[BostonCard]

Parties to the settlement rejected Judge Wilken's recommendation of phasing in roster limits over time. If Judge Wilken nevertheless moves forward with approving the settlement, the roster limits would go into effect for the 2025-26 academic year.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/co...093440007/

I guess we will see what happens.  Non-recruited athletes are not a party to the settlement, so it is perhaps not a surprise that even though it is a relatively small thing for the parties to agree to, it is nonetheless a case where their interests are aligned and in any negotiation there are plenty of things for the two sides to disagree on and thus have to compromise that you do your best to pocket any points of agreement, however small.  It is the judges responsibility to ensure that no third party gets screwed by any settlement, so I can see why the judge made her comments.  Ultimately, though, although walk-ons are potentially hurt by the roster limits, it’s hard to make the case that they have a right to be on a team, or that they were promised or owed anything beyond the current season.  So although we will see how strongly she feels about the point, if it were me, I would probably approve the settlement despite appropriate misgivings.

BC

[BostonCard]

Parties to the settlement rejected Judge Wilken's recommendation of phasing in roster limits over time. If Judge Wilken nevertheless moves forward with approving the settlement, the roster limits would go into effect for the 2025-26 academic year.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/co...093440007/

I guess we will see what happens.  Non-recruited athletes are not a party to the settlement, so it is perhaps not a surprise that even though it is a relatively small thing for the parties to agree to, it is nonetheless a case where their interests are aligned and in any negotiation there are plenty of things for the two sides to disagree on and thus have to compromise that you do your best to pocket any points of agreement, however small.  It is the judges responsibility to ensure that no third party gets screwed by any settlement, so I can see why the judge made her comments.  Ultimately, though, although walk-ons are potentially hurt by the roster limits, it’s hard to make the case that they have a right to be on a team, or that they were promised or owed anything beyond the current season.  So although we will see how strongly she feels about the point, if it were me, I would probably approve the settlement despite appropriate misgivings.

BC