How will the House v. NCAA settlement, revenue sharing impact women’s college basketball?

TAMPA, Fla.

After UConn crushed South Carolina on Sunday to win another national championship , womens college basketball can turn its attention to a court drastically different but no less important than the hardwood at Amalie Arena.

Courtroom 3 of Californias Oakland Courthouse, where a federal judge, Claudia Wilken, will hold Mondays final hearing over a settlement in the landmark House v.

NCAA lawsuit .

Assuming she signs off on the agreement in the coming hours, days or weeks, schools will be able to start paying players in every sport directly this year.

Womens basketball stands at a fascinating intersection at the dawn of the revenue-sharing era; its not a traditional cash cow like football or mens basketball, but its more valuable than swimming or soccer.

Womens hoops is not generally a revenue-producing sport, with South Carolina coach Dawn Staley noting its not there yet, but the top collegians can make more than the top professionals.

Good luck figuring out how those forces and each schools de facto $20.5 million salary cap will determine who cuts down the nets at next years Final Four in Phoenix and beyond.

I think its going to affect a lot, UCLA coach Cori Close said.

I dont think we know how exactly.

It will ruin parity UConn coach Geno Auriemma, unsurprisingly, was blunt about the impact he expects revenue-sharing to have on future tournaments.

It will ruin parity.

Thats No.

1, Auriemma said.

Auriemmas argument is easy to follow.

When schools pay players directly, money will be an even bigger force in talent acquisition and retention.

As the cost of success rises, fewer programs will be willing or able to pay it.

So when you do those kind of things and its money-driven, its going to be, who is going to become the Dodgers and Yankees? Auriemma said.

And how many of those are you going to have? And how many other programs in womens basketball are going to be Milwaukee and Kansas City? Except the Brewers and the Royals arent competing for the same dollars as the Packers and Chiefs.

At the college level, theres the added layer of different sports at one school pulling from a shared pot.

The settlement does not detail how much each school must spend on each sport going forward, but most major programs are expected to share money similarly to the Georgia model: about 75 percent to football, 15 percent to mens basketball, 5 percent to womens basketball and 5 percent to everyone else.

Close said she believes the Bruins brass will take care of her program, but shes nervous about the big picture if different schools are less committed to her game.

Im lucky to be at a place where womens basketball is really important, Texas coach Vic Schaefer said.

But Ill say this: I need football to be good.

If its not, will a schools powerbrokers divert more funds to make it good again? Or will an athletic departments other programs suffer because the rising tide of football fails to lift everyone else? The case for greater parity If Auriemmas prediction is on one end of the spectrum, Chiney Ogwumikes thoughts are closer to the other.

She envisions a path to greater parity in a sport that remains top-heavy.

If most schools use a similar revenue-sharing formula and have the same cap, that, in theory, should level the playing field in recruiting.

I do think it creates opportunities for stars to be built elsewhere, said Ogwumike, the former Stanford star forward and current ESPN analyst.

Now, other schools can be competitive just because of the money, right? Theres some evidence to back her up.

A decade ago, the McDonalds All-American rosters featured high school recruits committed to 14 different schools.

Seven college programs (including the usual suspects of UConn and Notre Dame) had at least two recruits in the showcase.

This years event featured recruits for 18 different programs.

Only four Stanford, Tennessee, LSU and South Carolina had two or more participating prospects.

Its impossible to say how much of those decisions were based on finances in future revenue-sharing promises or name, image and likeness (NIL) deals.

But its reasonable to assume it wasnt zero, which means player compensation has helped spread elite talent across a slightly wider array of programs.

Perhaps the new system will spread the talent even more.

In January, the NCAA membership voted unanimously to start awarding payouts for tournament wins units, in NCAA lingo.

With an increased financial incentive to win big, will we see new schools consider investing more in womens basketball and its players? What if Auriemmas Dodgers and Yankees arent UConn and South Carolina but mid-majors or Power 4 also-rans that no one expects? So out of whack As if the two extremes werent complicated enough, Mondays hearing comes during a complex time in womens basketball.

Between the WNBAs expiring collective bargaining agreement, collective-fueled NIL payments and the transition to revenue sharing, the college games top stars earn more than pros.

Its so out of whack, UCLAs Close said.

So is this: As Staley figures out next seasons roster, she sees a third-party NIL pot thats larger than what she expects to have for direct revenue-sharing payments.

That just doesnt add up, Staley said.

The Gamecocks NIL budget will get a boost around Thanksgiving by competing in the Players Era tournament alongside Texas, UCLA and Duke.

Its a reminder that the $20.5 million cap is expected to function more like a floor than a ceiling and that schools can find creative ways outside it.

You think anybody in their right mind is going to stick to $20.5 (million)? Auriemma asked.

That might be whats on the books, but that aint going to be the final number.

Theres nobody out there looking around to collect taxes on that.

Auriemma paused.

It was the day before his 24th Final Four, and his passionate warning about revenue-sharing had gone on long enough.

And we play UCLA.

Theyre really good, Auriemma added.

Just thought Id throw that in.

Over the next three days, Auriemmas Huskies crushed the Bruins by 34 in the largest blowout in womens Final Four history, then blew out South Carolina by 23 to win their 12th national title.

So much for parity.

This article originally appeared in The Athletic .

Sports Business, Women's College Basketball, The Athletic Women's Basketball Show 2025 The Athletic Media Company.

This article has been shared from the original article on yahoo, here is the link to the original article.