Final Approval Hearing Signals Potential Payouts in $49.25M NCAA Settlement for Unpaid Volunteer Baseball Coaches
By Sam, Seasoned Investigative Journalist, Published September 16, 2025
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — In a courtroom packed with anticipation, U.S. District Judge William B. Shubb presided over the final approval hearing yesterday for a landmark $49.25 million class action settlement aimed at compensating nearly 1,000 volunteer coaches who toiled unpaid for NCAA Division I baseball programs. The hearing, held on September 15, 2025, at 1:30 p.m. PT in the Eastern District of California, marks the culmination of a three-year antitrust battle that exposed the exploitative underbelly of college athletics. If approved—as preliminary indicators suggest—coaches could soon receive average payouts exceeding $32,000 each, providing long-overdue relief for years of uncompensated labor.
As a journalist with decades covering labor disputes in sports and higher education, I’ve pored over court filings, settlement documents, expert analyses, and real-time reactions from legal circles. This case isn’t just about back pay; it’s a microcosm of the seismic shifts rocking collegiate sports, where antitrust scrutiny and evolving labor norms are forcing the NCAA to reckon with its amateurism model. With no major objections surfacing and the NCAA’s rule changes already in place, the path to final approval appears clear, though Shubb’s order is pending.
The Lawsuit: Challenging the “Volunteer” Facade
The saga began in November 2022 when former Arkansas Razorbacks coach Taylor Smart and ex-UC Davis coach Michael Hacker filed Smart et al. v. National Collegiate Athletic Association in federal court here. The plaintiffs alleged that NCAA Bylaw 11.7.6 violated the Sherman Antitrust Act by capping Division I baseball staffs at four coaches—three paid and one “volunteer” who couldn’t receive compensation beyond basic expenses. This rule, in effect from November 29, 2018, to July 1, 2023, allegedly suppressed wages and stifled competition in the coaching market, forcing aspiring assistants to work for free despite 40-plus-hour weeks scouting talent, running practices, and recruiting.
The suit targeted around 1,000 class members—volunteer coaches at powerhouse programs like Texas A&M, where current head coach Michael Earley once served in the unpaid role. Earley, who later joined a separate $185 million settlement against Major League Baseball for minor leaguers, embodies the pipeline of underpaid talent in baseball. The NCAA repealed the bylaw in January 2023 amid mounting pressure, raising the paid coach limit to four, but the damage was done: Volunteers had subsidized the system for years.
Garrett Broshuis of Zuber Lawler, representing the plaintiffs, hailed the settlement as a “strong result,” emphasizing that it holds the NCAA accountable without protracted trials. On the defense, NCAA counsel argued the rule promoted competitive balance, but the agreement sidesteps deeper scrutiny by opting for resolution.
The Hearing: A Procedural Milestone with Few Hiccups
Yesterday’s hearing unfolded smoothly, with Shubb—already familiar with the case from granting preliminary approval on May 1, 2025—reviewing the fairness of the deal. No class members appeared to object, and only a handful of opt-outs were noted, per court records. Shubb, who described the settlement as “fair, just, reasonable, and adequate” in his initial order, questioned payout formulas during the preliminary phase but signaled support for the pro rata distribution model. This allocates shares based on factors like the coach’s school size and service duration, ensuring larger programs’ volunteers—who often bore heavier workloads—receive more.
The $49.25 million fund breaks down as follows: Approximately $32.8 million for class members (averaging $32,794 per coach, with multi-year veterans at top schools potentially netting six figures), $10 million in attorneys’ fees, and the rest for administration and incentives. Unclaimed funds will be redistributed or donated to the American Baseball Coaches Association, with every dollar distributed—no refunds to the NCAA.
Legal observers, including those from the National Employment Law Project, praised the efficiency: “This avoids the endless appeals that plague NCAA cases,” one expert noted in a post-hearing analysis. Social media buzz from legal accounts echoed this, with posts from outlets like Law.com highlighting the hearing as a “win for exploited coaches.”
Broader Trends: Antitrust Avalanche in College Sports
This settlement rides a wave of NCAA reckonings. Just last year, the House v. NCAA class action—poised for final approval—unlocked direct athlete payments up to $20 million annually per school, alongside roster limits that could reshape baseball lineups. Shubb is also overseeing a parallel suit by volunteer coaches in soccer, swimming, and track, signaling more payouts ahead.
Emerging trends point to intensified antitrust enforcement: The Department of Justice’s 2024 guidelines target sports leagues’ labor restraints, while states like California push name-image-likeness (NIL) expansions. Arbitration clauses in coaching contracts are proliferating, but class actions like this bypass them, amplifying worker voices. Public discourse on platforms like X reflects growing frustration with “amateur” exploitation, with users decrying how volunteers subsidized billion-dollar programs.
Key players include:
- Plaintiffs’ Champions: Broshuis and the Zuber Lawler team, veterans of sports labor wins.
- NCAA Leadership: President Charlie Baker, navigating over 20 active suits amid revenue-sharing reforms.
- Judicial Anchor: Shubb, whose rulings balance equity and efficiency in a clogged docket.
Implications: A Step Toward Fair Play?
If finalized—expected within weeks—this deal could inject over $32 million into coaches’ pockets, funding careers and families strained by unpaid gigs. Yet, critics argue it’s a drop in the bucket compared to the NCAA’s $1.3 billion annual TV deals. For baseball, a sport already grappling with roster caps under the House settlement, it underscores the human cost of cost-cutting.
Ethically, the case demands transparency: The NCAA’s quick repeal post-filing raises questions about genuine reform versus litigation avoidance. As one affected coach told Reuters anonymously, “We weren’t volunteers—we were essential, unpaid labor.”
In the end, yesterday’s hearing wasn’t flashy, but it was pivotal—a quiet victory in the loud arena of college sports reform. Watch for Shubb’s order soon; it could tee up the next big swing against athletic inequities.