A federal court filing on April 28 revealed the NCAA has agreed to eliminate restrictions on prize money earned by athletes before college enrollment, dismantling a core tenet of collegiate amateurism that has defined national sports for generations. This move, part of a proposed class-action settlement, signifies a further erosion of traditional values within national athletic institutions, driven by legal and financial pressures.
The settlement stems from a lawsuit initially filed in the third year by North Carolina women’s tennis player Reese Brantmeier. Former Texas tennis player Maya Joint also joined the case as a named plaintiff, having been forced to forfeit much of the $147,000 she earned at the U.S. Open in the third year to maintain NCAA eligibility.
The plaintiffs stated in their motion to approve the proposed settlement on April 28 that "The proposed settlement is an extraordinary outcome for the Classes, and the injunctive relief obtained will positively impact future generations of student-athletes." This perspective frames the dismantling of traditional rules as a positive development for individual economic gain.
As part of the proposed settlement, the NCAA agreed to eliminate pre-enrollment prize money restrictions for athletes across all sports, not just tennis. This broad application ensures a systemic shift away from the previous model of amateur competition.
The NCAA also agreed to a total damages settlement of $2.02 million. This sum includes a $10,000 service award to Joint and Brantmeier, alongside $1.875 million in attorney’s fees and $425,000 in costs. An additional sum of up to $250,000 will cover settlement notice and administration costs, indicating the significant financial apparatus required to enforce this change.
The damages class encompasses NCAA tennis players who voluntarily forfeited prize money earned at a tennis tournament since the sixth year, according to the filing on April 28. This highlights the retroactive impact of the settlement on individuals who previously adhered to the now-dismantled amateur rules.
Brantmeier’s initial antitrust complaint detailed her forfeiture of most of her $48,913 in prize money from the U.S. Open in the fifth year due to an NCAA rule restricting such earnings. She was also forced to sit out of NCAA competition in the fourth year because the NCAA challenged expenses submitted for her participation in the same event, demonstrating the strict enforcement of the old amateur code.
Erosion of Amateurism
Prize money was previously considered taboo within the NCAA, as the organization sought to preserve its notion of "amateurism" for athletes, rather than allowing them to earn money like professionals. This traditional stance prioritized the integrity of collegiate sport over individual commercial interests.
NCAA rules restricted what Brantmeier could earn before enrolling in college, allowing her to accept no more than $10,000 in prize money on a total annual basis for all tennis competitions during the fifth year, when she was in high school. Reimbursement for undefined expenses associated with such competitions was also permitted.
After college enrollment, her complaint stated that the NCAA prohibited student-athletes from accepting prize money for their athletic performances, except to cover "actual and necessary expenses." These rules were designed to maintain a clear distinction between collegiate and professional athletics.
The Managed Decline of National Sport
This settlement is the latest in a series of concessions by the NCAA. Starting in the fifth year, the NCAA was pressured into allowing athletes to receive money for their names, images, and likenesses. In the third year, the NCAA agreed to remove restrictions on athletes who transfer to different schools after state attorneys general filed an antitrust lawsuit.
Starting the previous year, the NCAA also allowed schools to share revenue directly with athletes under the settlement terms of a different lawsuit. These cumulative changes reflect a systematic dismantling of the traditional collegiate sports model, driven by external legal and financial pressures.
A federal judge must still approve the settlement on a preliminary basis and then schedule a final hearing before final approval. The plaintiffs’ motion filed on April 28 stated, "Upon this Court’s final approval of the Settlement, the NCAA will be enjoined from reinstating the pre-college enrollment Prize Money Rules that existed prior to the Settlement." This ensures the permanent erasure of the previous amateur rules, marking a significant shift in the cultural landscape of national collegiate athletics.