Abstract
The House settlement is an inflection point in NCAA Division I athletics, ushering in a new model of institutional revenue sharing, roster regulation, and athlete compensation. While legal and financial analyses dominate public discourse, less is known about how these shifts are understood by those working and competing within athletic departments. This study draws on narrative analysis of interviews with 11 athletes, coaches, and staff across five anonymized Power 4 institutions to examine how the House settlement is being interpreted as it takes effect. Three narrative foci emerged: 1) financial prioritization and resource allocation, 2) shifting culture, relationships, and meaning, and 3) organizational and bureaucratic (non)response. Participants described uneven access to information, evolving understandings of roles and responsibilities, and deepening stratification across programs. While some viewed the settlement as formalizing existing trends, others expressed disorientation, concern, or loss. This study offers one of the first qualitative accounts of the settlement’s lived impact and perceived institutional implications by centering these early interpretations.
Recommended Citation
Springer, Daniel
(2025)
"House Rules: Athlete, Coach, and Staff Perspectives on the Shifting NCAA Landscape,"
Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics: Vol. 18:
Iss.
1, Article 23.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.51221/sc.jiia.2025.18.1.23
Available at:
https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/jiia/vol18/iss1/23