by Anthoney L. Kinney
The House v. NCAA settlement marks a turning point in college athletics, inaugurating an era defined by direct athlete compensation and intensified financial competition. The settlement provides backpay to athletes denied name, image, and likeness (NIL) opportunities prior to 2021 and permits institutions to share up to $20.5 million annually in athletics revenue with their athletes.
It has been reported that all 12 member institutions in the Southwestern Athletic Conference (SWAC) have opted into the settlement. Yet for these historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) and other institutions outside the Power Four, meeting the revenue-sharing threshold is largely aspirational, as many already operate athletics programs at a deficit. For HBCUs, the true significance of the House decision lies not in competing within an unsustainable financial model, but in reaffirming their foundational mission; expanding access and delivering transformative educational experiences for Black student athletes.
A Legal Victory, But Not Labor Rights
While the House settlement may appear to signal progress, Edelman and Carrier (2025) observe that it is the result of mere legal strategy rather than substantive labor reform. Compensation framed as NIL or “educational benefits” falls short of wages and provides neither genuine occupational health and safety protections nor long-term pathways to career readiness or post-collegiate stability. For most athletes, particularly those at HBCUs unlikely to turn professional, this is short-term gain without structural support.
The financial stakes are also unequal. Wealthy institutions can absorb deficits as investments in athletic prestige. In fiscal year 2024, Ohio State reported a $38 million deficit after spending a record $292.7 million, a cost arguably justified by their 2025 football national championship. By contrast, non–Power Four institutions like the University of New Orleans announced a $2 million (25 percent) reduction to its athletics budget amid broader institutional cuts. HBCUs operating within similar constraints cannot spend their way into athletic relevance, nor should they attempt to.
The Academic Fallout
The uneasy relationship between athletics and academics at sports-driven institutions has long blurred ethical lines. Practices like relaxed admissions, academic clustering, and isolated support systems create a two-tiered educational experience. In extreme cases—such as the University of North Carolina’s academic fraud scandal involving over 1,500 athletes—this tension escalates into outright misconduct. Black male athletes, who are disproportionately represented in high-revenue sports on non-HBCUs campuses are often the most affected.
The NCAA’s Academic Performance Program (APP) was designed to promote educational accountability, yet has consistently failed to do so. Between 2017 and 2021, over 80 percent of the most severe academic sanctions targeted HBCU teams, though HBCUs make up just 6 percent of Division I membership. These penalties—postseason bans, scholarship losses, reputational harm—are often imposed without the resources needed for improvement, deepening disparities rather than resolving them.
In contrast, well-funded programs, with stronger infrastructures for academic support, rarely face similar sanctions, even as alarming disparities in Black and White athlete graduation rates persist. This selective accountability allows the NCAA to overlook systemic inequities while disproportionately penalizing under-resourced institutions.
HBCU Success Despite Challenges
For HBCUs, equity has always been prioritized through education. Founded to serve Black students, they provide culturally responsive support that drives strong outcomes. Though enrolling just 3 percent of U.S. college students, HBCUs have historically produced 26 percent of Black bachelor’s degrees and significant shares of graduate and professional degrees. When controlling for institutional characteristics, Black students at HBCUs are up to 33 percent more likely to graduate than peers at comparable non-HBCUs.
These outcomes reflect the enduring value of mission-driven education. As college athletics shifts toward commercialization, HBCUs must remain focused on student success, not financial competition. This focus has long enabled HBCUs to transform limited resources into outsized impact, particularly for first-generation and under-resourced students. Amid increasing financial pressures, resisting the lure of an expanded commercial athletics model is not a retreat, but a reaffirmation of what has always set HBCUs apart.
Reclaiming First Principles
This is a moment for clarity and conviction. HBCUs have never thrived by imitation, but by innovation rooted in purpose. Rather than chase models designed for institutions with deeper pockets and different priorities, HBCUs can chart a path that redefines success on their own terms—where athlete well-being, degree attainment, and community uplift are the benchmarks that matter most.
In a landscape increasingly driven by market logic, HBCUs must remain grounded in educational values. By investing in academic support, life skills, and post-athletic transitions, HBCUs can ensure that sport serves students, not the other way around. This is not a rejection of progress, but a call to align growth with mission.
HBCUs have always done more with less. Now, they must do more for their students, not because of market demands, but in defiance of them.
Anthoney L. Kinney holds a Ph.D. in higher education from Florida International University with a research focus on the NCAA’s academic policies and their disparate impact on Black athletes and institutions. Dr. Kinney currently serves as an associate dean in the Division of Student Affairs and as an adjunct professor in the department of kinesiology and sport sciences at the University of Miami in Florida.
Extremely informative!