The House Built to Fall: Why Roster Limitations Present Major Concerns to the House Settlement
- Colton Teal
- 2 hours ago
- 8 min read
Monday, April 7th, 2025, is a day that will long be remembered throughout the collegiate athletics world, not just in Gainesville, Florida. As the University of Florida erased a 12-point deficit to defeat the University of Houston, crowning the Gators 2025 Men’s Basketball Champions,[1] a soon-to-be-retired federal judge was reeling from a day’s long discussion that will undoubtedly reshape the landscape of the NCAA.[2] That judge, Claudia Wilken, now holds the power to begin the “revenue sharing” era in college athletics by approving the proposed House settlement agreement.[3]
Five years into the litigation, the House v. NCAA case has shifted from a case about the NCAA owing back damages to former Division I athletes (myself included) for its unlawful restriction of athletes ability to profit off their name, image, and likeness (NIL) to a complete overhaul of the NCAA’s governing structure.[4] While the terms of the settlement agreement take significant power away from the NCAA to restrict “student-athletes” ability to be compensated, they also provide the NCAA newfound powers. For example, the agreement allows for the NCAA to bind future athletes to the settlement (absent objection from said athlete) and monitor athletes' NIL deals that amount to more than $600 to ensure such a deal has a “valid business purpose.”[5] That said, to many athletes, the most concerning part of the House settlement is that the NCAA also attempts to restrict an athlete’s ability to even play Division I athletics.[6] The settlement imposes a smaller maximum roster size for 19 of 43 NCAA sports.[7]
A massive cut of Division I roster spots would occur if the proposed settlement went into effect.[8] At a minimum, the NCAA would strip 4,739 young adults of the opportunity to play Division I athletics, which is many athletes' lifelong dream for their athletic career. This amount does not reflect the fact that athletic departments are scrambling to shrink the number of non-net revenue-generating sports teams on their campuses to deal with the financial strain of the House settlement.[9] This financial strain stems from a culmination of obligations that the settlement places on athletic programs. Among these financial strains include decreased revenue from the settlement’s backpay obligations, lessened payments from conference revenue, increased expenses due to revenue sharing with athletes, increased scholarship expenses, and increased compliance demands causing increased department expenses.[10] Many of these programs are also still recovering from the decreased revenue impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic.[11]
The strain of the House settlement has already caused a reaction from several Division I athletics programs, including Cal Poly cutting the athletic careers of 58 athletes short by discontinuing their swimming and diving teams[12] and Saint Francis moving their programs to Division III athletics.[13] Both universities directly cited the House settlement as a motivation behind their decisions.[14] Thus, one can only speculate how many opportunities to play Division I athletics will be stripped away from current and prospective collegiate athletes.
Moreover, it is not as if these athletes had advanced notice that their roster spot would no longer be available. Rather than implement the roster limitations in some years, the NCAA has proposed cutting down roster sizes the season after the settlement, which is predicted to go into effect starting with the 2025-2026 athletic year.[15] The NCAA’s insistence on immediate implementation of roster sizes has already crushed the dreams of many athletes. For example, Taylor Wilson is a standout high school soccer player from Germantown, Maryland.[16] Wilson was not just a lifelong Penn State fan; she was a fanatic.[17] She stated that Penn State was “a personality trait of mine.”[18] So, when the Nittany Lions presented a scholarship offer to Wilson, she committed four years of her life to Penn State without hesitation.[19] Fast forward a year later, Wilson’s dream school turned her life into a nightmare by pulling her scholarship offer because of House’s decreased roster sizes, making the 17-year-old feel “numb” and her parents “mad and shocked.”[20] But when asked about the decision, Penn State’s head women’s soccer coach said, “It was just business.”[21] With the House settlement, the expendability of young athletes is now treated as a business more than ever before.
Evidently, Judge Wilken shares similar concerns about the shrinking opportunities for athletes, as highlighted by her comments during the House April 7 fairness hearing.[22] Rather than the NCAA’s proposed plan to cut the roster sizes immediately, Judge Wilken suggested allowing current athletes to keep their roster spots while gradually implementing the roster cuts, stating, "It’s not that many people. It’s not that much money.”[23] Judge Wilken also noted that the move would be “goodwill” from the NCAA.[24] Instead, the NCAA’s representative, Rakesh Kilaru, pushed back on Judge Wilken’s proposal, stating that as long as the athletic scholarship is honored, a coach could cut an athlete at any point and could renege on a roster-spot commitment to a high school athlete.[25] Kilaru stated that the roster cuts were not arbitrary as they were based on the total number of athletes who actually participate in competition throughout a season.[26] The NCAA’s representative also claimed that this would affect “a small number of folks.”[27]
It appears that to the NCAA, a non-profit organization that has consistently raked in over one billion dollars of revenue annually in the past,[28] these decisions profoundly impacting the lives of young adults are just business. Though Kilaru attempts to rationalize his arguments, he ignores that cutting an athlete’s promised roster spot will become all the more common if the current version of the House settlement goes into effect. More athletes like Taylor Wilson will have their roster spot displaced, leading to substantial uncertainty and instability in said “cut” athlete's life. Though schools will bear the financial burden of doing so, one should expect schools to quickly cut the roster spot of athletes who have become injured or had one subpar season performance. If the current House settlement had been in place at the time, I have no doubt that my roster spot on my Division I team would not have existed after I tore my UCL in my senior year of high school baseball.
This claim is bolstered by Kilaru’s claim on behalf of the NCAA. Because the NCAA has calculated roster sizes based on the total number of athletes who actually participate in competition throughout the season, athletic teams have no wiggle room to carry injured and developing players on their roster. Unlike in the past, schools will be unwilling to use a valuable roster spot on players who have potential but are not “game-ready” by utilizing a redshirt. Similarly, schools will move on from players who cannot compete that season due to injury (that is, until employment law protections kick in)[29]. Schools' ability to treat their players as expendable assets is bolstered by the current version of the transfer portal, which essentially allows free agency.[30] Thus, schools can replace their current rostered players at a moment’s notice. Likewise, these small roster sizes will increase pressure on athletes to perform, increasing already prevalent mental health concerns in collegiate athletics. Schools will no longer be able to utilize a “deep bench,” so teams may be forced to throw an athlete struggling with athletic performance onto the playing field despite their struggles. Undoubtedly, this will increase athlete harassment, something that 1 out of 3 NCAA athletes already experience when only accounting for abuse stemming from those with a betting interest.[31] The NCAA’s roster limitations will harm the lives of current and prospective collegiate athletes.
Many similar concerns as those discussed above were shared in the April 7th fairness hearing. University of Utah swimmer Gannon Flynn stated that because of House’s proposed roster limits, athletes are already being told to “transfer or quit outright.”[32] Glynn assessed the roster limits as “cruel.” Representing the interest of high school athletes, Gracelyn Laudermilch, a high school runner, shared a similar story to Taylor Wilson with committing to a roster spot that had since been stripped away from her.[33] In the words of Laudermilch, “No one can explain why roster limits are good for anyone.”[34] Despite these impassioned claims for athletes worried about their future, the NCAA’s representative, Kilaru, responded by explaining the benefits of a scholarship to an athlete as if a scholarship from a university to a student is unique to athletics.[35] Judge Wilken quickly shut this argument down, stating, “That's small comfort (to) the ones who don't get the roster spot or the scholarship.”[36] I tend to agree.
From a billion-dollar organization that champions athletic development and a focus on mental health when selling its recruiting pitch to athletes,[37] the NCAA’s justifications for the immediate implementation of its roster limits in the House settlement appear rich (almost as rich as its insistence on amateurism)[38]. Though there are many potential issues facing the approval of the House settlement, among the most disturbing are these roster limitations that will strip athletes of their ability to play the sport in which they have worked their entire lives to develop into Division I athletes. Please consider expressing public support against the proposed roster limitations in the House settlement.
[1] Jeff Borzello, Florida Rallies Once Again to Beat Houston for NCAA Title, ESPN (Apr. 7, 2025), https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/44580884/florida-rallies-once-again-beat-houston-ncaa-title.
[2] Ross Dellenger , NCAA’s House Settlement Ruling Not Over Finish Line Yet; Here Are the Judge’s Remaining Sticking Points, Yahoo Sports (Apr. 8, 2025), https://sports.yahoo.com/college-football/article/ncaas-house-settlement-ruling-not-over-finish-line-yet-here-are-the-judges-remaining-sticking-points-022522716.html.
[3] Id.
[4] See generally id.
[5] See Amended Stipulation and Settlement Agreement, House v. NCAA, 545 F. Supp. 3d 804, 808 (N.D. Cal. 2021)(filed Sept. 26, 2024) [hereinafter House Settlement Agreement].
[6] Steve Berkowitz, House v. NCAA Settlement Hearing Live Updates: College Sports, USA Today (Apr. 7, 2025), https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2025/04/07/house-ncaa-settlement-hearing-live-updates-college-sports/82968197007/.
[7] Dan Murphy & Michael Rothstein, Athletes Face National Signing Day amid Uncertainty over Roster Limits, ESPN (Nov. 11, 2024), https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/42273737/college-athletes-face-national-signing-day-amid-uncertainty-new-roster-limits.
[8] Id.
[9] House v. NCAA Will Hurt Non-Revenue-Generating Athletes, Stanford Daily (Jan. 8, 2025), https://stanforddaily.com/2025/01/08/ncaa-settlement-hurts-non-revenue-athletes/.
[10] See generally House Settlement Agreement, supra note 5.
[11] Ben Portnoy, Five Years Later: Looking Back at the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on College Sports, Sports Bus. J. (Mar. 18, 2025), https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2025/03/18/five-years-later-looking-back-at-the-impact-of-the-covid-19-pandemic-on-college-sports/.
[12] Associated Press, Cal Poly Eliminates Men’s, Women’s Swimming, Diving Programs, ESPN (Mar. 12, 2025), https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/44223528/cal-poly-eliminates-mens-women-swimming-diving-programs.
[13] Myron Medcalf, Saint Francis, After First Four Loss, Moving to Division III, ESPN (Mar. 25, 2025), https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/44402532/saint-francis-first-four-loss-moving-division-iii.
[14] Associated Press, supra note 12; Medcalf, supra note 13.
[15] Yale Gieszl, The NCAA’s Proposed 2025-26 Roster Limits, Skier Scribbler (Mar. 4, 2025), https://skierscribbler.com/13476/sports/the-ncaas-proposed-2025-26-roster-limits/.
[16] Murphy & Rothstein, supra note 7.
[17] Id.
[18] Id.
[19] Id.
[20] Id.
[21] Id.
[22] Berkowitz, supra note 6.
[23] Id.
[24] Id.
[25] Id.
[26] Id.
[27] Id.
[28] Associated Press, NCAA Generates Nearly $1.3 Billion in Revenue for 2022-23, ESPN (Feb. 1, 2024), https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/39439274/ncaa-generates-nearly-13-billion-revenue-2022-23.
[29] See Complaint — Class and Collective Action ¶¶ 9–21, Johnson v. NCAA, 556 F. Supp. 3d 491 (E.D. Pa. 2021) (No. 19-5230), 2019 WL 5847321; Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101-336, 104 Stat. 327 (codified at 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101-12213 (1990)).
[30]Noah Henderson, College Football Free Agency: Transfer Portal Trends and NIL, SI (Dec. 12, 2024), https://www.si.com/fannation/name-image-likeness/nil-news/college-football-free-agency-transfer-portal-trends-and-nil-impact
[31] Saquandra Heath, ‘Don’t Be a Loser’: NCAA Launches Sports Betting Anti-Harassment Video, NCAA (Mar. 18, 2025), https://www.ncaa.org/news/2025/3/18/media-center-don-t-be-a-loser-ncaa-launches-sports-betting-anti-harassment-video.aspx.
[32] Berkowitz, supra note 6.
[33] Id.
[34] Id.
[35] Id.
[36] Id.
[37] See generally NCAA Homepage, NCAA (Apr. 10, 2025), https://www.ncaa.org/index.aspx.
[38] See Nat’l Collegiate Athletic Ass’n v. Alston, 141 S. Ct. 2141, 2147 (2021).