Others Speak Out
Athletes Gannon Flynn and Gracelyn Laudermilch raised alarms over team roster cuts and revoked scholarships they say were a direct consequence of the settlement’s terms. Laudermilch claimed she lost a promised track-and-field spot after accepting it — a move she tied to the school’s response to the looming deal.
Legal Teams Hold the Line
Despite the uproar, class counsel Steve W. Berman and Jeffrey L. Kessler defended the deal as both fair and necessary given the risks of ongoing litigation and looming Congressional intervention. Berman noted that over 30% of the class had already filed claims, a promising sign of legitimacy.
“If this settlement is not approved, it could all go away,” Berman warned, referencing proposed legislation that could give the NCAA antitrust immunity.
Kessler emphasized that the $200 million Hubbard deal reflects nearly 64% of actual damages, and that no future damages are being waived — a point that could quiet some critics.
Judge Weighs Next Moves
While Judge Wilken appeared skeptical of some objections, particularly those tied to Title IX, she also expressed doubt that athletes not yet born or currently underage — included as “future” class members — could be legally bound to the agreement.
She floated the idea of annual judicial oversight for the next decade to allow objections from new class members, a concept Kessler agreed to explore further.
Wilken also suggested she might approve the Hubbard deal independently but noted that NCAA counsel Rakesh N. Kilaru insisted both parts must be approved as a package.
