This year, private equity firms are suiting up for college game day and the landmark House v. NCAA settlement (the “House Settlement”) is making it possible.
Overview: House v. NCAA Settlement
On June 6, 2025, Judge Claudia Wilken of the Northern District of California approved the $2.8 billion settlement in the House v. NCAA class action antitrust lawsuit, marking a historic shift for collegiate athletics. Effective as of July 1, 2025, the House Settlement allows NCAA Division I (Division I) programs to directly compensate athletes for the commercial use of their name, image, and likeness (NIL).[i]
House was originally filed in 2020 by former Division I college athletes against the NCAA and its Power Five conferences (collectively, the “Consolidated House Defendants”), seeking retroactive damages and an injunction to prevent anticompetitive restrictions on NIL compensation. Judge Wilken certified House as a class action lawsuit in 2023, ultimately consolidating House with Hubbard v. NCAA and Carter v. NCAA in 2024.[ii],[iii] The class members of each suit agreed to settle their claims pursuant to a comprehensive, 10-year agreement, with damages to be distributed amongst three separate damages classes and one injunctive relief class.[iv],[v]
As to each damages class, the settlement agreement requires the Consolidated House Defendants to pay $2.8 billion in back damages to class members who competed between 2016 and 2024 but did not receive NIL compensation. Conversely, under the injunctive relief provisions of the settlement agreement:
- Division I schools who opted in to the House settlement before June 30, 2025 (the “Opted-In Schools”):
- may allocate up to approximately $20.5 million per year from their revenue to directly compensate athletes worth up to 22% of the Power Five schools’ average athletic revenues each year, subject to yearly increases[vi]; but
- must eliminate caps on scholarship awards to collegiate athletes; and
- The NCAA must adopt roster limits for each sport at the Opted-In Schools.
Although the NCAA can still prohibit third-party NIL payments, the House Settlement further restricts such prohibitions to a limited set of Associated Entities[vii] or Individuals.[viii] To enforce these and other terms of the House Settlement, the Power Five conferences established the College Sports Commission, a separate legal entity responsible for overseeing direct payment, NIL agreements, and roster limits.[ix]
The House Settlement Unlocks Significant Opportunities for Private Equity in College Athletics
Historically, Division I programs have generated athletic revenue from media rights, corporate sponsorship, licensing and merchandising deals, and ticket sales, but for the first time in NCAA history, Opted-In Schools may share this revenue with their players. House’s revenue-sharing provisions will be easily manageable for Opted-In Schools in a Power Five conference; however, for Group of Five conferences and other mid-major Division I schools, opting in could mean serious strains on their athletic revenues.[x] Coupled with rising expenses and an urgent need to modernize financial models, many Division I schools are leveraging outside capital, and private equity is consistently first off the bench.
- NIL Infrastructure & Direct Athlete Compensation. Opted-In Schools and the College Sports Commission have both engaged PE-backed technologies to professionalize and scale NIL operations, including direct athlete compensation from revenue-sharing. The recent emergence of such platforms addresses the immediate need to manage deal flow, brand management, tax support, and compliance for athletes to third-party collectives and agency-like services.
- Commercialization of Athletic Departments. Opted-In Schools like the University of Kentucky are quietly converting their athletic departments into limited liability companies – an early move that positions Division I programs to raise external capital and monetize assets apart from the state budget process. In light of these organizational shifts, PE firms like the Elevate Fund and Chiron Sports Group’s Legacy 25 Fund are committing private credit to Division I programs.[xi],[xii] The instant liquidity boost allows Opted-In Schools to tackle revenue-generating projects like capital improvements, increased fan and donor engagement, and system optimizations.
- Media Rights, Capital Improvements & Ancillary Revenue. In a post-House economy, institutional funds allocated to capital improvements must go beyond prolonging facility life – rather, capital improvements must also maximize revenue. As Group of Five Opted-In Schools and other mid-major Division I programs look to close the gap with their Power Five counterparts, expect an influx of private equity commitments unlocking additional media rights, hospitality models, gameday experiences, and local sponsorship inventory.
Final Legal, Regulatory & Strategic Considerations
The long-term benefits of the House Settlement should be weighed against uncertain factors like policy changes from the College Sports Commission, Executive Order 14322 “Saving College Sports,” Johnson v. NCAA, and future litigation raising questions around whether college athletes should be classified as employees.[xiii],[xiv]
However, for PE firms that can navigate the emerging legal landscape, structure innovative capital partnerships, and bring operating discipline to college sports, House presents a unique opportunity to shape the next era of the NCAA. Whether you’re exploring fund formation, running due diligence on potential investments, or advising a university partner, our team is here to support your efforts.
[i] In re College Athlete NIL Litigation, No. 4:20-cv-03919 (N.D. Cal. filed June 11, 2025) (Opinion Regarding Order Granting Motion for Final Approval of Settlement Agreement).
[ii] Hubbard v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, No. 4:23-cv-01593, (N.D. Cal.).
[iii] Carter v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, No. 4:23-CV-06325 (N.C. Cal.).
[iv] In October 2024, Judge Wilken granted preliminary settlement approval, with additional directions to address concerns around notice to future class members and roster limits. See In re College Athlete NIL Lit. (Opinion Regarding Order Granting Motion for Final Approval of Settlement Agreement) at 6.
[v] For the purpose of settlement, Judge Wilken approved the division of class members into three damages classes: (i) Football and Men’s Basketball, (ii) Women’s Basketball, and (iii) Additional Sports. The Injunctive Relief class includes all student-athletes who compete on, competed on, or will compete on a Division I athletic team at any time between June 15, 2020, through the end of the Injunctive Relief Settlement Term. Id. at 8.
[vi] Schools that elect to opt out of House will be bound to existing NCAA rules, including state legislation. See Austin Reid and Andrew Smalley, What the NCAA Settlement Means for Colleges and State Legislatures, NCSL, June 9, 2025.
[vii] “Associated Entities” include (a) entities that are or were known to “the athletics department staff of a Member Institution (NCAA Division I schools), to exist, in significant part, for the purpose of (i) promoting or supporting a particular Member Institution’s intercollegiate athletics program or student-athletes; and/or (ii) creating or identifying NIL opportunities solely for a particular Member Institution’s student-athletes,” (b) “have been directed or requested by a Member Institution’s athletics department staff to assist in the recruitment or retention of . . . student-athletes, or (ii) otherwise has assisted in the recruitment or retention of . . . student-athletes”, (c) “any entity owned, controlled, or operated by, or otherwise affiliated with, such entity or an Associated Individual, other than a publicly traded corporation.” In re College Athlete NIL Lit. (Opinion Regarding Order Granting Motion for Final Approval of Settlement Agreement) at 12.
[viii] “Associated Individuals” are those who (a) are or were “a member, employee, director, officer, owner, or agent” of an Associated Entity, (b) “who directly or indirectly . . . have contributed more than $50,000 over their lifetime” to a particular Member Institution or to an Associated Entity, and (c) that “(i) have been directed or requested by a Member Institution’s athletics department staff to assist in the recruitment or retention of . . . student-athletes, or (ii) otherwise has assisted in the recruitment or retention of . . . student-athletes.” Id.
[ix] Enforcement, Roster Limits, College Sports Commission.
[x] For the 2024 Tax Year, the Power Five conferences generated a combined $3.54 billion in revenue, as compared against the Group of Five conferences combined $376.4 million in revenue. See Joseph Dylan, Power conferences generated nearly $3.2 billion more in revenue than Group of Five in 2023-24, June 23, 2025.
[xi] Jessica Golden, Sports agency Elevate launches $500 million college investment as payment landscape evolves, June 9, 2025.
[xii] Eric Jackson, PE Firm Hunts College Sports With Fund Backed by Gronk, McCourtys, Aug. 29, 2025.
[xiii] The Executive Order mirrors and memorializes the House Settlement terms. See Exec. Order No. 14322, 90 Fed. Reg. 35821 (2025).
[xiv] Johnson v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, No. 22-1223 (3d Cir. 2024).
This article may be reproduced, in whole or in part, with the prior permission of Thompson Hine LLP and acknowledgement of its source and copyright. This publication is intended to inform clients about legal matters of current interest. It is not intended as legal advice. Readers should not act upon the information contained in it without professional counsel.
This document may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions.
© 2025 THOMPSON HINE LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.