USA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Enric Ripoll-González, Jorge Sanz and Marco Barbosa, Cases Lacambra
Cases Lacambra 1221 Brickell Ave, Suite 2450 Miami FL 33131 USA Tel: +1 305 381 9191 Email: usa@caseslacambra.com Web: www.caseslacambra.com
Introduction American sports are being rebuilt from the ground up. The amateur ideal that governed college athletics for more than a century has given way to something resembling a professional labour market. Soccer, once a niche sport in the United States, is now attracting the kind of international capital and institutional infra - structure that signals permanent arrival. Meanwhile, the economics of sports media, stable for decades around broadcast television, have splintered into a fragmented streaming ecosystem where nothing is certain except continued disruption. The June 2025 approval of the House v NCAA settle- ment represents perhaps the most significant turning point in collegiate sports history. For the first time, schools can share revenue directly with athletes under a regulated framework. Combined with name, image and likeness rights that already allow athletes to earn substantial income from endorsements, the settle - ment creates a dual-compensation model that raises fundamental questions about the future of college sports. Will athletes become employees? How will institutions balance Title IX obligations with revenue- driven incentives? Can the NCAA maintain any mean - ingful governance authority? These questions extend beyond courtrooms and compliance offices. They affect how universities allo - cate budgets, how conferences organise themselves and, ultimately, what college athletics will look like in ten years. This chapter examines three major trends reshaping American sports: • the post-settlement transformation of college ath - letics;
• the soccer boom and its legal implications; and • the fragmentation of sports media rights in the streaming era. College Athletics After House: The End of Amateurism What the settlement changes When Judge Claudia Wilken approved the House set - tlement in June 2025, she effectively dismantled what remained of the amateurism model of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The settle - ment allows Division I schools to share up to approxi - mately USD20.5 million annually with their athletes, with that cap increasing over time. The NCAA must also pay roughly USD2.8 billion in back damages to athletes who competed from 2016 onwards. The practical effect is that college athletes now oper - ate in two parallel compensation systems. They can pursue name, image and likeness (NIL) deals with brands, collectives and local businesses while simul - taneously receiving direct revenue shares from their schools. This is not a reform of the old system. It’s a replacement of it with something that increasingly resembles professional sports economics. The unanswered questions are massive. Schools must now decide how to allocate their revenue-shar - ing pools across sports and individual athletes. Do they concentrate resources on football and basket - ball players who generate the most revenue? Do they spread payments more evenly to avoid Title IX prob - lems? How do they prevent wealthier programmes from using direct payments as recruiting weapons? The settlement provides a framework but leaves the hardest decisions to individual institutions.
393 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook