Attorneys representing the NCAA settlement have revised the organization’s plan for roster limits in hopes of placating U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken, who delayed a decision on the settlement a few weeks ago over concerns regarding the roster limits.
According to ESPN, the new plan would allow athletes who lost their spot on the roster a chance to continue playing without counting against the supposed limit, so long as that student-athlete has eligibility. The new plan would be optional for universities, meaning not all schools would adhere to this plan.
Attorneys representing the NCAA settlement have revised the organization’s plan for roster limits in hopes of placating U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken, who delayed a decision on the settlement a few weeks ago over concerns regarding the roster limits.
According to ESPN, the new plan would allow athletes who lost their spot on the roster a chance to continue playing without counting against the supposed limit, so long as that student-athlete has eligibility. The new plan would be optional for universities, meaning not all schools would adhere to this plan.
Related: Judge Delays NCAA Settlement Over Immediate Impact of Roster Limits
If adopted, this rule change would apply to a variety of student-athletes, including “those currently on a roster; those athletes who have already been cut this year; and those high school recruits who enrolled at a school after committing to a roster position only to see it eliminated.”
Along with this revision, participating universities would be required to track their “grandfathered-in” roster spots. Those spots would “roll off” the exemption list as the student-athletes currently in those spots use all of their eligibility. In essence, for a few years or semesters, a school could exceed the roster limits tied to the settlement.
So far, representatives from the Big Ten, SEC, ACC and Big 12 have all agreed to this grandfathered-in model. Judge Wilken requested that any objectors file responses to the plan by May 13. The plaintiffs and the NCAA will then have time to respond to those objections.
Representing some objectors is attorney Steven Molo. “While the NCAA and Class Counsel have acknowledged our objection to roster caps is valid, their proposed mushy modification doesn't go far enough,” Molo said. “Many, many student athletes have had something taken away from them. The fight will continue.”
Mushy or not, the supposed July 1 settlement deadline is looming. Following the deadline for objectors to file responses, Judge Wilken can issue her decision at any time.
