Paying student-athletes could be "the cost of doing business" for Arizona college athletics

College athletics is undergoing a seismic shift due to a recent settlement on student-athlete compensation , and Arizona's universities are still figuring out what it will mean for their programs.

The big picture: The NCAA and its power conferences last month approved new rules that will allow college athletic programs to directly pay student-athletes for the first time.

• Under a proposed settlement in the House v. NCAA antitrust case, the NCAA and schools would pay nearly $2.8 billion to 14,000 former and current collegiate athletes.
• It would also permit, but not require, schools to set aside around $20 million in revenue annually to share with student-athletes.
• The Big 12 Conference, which ASU and UofA will join this year, is a signatory to the settlement, though decisions about revenue sharing will be up to individual schools.

Why it matters: Once revenue sharing goes into effect, schools will have to participate in order to stay competitive, Darren Heitner, a Florida attorney who specializes in sports law, tells Axios.

• "It's going to be the cost of doing business," he says.
• Financial considerations are often a top priority for recruits, Heitner says, and it'll be viewed as a "scarlet letter" for any school that doesn't pay players.

What they're saying: "We have a responsibility to compete at the highest level," UofA athletic director Desireé Reed-Francois said at an Arizona Board of Regents meeting last Thursday. "Revenue sharing is part (of that). We're going to participate, but there are a lot of details we're working through."

• ASU spokesperson Jerry Gonzalez declined to comment on how the settlement will affect the university.

What's next: The settlement still must be finalized and approved by the judge in the antitrust case.

Context: This is the second major shakeup in recent years pertaining to financial compensation for student-athletes, following the 2021 U.S Supreme Court ruling that opened the door to name, image and likeness (NIL) payments for endorsements and sponsorships.

• Heitner, who represents brands involved in NIL deals, says he views the revenue sharing as something that would supplement athletes' NIL payments and "put some skin in the game" for schools that haven't had to make any financial obligations themselves under the NIL system.