Introduction
Prince Sedona is not only known for her athletic skills and basketball prowess but also for the work she has done in advocating for fair pay to athletes in college sports. Prince’s journey started in high school where she excelled as a basketball player. However, it was her advocacy for gender equity and fair pay that grew disparity in the payment structures of athletes who agreed to play at certain schools that were settled with the NCAA.
In the historic House v. NCAA case, Sedona Prince actively participated in the case which altered the future of several college sports bound sedimentary rocks stripped of their cementing material. This article aims to analyze the case, Prince’s participation in it, the consequences the NCAA athletes had to face, and the divided future of college sports and its payments.
Sedona Prince: A New Name in College Basketball
Born on May 12, 2000, in Hemet, California, Sedona Prince is 6 feet 7 inches tall, which makes her one of the tallest women in the world. During her high school years, she was regarded as one of the best high school basketball players in America. Sedona had a successful run at Liberty Hill High School, where she won several state championships along with her school, defeating other schools in the region. As a result of her impressive performance, she got a scholarship from the University of Texas.
Unfortunately, her time at Texas did not go as planned due to an injury which resulted in her redshirting her freshman year. Her potential was always visible, and she decided to transfer to the University of Oregon, where she wanted to pursue her basketball dreams. Here, she became one of the best players in the NCAA Division One Women’s Basketball League. Prince made a name for herself even more while in Oregon because of her very active participation in social causes.
Sedona Prince – A Gender Equality Advocate: A Turning Point for Women Empowerment
Brought Into The Spotlight By TikTok
In 2021, Sedona Prince went viral, but not because of her basketball prowess. Her TikTok showing the difference in resources provided for the men’s and women’s NCAA basketball tournaments went viral. The video captured the stark inequalities that female athletes endured in collegiate sports. Prince showcased the gaps in the weight rooms and practice facilities to the nation and thrust the gender disparity within the NCAA into the limelight.
Also Read: Dallas Wings
Prince’s TikTok initiated a debate across the United States that now arguably forces the NCAA to address inequities. This moment amplified changes made towards equality, at least superficially, for women in athletics by necessitating the NCAA to implement numerous changes to the women’s tournament like improving their marketing and media coverage of the tournaments. Sedona Prince emerged as a bold activist advocating gender biases in sports and claims for changing the system set in motion to fight for athlete compensation.
The House v NCAA Lawsuit: This Changes Everything
One of Sedona Prince’s most impactful moments came in 2020 when she and swimmer Grant House became the poster children for the House v NCAA class action lawsuit. This class action legal dispute filed against the NCAA and the Power Five conferences focused on the NCAA’s athlete compensation policies. The class action’s main objective was to contest the right of athletes to earn income from their name, image, and likeness (NIL) under the NCAA’s ‘amateurism’ system.
Important Details In The Lawsuit
The class action lawsuit maintained that the NCAA’s boundaries placed on athletes earning income from their name, image, and likeness (NIL) profits constituted an infringement on antitrust laws due to the restrictive and monopolistic nature of its practices. It is a well-known fact that during the peak of the college athlete’s career, the athlete would not be allowed to receive any offers based on endorsements, merchandise, or even branded goods. On the other hand, the NCAA branded programs and a lot of colleges made billions of dollars through media marketed all over their branded merchandise, ticket sales, and the later released video games that the student-athletes were not compensated for.
The plaintiffs, one of whom included Prince, claimed that the NCAA policies in place were both discriminatory and exploitative, considering that college athletes monetarily contribute a lot of value to their respective sports. The class-action suit sought to address issues of awarding compensation to athletes who were barred from monetizing their Name, Image, and Likeness during their college years and reforming the NCAA policies around athlete compensation.
The Settlement: A $2.8 Billion Victory
This battle was finally settled in May 2024, when the House v. NCAA lawsuit reached an unprecedented settlement of $2.8 billion after legal tussles for years. This was a landmark settlement that changed the face of college sports and secured a win for athletes nationwide. The details of the settlement were as follows:
- Back Pay for Athletes: The settlement reserved around $2.75 billion to reimburse athletes who engaged in Division I sports between 2016 and 2024. It was decided that these athletes would be compensated during the periods in which they were prohibited from monetizing their NIL rights. The amounts allocated varied based on the athlete’s sport, and the revenue constituting the programs they participated in.
- Revenue Sharing: Starting with the 2025 season, college athletes are set to receive up to $20.5 million annually through a new revenue-sharing model. This model gave college athletes the opportunity to be compensated via direct payment for the work they provided toward their college programs and enabled them to benefit financially from their efforts in bringing revenue to their colleges.
- NIL Oversight: A significant part of the settlement included the formation of the new NIL clearinghouse. This clearinghouse would manage and control NIL contracts to make certain that all necessary fairness and transparency were upheld. The NCAA had previously been in damage control over lack of supervision regarding the exploitation of elementary “pay for play” deals and unethical practices concerning NIL contracts. The purpose of the clearinghouse is to protect against unscrupulous exploitation of NIL contracts and ensure proper fair market value is given.
- Scholarship and Financial Aid Adjustments: The settlement struck off various forms of financial aid and reorganized steps schools use to support students depending on their level of study towards one unified goal: low support. In the same light, Colleges had the option of placing caps on financial aid packages given to every student, providing every student with a clearly defined budget within which to plan their spending by data predetermined limits.
Impact on NCAA Athletes
An evolution in the NCAA’s philosophy on athlete payment came with the $2.8 billion settlement. For the first time, athletes were to be paid in monetary value – as opposed to scholarships – for their contribution to revenue generation towards the college. Wearables such as athletic MRI (an NCAA bloodhound institution) and digital sponsoring systems had long since been capturing the athlete’s activities, resulting in enormous profit monetarily and otherwise for schools and the NCAA. It was about time the athletes were given their due payment which they for so long had been deprived of.
Financial Impact
The requirements outlined clearly demonstrate the NCAA was making the best of a bad situation. Redonomics 101 suggests the vast financial ramifications of the settlement were caused due to the sheer stipulation of the funds released through the deemed ‘backpay.’
The estimate of $2.75 billion stated for lump sum payment payable was a figure astronomically exaggerated. Although athletes were stripped of their income through the profit obligation, the freedom of the ‘generate in bounds of open check policy’ proved a beacon of inexhaustible innovation opportunities.
Football and basketball are mainly played at the professional and collegiate levels, earning them the title of “high-revenue sports.” Athletes tertiary enrolled or nobody gave any heed to such as swimmers and track runners; the previously mark-less settlement would finally prove helpful. Irrespective of team stature, the multi-level payment system made it feasible for every player from lesser-sanctioned teams to access monetary allowances commensurate with the worth of their programs.
Gender Equity
The aftermath of the House v. NCAA settlement had a far-reaching impact on gender equity regarding women’s equity in college athletics. Women lacked the same amenities: effective media coverage and basic payments when compared to male sports counterparts. The settlement sought to resolve, to some extent, this inequitable treatment of female athletes by compensating them appropriately in relation to their efforts in the sport.
This was crucial for Sedona Prince’s goals, too, because she had strived for gender equity in sports for many years now. The TikTok video she posted went viral as it showcased the difference in facilities, resources, and treatment given to women in comparison to men during the NCAA tournaments. The settlement process ensured that women athletes did receive some form of payment that corresponded with the work they put in, resolving some inequities.
Also Read: Hailey Van Lith
Broader Implications for College Sports
The settlement made through House v. NCAA was beneficial as it encompassed all areas of college sports. This greatly impacted the way people viewed and overly used the term college sports and marked the start of a period where athletes would no longer remain considered amateurs who could not make money off their skills.
The Coming of Age of College Sports
The modification meant that there was the start of the coming-of-age of college sports. College athletics would now be eligible to earn money through their NIL rights under direct payment, which was previously exclusive to professional athletes. This change was most notable for those who participated in high-revenue sports such as football and basketball, as the income generated from their programs typically exceeded the funding received from their schools.
Recruitment and Retention of Students
They expected that the changes to athlete compensation would greatly affect college recruitment and retention. Schools became more attractive to athletes as options could now be selected based on athletic programs, academics, and the financial benefits offered. The income potential associated with NIL contracts and direct payments would certainly affect recruitment in efforts to maximize earnings in education and athletics.
Legal Precedents
“House v. NCAA” is a landmark legal dispute with profound impacts on the payment of college level athletes and the NCAA’s policies. This case, along with its subsequent ruling and settlement, set the stage for other disputes challenging the NCAA’s policies regarding NIL contracts and compensation. With this ruling, the NCAA’s amateurism was being increasingly challenged legally, which put this model on the path for reforms.
Sedona Prince’s Legacy and Continued Advocacy
Prince is considered to be among the most important figures in the House v. NCAA. In her role with the case, she has made great steps as an advocate towards equal financial treatment for all athletes, including those at the collegiate level. Aside from the legal pursuit, Sedona Prince’s advocacy toward female sporting gender inequality has compelled a myriad of changes.
Her transition from a college athlete to an inspiring fighter for athlete rights demonstrates how sports can be used as a tool for creating social impact. Sedona Prince’s fight for fair wages and equity has not only transformed the reality of college sports but also serves as a guiding light for future athletes who will no longer need to struggle for the fundamental rights and acknowledgment that they, for far too long, have been enduringly denied.
Conclusion
Sedona Prince’s involvement in the House v. NCAA lawsuit signifies a landmark change in history in college sports. With her tireless efforts, she championed and won a landmark settlement which entails paying thousands of college athletes and changing the landscape of their role in college athletics. College sports will never be the same because the system is becoming more balanced. Athletes will receive proper recognition and compensation in exchange for all the effort they provide. The advancements made in these policies highlight the unfairness that prevailed in college sports. Sedona Prince, both as an athlete and an advocate, represents the hope for emerging progressive changes in the world of sports.
3 Comments