Boozer92 said:
The roster limits is an interesting question. As well as the additional scholarship money associated.
Since the judge decided not to finalize the settlement over objections by current players to roster limits, I don't think we know what the rules are for next year.
This is a double whammy for now. We can't offer additional scholarship money that we may or may not have next year. We also have to be prepared for a roster limit that may or may not exist next year.
It is also possible that any players on the roster when the settlement finally happens will be exempt from being cut due to roster limits. So for example if we have 26 or 27 players at the time of the settlement there could be a scenario where we could exceed the limit.
The problem is that since the judge kicked the can down the road there is a lot of uncertainty this summer and maybe through the fall.
Regarding scholarships/revenue share, my understanding is that happening regardless. House attorneys said something to the effect that if the settlement is stayed, the revenue share will happen, but the back pay for former players would be on hold.
If you go forward with Rev Share, you have addressed the issue with the current/future players. If you hold rev share pending final resolution, then your former player class is just getting bigger. Still potential for current players to claim they aren't getting enough but that would be a better claim against the school rather than NCAA as NCAA is leaving funding allocation to the schools.
As for the clearinghouse, they said their sample review of prior NIL deals shows their metrics would have approved almost all corporate sponsorships, but would have rejected almost all deals with collectives. That sounds great, but the collectives will quickly figure out what will get approved and structure deals to conform.
