香港三级片

COLUMBIA, Mo. 鈥� With college sports鈥� landscape-shifting legal settlement still floating in courtroom limbo, Missouri athletics director Laird Veatch remains optimistic that the school will 鈥渕anage鈥� the rules that eventually emerge.

The $2.8 billion House v. NCAA settlement is close to approval, the federal judge overseeing the process has said, but a roster limits roadblock has kept the agreement from crossing the finish line.

The background, for those who find this litigation confusing: Two key parts of the settlement seem done and dusted. There will be billions of dollars in backpay to former college athletes who could not profit from their name, image and likeness during their playing careers. And moving forward, universities will be able to share revenue directly with athletes as compensation 鈥� starting with $20.5 million next sports year, assuming this all winds up approved.

Then there are roster limits. As part of the settlement, schools will be able to offer more scholarships to athletes, but there will be fewer overall roster spots available. A football program will go from having 85 scholarship players and 35 walk-ons to just 105 players, with all eligible for full scholarships, for example.

It鈥檚 those roster limits that have drawn objections, mostly from walk-on athletes whose spots stand to vanish under the settlement terms. Enough formal objections came through for U.S. Judge Claudia Wilken to require attorneys to re-work terms to grandfather athletes in.

It seemed an imperfect idea made even less resolute when attorneys came back to court with a solution that schools could grandfather current and incoming athletes in under the roster limits 鈥� but only if they want to. It鈥檚 not yet clear whether this structure will satisfy Wilken and trigger full approval of the settlement.

At the moment, though, the path forward seems to involve schools having the choice of whether to grandfather in athletes who hold or have been promised a roster spot.

There hasn鈥檛 been much clarity about how this will play out on a school-by-school basis. Notre Dame has said it will grandfather athletes across all of its offered sports. Clemson football coach Dabo Swinney has said he鈥檒l do so for his program.

So what will Mizzou do about roster limits? Asked by the Post-Dispatch earlier this week, Veatch was heavy on institutional confidence but light on specifics.

鈥淭here鈥檚 been a lot of talk about roster limits as we鈥檝e gone through the process,鈥� Veatch said. 鈥淣ow, in terms of the latest developments and where this thing鈥檚 landed, we had had conversations about what could happen. But we need to find out what the specifics are before we get there. Of course, I鈥檓 starting to get an understanding of what that could be. We have conversations as an SEC AD group and hear from attorneys and do all that. We鈥檙e starting to get our heads around that.

鈥淚n the end, if it works out in the direction that I believe it will, I think we鈥檒l be in a position to manage that, just like all schools will. It鈥檒l create some nuance and a little challenge here and there, but it鈥檚 not something that is insurmountable. We鈥檒l work through that. Our coaches, our teams, everyone involved has gotten really used to being flexible these days. You just learn, you figure it out, you go through the process, you see what the latest is, and you react to that and get ready. We鈥檒l manage through it. I鈥檓 confident we can do that.鈥�

To this point, MU has not been immune to the impending impacts of roster limits.

A Missouri swimmer was among the athletes who submitted written objections to the settlement.

鈥淚 would be lying if I said the House vs. NCAA settlement has not been hanging over our heads all year,鈥� Seth Cannon, a freshman swimmer at Mizzou, wrote in January. 鈥淚t has been a black cloud over the entire team as well as the coaching staff, who are not looking forward to cutting the roster down to 22 men and 30 women because of this settlement.鈥�

Within the football program, Tigers coach Eli Drinkwitz said he 鈥渉urt a lot of players鈥� at the end of last season by having upfront conversations with those who could be cut due to a decrease in available spots.

How much will that change following settlement approval? Will there be enough discontent related to roster limits to trigger more legal action, perhaps on the part of athletes whose spots disappeared? This particular point of contention may look like attorneys missing the forest for the trees in terms of the broader settlement, but it鈥檚 not without implications for current athletes.

Without concrete, committed directions from the court or athletics department leadership, though, it鈥檚 uncertainty that will linger for at least a little while longer 鈥� for both athletes and these changes to college sports.