play in this game and that there is a lot riding on it for the Wolverines.

“There’s going to be more pressure on Michigan, of course,” Brohm said. “They’ve got a chance to really do something special this year, they’re in a great position to do that. So, for us, this is a one-game shot to play in a championship game and roll the dice and see what we can do.” — Tom VanHaaren


American Athletic Conference championship: No. 22 UCF (9-3) vs. No. 18 Tulane (10-2)
(Yulman Stadium, New Orleans, Saturday, 4 p.m. ET, ABC/ESPN app)

The first time Tulane hosted UCF this season, the Knights jumped out to a 24-7 lead and never relinquished it, winning 38-31.

However, Tulane quarterback Michael Pratt saw something out of his team that game. He told ESPN the following week, “I think the one thing that we need to take from [that loss], I think that everyone fought. There was no quit in anyone.” He added that they’d need to show a sense of urgency in the following week.

They had urgency… and then some. Pratt responded by going 9-of-14 passing for 141 yards and three touchdowns, as well as 70 yards on the ground and three more scores from there in a 59-24 win over SMU. The week after, they knocked off then-No. 24 Cincinnati on the road.

Now comes the rematch against a UCF team that rebounded this past week in the War on I-4, after a surprising 17-14 loss against Navy in Orlando. Quarterbacks Mikey Keene and John Rhys Plumlee have shared snaps the last couple of games, giving the Knights a variety of looks offensively, with no shortage of playmakers surrounding them.

The Knights ran for a then season-high 336 yards (176 of which came from quarterback Plumlee) in their first matchup with the Green Wave, which was the most Tulane has allowed all season. UCF’s 38 points in that game was also the most Tulane’s defense has allowed this year.

The Knights have won the previous five games against the Green Wave. In a season where Tulane has been one of the best and most surprising stories, the Green Waves’ next chapter becomes this second chance they’re being given against a UCF hurdle that they haven’t been able to clear.

There won’t be a better time to do it than Saturday afternoon, but as the Knights have established in the past, it’s not going to be easy. — Harry Lyles Jr.

Continue Reading

Sports

Padres’ Bogaerts leaves after diving for ball

Published

on

By

Padres' Bogaerts leaves after diving for ball

ATLANTA — San Diego Padres second baseman Xander Bogaerts apparently injured his left shoulder and was removed from Monday’s game against the Atlanta Braves.

Bogaerts landed on the shoulder while diving for a bases-loaded grounder hit by Ronald Acuña Jr. in the third inning. Bogaerts stopped the grounder but was unable to make a throw on Acuña’s run-scoring infield hit.

Bogaerts immediately signaled to the bench for assistance and a trainer examined the second baseman before escorting him off the field.

Tyler Wade replaced Bogaerts at second base. The run-scoring single by Acuña gave Atlanta a 5-0 lead over Dylan Cease and the Padres.

Bogaerts entered Monday’s first game of a doubleheader hitting .220 with four homers and 14 RBI.

Continue Reading

Sports

MLB opens investigation into ex-Angel Fletcher

Published

on

By

MLB opens investigation into ex-Angel Fletcher

MLB opened an investigation Monday into allegations that former Los Angeles Angels infielder David Fletcher gambled with an illegal bookie, an MLB source told ESPN, but investigators face a significant hurdle at the start — where they’re going to get evidence.

ESPN reported Friday that Fletcher, who is currently playing for the Atlanta Braves‘ Triple-A affiliate, bet on sports — but not baseball — with Mathew Bowyer, the Southern California bookmaker who took wagers from Shohei Ohtani‘s longtime interpreter, Ippei Mizuhara.

Fletcher’s close friend Colby Schultz, a former minor leaguer, also bet with Bowyer and wagered on baseball, including on Angels games that Fletcher played in while he was on the team, according to sources.

“Government cooperation will be crucial in a case like this where we don’t have evidence,” the MLB source said.

MLB investigators will request an interview with Fletcher at some point, but he has the right to refuse cooperation if he can claim he could be the subject of a criminal investigation.

Fletcher did not respond to multiple requests for comment Friday.

The source declined to say whether MLB has reached out to law enforcement for assistance yet, but investigators are expected to do so.

Fletcher might continue playing during the MLB investigation, according to the source. He went 0-3 with a walk Saturday for the Gwinnett Stripers, the day after ESPN’s report, and made a rare relief pitching appearance in Sunday’s game, giving up three runs in 1⅓ innings. Fletcher had never pitched professionally before this season, but has made three relief appearances for Gwinnett.

MLB sources have said that if a player bet illegally but not on baseball, it’s likely he would receive a fine rather than a suspension. Any player connected to any betting on baseball games could face up to a lifetime ban.

Fletcher told ESPN in March that he was present at the 2021 poker game in San Diego where Mizuhara first met Bowyer. Fletcher said he never placed a bet himself with Bowyer’s organization.

Continue Reading

Sports

What to know ahead of this week’s House v. NCAA settlement votes

Published

on

By

What to know ahead of this week's House v. NCAA settlement votes

The trajectory of major college sports is set to bend this week to give athletes a significantly larger portion of the billions of dollars they help generate for their schools.

The industry’s top leaders will gather in the next few days to vote on the proposed terms of a landmark settlement. The deal would create a new framework for schools to share millions of dollars with their athletes in the future and create a fund of more than $2.7 billion to pay former athletes for past damages.

The settlement would also mark the end of at least three major federal antitrust lawsuits looming as existential threats to the NCAA and its schools, and would resolve the most pressing — and arguably most formidable — legal challenges facing the college sports industry. The deal would not, however, solve all of the NCAA’s problems or even provide clear answers to many crucial questions about how a more professionalized version of major college sports might look in the near future.

Here are some of the details and unsolved questions shaping conversations during what could be a monumental week in the history of college sports.

Terms of the settlement

While several important details are not yet finalized, sources have confirmed the following general structure of an agreement to settle the House v. NCAA case:

The NCAA’s national office would foot the bill for a $2.7 billion payment for past damages over the course of the next 10 years. The NCAA would generate the majority of that money partly by cutting back on the funds that it distributes to Division I schools on an annual basis.

The power conferences would agree to a forward-looking revenue sharing structure that would give schools the ability to spend a maximum of roughly $20 million per year on direct payments to athletes. The $20 million figure could grow larger every few years if school revenue grows. Each school would be left to decide how to allocate that money while remaining compliant with Title IX laws.

The plaintiffs, which could include all current Division I athletes, would give up their right to file future antitrust claims against the NCAA’s rules. This would include dropping two pending antitrust cases (Hubbard v. NCAA and Carter v. NCAA) that also have been filed by plaintiff attorneys Steve Berman and Jeffrey Kessler.

The sides would also agree to renew the class on an annual basis to include new athletes. New athletes — mostly incoming freshmen — would have to declare that they are opting out of the class in order to challenge the NCAA’s restrictions on payments in the future.

This rolling new class of athletes would, in effect, retire the most impactful tool that has been used over the past decade to chip away at the NCAA’s amateurism rules. Previously, Berman and Kessler needed only one athlete to lend his or her name to a case that would aim to remove illegal restrictions for all college athletes. Moving forward, a lawyer pushing to provide more benefits for athletes will first have to organize and gain commitments from a large group of players who opted out of the settlement.

Athletic and university administrators have long argued that their athletes are generally happy with what the schools provide and that the last decade’s lawsuits are the product of agitating lawyers and advocates. A settlement would not close the door on bargaining with athletes in the future, but it would make it less appealing for attorneys to test the legality of the NCAA’s rules without an explicit demand from a large swath of athletes.

While individual athletes could still opt out and sue the NCAA, the damages for a single athlete or small group of athletes would be far smaller. So, in practice, the House case settlement would provide schools with protection from future suits by removing the financial incentives that make these cases — which often takes years to fight — worthwhile for a plaintiffs’ attorney.

Class action cases have been an important tool to date for plaintiff attorneys because organizing college athletes — a busy and transient group of young people — is extremely difficult. (Although there are a number of groups actively attempting to form college players’ associations.) Some sports antitrust experts, such as Baruch College law professor Marc Edelman, say that, by making future class action lawsuits more difficult, this settlement would give schools ample license to collude on restricting payment to players. Edelman said this conflict could give a judge pause when deciding to approve the terms of the settlement.

Who’s in?

Attorneys representing the plaintiff class of all Division I athletes proposed terms to all defendants involved in the lawsuit in late April. To settle the case fully, the NCAA and each of the five power conferences will have to agree to the terms. Leaders from each group are expected to hold votes by Thursday.

The NCAA’s Board of Governors is scheduled to meet Wednesday.

The Big Ten presidents are planning to meet in person and vote this week as part of the league’s regularly scheduled meetings. That league has long been considered the major conference with the least amount of pushback on the vote. ACC presidents, SEC leaders and Big 12 leaders will also vote this week. In an odd twist, the Pac-12’s membership from this past season will gather virtually to vote, as the 10 departing programs will not vote in the conferences they plan to join next year. Since the Pac-12 was part of the suit as a 12-team league, the 12 presidents and chancellors of those schools will vote as a 12-school unit.

While the NCAA and conferences have to opt in, any athletes involved in the class will have an opportunity to opt out once the attorneys hammer out the details of settlement terms. Any athletes who opt out would retain the right to sue the NCAA in the future, but they would miss out on their cut of the $2.7 billion in damages. On the flip side, it’s unlikely that a current athlete who opts out would give up the opportunity to receive the forward-looking revenue share money, according to legal sources.

Next steps

If all parties agree to the broader terms of a settlement of the House case this week, their attorneys will get to work drafting the fine print of an agreement. That process can take weeks, according to attorneys with experience settling complex antitrust cases.

The judge overseeing the case, Judge Claudia Wilken of California’s Northern District, would then hold a preliminary hearing to review the terms of the settlement. If the judge approves, notice would be sent to all athletes providing them with a chance to formally object or opt out. And finally, the agreement would go back to the courthouse where Wilken would consider any arguments presented in objection before deciding whether the settlement meets her approval.

The Fontenot Case

Alex Fontenot is a former Colorado football player who sued the NCAA in late November for restricting athletes from sharing in television rights revenue. He filed his case a few weeks before Berman and Kessler (the two attorneys representing athletes in the current settlement negotiations) filed a similar complaint called Carter v. NCAA.

Both Kessler and the NCAA have argued that the two complaints are similar and should be consolidated into a single case, which would likely lead to the Fontenot case being part of the pending settlement talks. Fontenot’s attorneys do not want to consolidate and will present their argument for why the cases should be separate in a Colorado courtroom this Thursday.

Garrett Broshuis, Fontenot’s attorney, said he has concerns about how the House settlement could make it harder for future athletes to fight for more rights. Broshuis, a former pitcher at Missouri, has spent most of the last decade successfully suing Major League Baseball to help minor leaguers negotiate better working conditions.

The judge in the Fontenot case has not yet made a ruling on whether it should qualify as a class action lawsuit. If the House settlement is finalized, any college athlete would have to opt out of the settlement in order to take part in the Fontenot case. Opt-outs or objections raised during the House settlement hearings could give Judge Wilken additional pause in approving its terms.

Would Fontenot and other athletes who are working with his attorneys on this case opt out of the House settlement in hopes of pursuing a better deal in their own case?

“To the extent we can, we’re monitoring the media reports surrounding the proposed settlement,” Broshuis told ESPN this weekend. “Once the actual terms are available, we’ll closely scrutinize them. We do have concerns about what’s being reported so far, especially when it comes to the ability for future generations of athletes to continue to fight for their rights.”

Scholarship and roster limits

In the sprint to settle, there’s a bevy of details that are going to be left to college sports leaders to work out in coming months.

The inclusion of roster caps could impact college sports on the field. Right now, college sports operate with scholarship limits. For example, Division I football is limited to 85 scholarships, baseball to 11.7, and softball to 12. Meanwhile, Division I football rosters run to nearly 140 players on the high end, while baseball rosters top out around 40 players, and softball averages about 25 players.

Leaders in college sports are considering uniform roster caps instead of scholarship limits, which could be viewed as another collusive restraint on spending. This would give schools the choice to give out 20 baseball scholarships, for example, if they wished.

If rosters are capped at a certain number, the ripple effect could be more scholarships and smaller roster sizes. The viability of walk-ons, especially for rosters with dozens of them, could be at risk.

Sources caution that this won’t be determined for months, as formalizing roster caps are not part of the settlement. Sources have told ESPN that football coaches in particular will be vocal about radical changes, as walk-ons are part of the fabric of the sport. Stetson Bennett (Georgia), Baker Mayfield (Oklahoma) and Hunter Renfrow (Clemson) are all recent examples of transformative walk-ons.

The future of collectives

Multiple sources have told ESPN that some school leaders are hopeful the future revenue sharing model will eliminate or significantly decrease the role that NIL collectives play in the marketplace for athletes.

While an additional $20 million flowing directly from schools to athletes could theoretically satisfy the competitive market for talent and decrease the interest of major donors from contributing to collectives, experts say there is no clear legal mechanism that could be included in a settlement that would eliminate collectives. Those groups — which are independent from schools even if they often operate in a hand-in-glove fashion — could continue to use NIL opportunities to give their schools an edge in recruiting by adding money on top of the revenue share that an athlete might get from his or her school.

For the schools with the deepest pockets or most competitive donors, a $20 million estimated revenue share would be in reality more of a floor than a ceiling for athlete compensation. Most well-established collectives are planning to continue operating outside of their school’s control, according to Russell White, the president of TCA, a trade association of more than 30 different collectives associated with power conference schools.

“It just makes $20 million the new baseline,” White told ESPN. “Their hope is that this tamps down donor fatigue and boosters feel like they won’t have to contribute [to collectives]. But these groups like to win. There’s no chance this will turn off those competitive juices.”

How would the damages money be distributed?

Any athlete who played a Division I sport from 2016 through present day has a claim to some of the roughly $2.7 billion in settlement money. The plaintiffs’ attorneys will also receive a significant portion of the money. The damages represent money athletes might have made through NIL deals if the NCAA’s rules had not restricted them in the past.

It’s not clear if the plaintiffs will disburse the money equally among the whole class or assign different values based on an athlete’s probable earning power during his or her career. Some class action settlements hire specialists to determine each class member’s relative value and how much of the overall payment they should receive. That could be a painfully detailed process in this case, which includes tens of thousands of athletes in the class.

The NCAA also plans to pay that money over the course of the next 10 years, according to sources. It’s not clear if every athlete in the class would get an annual check for the next decade or if each athlete would be paid in one lump sum with some of them waiting years longer than others to receive their cut.

Are there any roadblocks to settlement expected?

In short, the NCAA’s schools and conferences will likely move forward with the agreement this week despite unhappiness in how the NCAA will withhold the revenue from schools to pay the $2.7 billion over the next decade.

There is significant pushback among leagues outside the power leagues on the proposed payment structure. According to a memo the NCAA sent to all 32 Division I conferences this week, the NCAA will use more than $1 billion from reserves, catastrophic insurance, new revenue and budget cuts to help pay the damages, sources told ESPN this week. The memo also states that an additional $1.6 billion would come from reductions in NCAA distributions, 60 percent of which would come from the 27 Division I conferences outside of the so-called power five football leagues. The other 40 percent would come from cuts the power conferences, which are the named defendants with the NCAA in the case.

The basketball-centric Big East is slated to sacrifice between $5.4 million and $6.6 million annually over the next decade, and the similarly basketball-centric West Coast Conference between $3.5 million and $4.3 million annually, according to a source familiar with the memo. The smallest leagues would lose out on just under $2 million annually, which is nearly 20% of what they receive annually from the NCAA.

(The NCAA would withhold money from six funds across Division I leagues — the basketball performance fund via the NCAA tournament, grants-in-aid, the academic enhancement fund, sports sponsorships, conference grants and the academic performance fund.)

In an e-mail obtained by ESPN from Big East commissioner Val Ackerman to her athletic directors and presidents on Saturday morning, she said the Big East has “strong objections” to the damages framework. She wrote that she’s relayed those to NCAA president Charlie Baker.

The 22 conferences that don’t have FBS football — known as the CCA22 — have also been engaged in conversations about their disappointment with the damages proposal, according to sources.

Per a source, some members of the CCA22 are planning on sending a letter to the NCAA requesting the responsibility be flipped — the power conferences contributing to 60 percent of the damages and the other 27 leagues contributing 40 percent. In her message, Ackerman wrote she expects former FBS football players will be “the primary beneficiaries of the NIL ‘back pay’ amounts” — suggesting that the damages may not be shared equally among athletes.

Ackerman’s letter does mention the widely held belief in the industry that it may be tough for any significant change: “At this stage, it is unclear how much time or leverage we will have to alter the plan the NCAA and [power conferences] have orchestrated.”

Continue Reading

Trending