The spring transfer portal window officially opened on Wednesday, and head coach Kenny Dillingham said the way ASU handles it will be dictated in part by the House v. NCAA case that is now before a federal judge for a final decision.
The case is a $2.8 billion antitrust settlement that pays money back to previous college athletes while setting up those in the future to be paid directly by their respective schools. The pool of money from which schools could pay athletes across all sports would begin at $20.5 million annually.
Dillingham said on Monday before the final filing reached the federal judge that he’s less concerned with the spring transfer portal window because he was more concerned with the roster limits.
The proposed roster limits — set at 105 for football — would also eliminate the presence of walk-ons.
U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken, who heard arguments and objections from numerous figures before granting preliminary approval, recommended a grandfathering-in process that would ease the blow for walk-ons and their families.
RELATED STORIES
Kenny Dillingham explains why entire ASU football team was at Pat's Run
Dillingham needs young ASU players to stake 'play me' claim this spring
Wilken said figuring out a way to delay implementation wouldn’t be that expensive and “would save a lot of good will and angst and unhappiness from a lot of students and their parents, so why not just do it?”
In their filing, NCAA representation said it would be too “unworkable,” with athletes perhaps seeking to start over after making a change: “And every additional ‘round’ of re-dos permitted would create a new set of potentially affected student-athletes who might want re-dos themselves; with thousands if not more individual decisions having been made on the understanding the roster limits would likely go in effect in less than three months.”
The brief also argued that one of the most overlooked parts of the roster limits is how much more aid would go to athletes.
“Indeed, while it is unfortunate that a small number of athletes may ultimately have lost roster spots as a result of the settlement, the settlement afforded them an opportunity to compete for scholarships (or larger scholarships) and additional compensation and benefits that were not previously available,” the attorneys wrote.
What did ASU’s Kenny Dillingham hope would happen with House case?
Dillingham said he was all for the continued allowance of walk-ons in the short term because “having to tell a kid that you’re not on the team because other people have decided that you can’t come here for free” is “not fun.”
“That’s not the ideal situation or the most fun thing I’ll have to do this year,” Dillingham said. “So hopefully, they do phase in those guys just so they have the ability to play college football and to be a part of the team and to be a part of the community.
“But if they don’t, then, you know, tough conversations have to happen, and that’s unfortunate.”
ASU entered this season with exactly 105 players on its spring camp roster, and three players announced on Tuesday their decisions to enter the spring transfer window.
“The whole goal was to get our team in place by right now so we can build culture and community, and I think, for the most part, we have that,” Dillingham added. “May we add a few pieces? Yes, I think it’s completely (dictated by) the House case combined with who actually enters the portal and their fit here.”
The Associated Press contributed to this story.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Why Kenny Dillingham is more concerned with House v. NCAA case than spring transfer portal )
Also on site :
- Hoping to install solar? You may have a harder time due to Trump tariffs
- The Champions League parallel Arsenal can take into Lyon semi-final
- We live in ‘Amityville house of horrors’ where cannibal killer ate woman’s face – here’s why we don’t regret buying home