The NCAA is facing another blow to its already tattered reputation as a federal district judge, Claudia Wilken, granted class-action status to an ongoing antitrust lawsuit against the organization. The ruling in House v. NCAA opens the door for potentially thousands of NCAA athletes to join the lawsuit and seek damages for the revenue they could have earned from their name, image, and likeness (NIL) rights if they had been allowed to monetize them during their enrollment.

The lawsuit, filed in 2020, is seeking a staggering $1.4 billion in damages, representing the lost opportunities for athletes to earn revenue from their NIL. Former Arizona State swimmer Grant House, along with former Oregon basketball player Sedona Prince and former Illinois football player Tymir Oliver, are the lead plaintiffs in the case.

If the NCAA loses the lawsuit, damages under antitrust law could be tripled, potentially resulting in a massive $4.2 billion payout. This amount puts the future of the NCAA at risk, as their net assets for the fiscal year 2022 were reported at $458 million.

Legal experts and industry insiders have questioned the NCAA's decision not to settle the case, as the potential consequences for the organization are dire. The failure to settle could not only impact the NCAA's ability to govern but also threaten its very existence.

"The NCAA is facing a worst-case scenario," warned attorney Thomas Mars, who specializes in NCAA legal affairs. "This case has the potential to kill the company. It's generally not advisable to take such a gamble. Boards and CEOs usually opt to settle class actions before certification if they can."

Beyond the financial implications, a loss for the NCAA in this case could dismantle the current collegiate model, which relies on uncompensated athletic participation as part of the educational experience. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken, who made the ruling, is the same judge who previously ruled against the NCAA in the landmark O'Bannon v. NCAA and NCAA v. Alston antitrust cases, further weakening the organization.

The outcomes of those previous cases raised speculation about the future of college athletics, including the potential for paying players as employees and introducing collective bargaining. A victory for the plaintiffs in the House v. NCAA lawsuit could accelerate these changes, allowing schools to directly compensate athletes and removing all current restrictions.

The trial for the House v. NCAA lawsuit is scheduled to begin in January 2025. However, the NCAA is already embroiled in several other significant legal cases that could further impact its governance and existence.

Johnson v. NCAA seeks to classify athletes as employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act, while Hubbard v. NCAA demands back pay for athletes based on Alston revenues that were not paid. The NCAA's attempt to limit benefits related to education in the Alston case was overturned by the Supreme Court. Additionally, two basketball prospects recently filed a lawsuit against the NCAA over their ineligibility at Chicago State University due to their participation with the Overtime Elite Academy, which began offering scholarships instead of salaries.

Furthermore, several complaints have been made to the National Labor Relations Board, requesting employment status recognition for athletes in the Big Ten, Pac-12, and Dartmouth.

The ongoing legal battles and the potential financial fallout are leading some schools to question their future affiliation with the NCAA. Attorney and sports law expert Mit Winter believes that schools may contemplate leaving the NCAA and forming new organizations to avoid costly lawsuits.

The NCAA's unsuccessful strategy of pushing cases to the limit has drawn criticism, with past cases resulting in multi-million dollar payouts. Their decision to pursue Alston to the Supreme Court ultimately opened the door to unregulated NIL benefits, further complicating their legal position.

As the NCAA braces for the impending trial in the House v. NCAA lawsuit, the outcome could redefine the landscape of college athletics and potentially reshape the organization's future.