NEW YORK: A judge granted preliminary approval Monday to the $2.78 billion legal settlement that would transform college sports by allowing schools to pay players.

US District Judge Claudia Wilken released an order setting a timeline for a deal that would put millions of dollars into the pockets of college athletes, who can begin applying for payment on Oct. 18.

A final hearing is set for April 7, 2025, the day that one of college sports’ biggest moneymakers, March Madness, comes to a close with college basketball’s national title game.

If finalized, the deal would allow the biggest schools to establish a pool of about $21.5 million in the first year to distribute money to athletes through a revenue-sharing plan. Athletes would still be able to cut name, image and likeness deals with outside groups.

Former college athletes from as far back as 2016 would be able to apply for their share of $2.576 billion set aside to help them recoup money they could’ve made from NIL deals, which weren’t allowed until 2021.

“We are pleased that we are one step closer to a revolutionary change in college athletics that will allow billions in revenue sharing,” said plaintiff attorney Steve Berman.

The judge’s approval comes 11 days after attorneys tweaked wording in the original settlement agreement to address Wilken’s concerns. The main change involved getting rid of the word “boosters” and replacing it with a better-defined description of whose potential NIL deals would be subject to oversight by a neutral arbitrator once the deal goes through.

That did not, however, strike to the heart of the settlement, which sets up a revenue-sharing arrangement between schools and athletes who, for decades, played for scholarships, a few expenses and little else, while coaches and athletic departments brought in millions. The $21.5 million figure comes from the 22 percent of average revenue that power conference schools generate through media rights, tickets and other sources. It will be recalculated periodically through the 10-year window the agreement covers.

Not every school will chip in the full amount. Those that will are hurrying to find ways to replace what they’ll pay out to athletes. They worry it could impact their overall sports programs, especially the “non-revenue” sports that play an outsized role in populating US Olympic rosters.

“We are thrilled by Judge Wilken’s decision to give preliminary approval to the landmark settlement that will help bring stability and sustainability to college athletics while delivering increased benefits to student-athletes for years to come,” said NCAA President Charlie Baker. “Today’s progress is a significant step in writing the next chapter for the future of college sports.”

In addition to creating a payment system, the settlement sets up a framework to regulate future NIL deals and replaces scholarship caps with “roster limits,” which will grow to 105 for football, the biggest sport at most major universities, and also the sport that brings in the most money while incurring the most expense.

How those new roster caps and everything else will impact Title IX has yet to be seen. Plaintiffs lawyers have estimated around 90 percent of the money will go to football and men’s basketball players whose sports bring in the lion’s share of the revenue. Critics of the settlement have suggested that could be in violation of Title IX.

This settlement resolves three major antitrust lawsuits filed against the NCAA, including one spearheaded by Grant House, a former swimmer at Arizona State. Berman’s law firm says the value of new payments and benefits to college athletes is expected to exceed $20 billion over 10 years.

The $21 million that the biggest schools will dole out represents not even 10 percent of an NFL salary cap, but is considered big progress for college sports, which are undergoing a revolution with an expanded football playoff (with its $7.8 billion TV contract) and a related move to mega-conferences; the Southeastern and Big Ten Conferences now have 34 teams between them.

“For far too long, these athletes have been deprived of their economic rights in an unjust system that will now, finally, be fundamentally reformed,” plaintiff attorney Jeffrey Kessler said in a news release that was part of the court filings.

Still unknown is how long the terms of this deal will last. Litigation regarding the rights of players to unionize and potentially be considered employees remains unsettled. Meanwhile, the NCAA is pushing for federal legislation to knit together a streamlined policy for NIL, which is currently regulated by a patchwork of state laws, legal settlements and NCAA rules.

TALLADEGA, Alabama: Michael Jordan arrived at Talladega Superspeedway about 30 minutes before the start of the playoff race and made his way directly to Bubba Wallace’s pit stand for a quick visit with his guys.

The NBA great eventually made his way down pit road to Tyler Reddick’s stand, where he sat on the wall and waited for Front Row Motorsports owner Bob Jenkins. Both NASCAR team owners have refused to sign NASCAR’s charter agreement and last week filed a federal antitrust lawsuit against the stock car series.

The brief exchange Sunday was planned as a show of solidarity by the only two teams that chose not to accept NASCAR’s terms for its new revenue-sharing model. 23XI Racing and Front Row want a jury to decide if NASCAR is, indeed, “monopolistic bullies” as the suit alleges.

Jordan said before the race the lawsuit is on behalf of all Cup Series teams; 13 organizations signed the charter agreement, with 23XI and Front Row the only holdouts. Many team owners have said they signed on deadline and under threat of having the entire charter system revoked.

“I think everybody should have an opportunity to be successful in any business and my voice is saying it hasn’t been happening,” Jordan told Fox Sports.

He said he had no intention of speaking with NASCAR chairman Jim France, who is named in the suit, while in Talladega over the weekend.

The legal battle has become the biggest talking point in NASCAR in the middle of its playoffs as the entire industry waits to see what happens next. NASCAR has declined to comment and France declined to discuss it at Talladega. NASCAR’s court response could come as early as this week ahead of Sunday’s playoff elimination race at Charlotte Motor Speedway.

Michael McDowell, who won the pole for Sunday’s race for Front Row, defended Jenkins’ decision to battle NASCAR. McDowell decided months ago he was leaving the team he’s driven for since 2018 at the end of the season, but is supportive of what Jenkins and 23XI are trying to accomplish.

“Bob Jenkins is so dedicated to this sport,” McDowell said. “He has spent millions and millions and millions and millions and millions of his own dollars to be in this sport and to be competitive. Nobody does that unless they’re insane or super passionate.

“He’s passionate about our race team and being competitive. It’s been a steady progression and I feel like we’re at a point now where we’re a contender,” McDowell continued. “There is nobody spending what we spend and performing how we perform. Nobody. And if he has to spend his own money, there is a problem.”

Denny Hamlin, who co-owns 23XI Racing with Jordan and Curtis Polk, also defended taking the fight to court.

“It’s been stated in statements by Michael Jordan that he loves NASCAR,” Hamlin said. “We’ve obviously invested heavily in NASCAR and reinvested what I got out of this sport as a driver back into it as an owner. Certainly, we love the sport, just would love to see change as well.”

Asked if he thinks NASCAR has any appreciation for what Hamlin — who as a Charlotte Hornets season ticket-holder developed a relationship with Jordan and then persuaded Jordan to start a NASCAR team with him — and 23XI have done for the sport, Hamlin took a long pause.

“Probably not,” he finally answered.

Jordan is the highest-profile team owner in NASCAR, and one of only two who are Black. 23XI also has one of the most diverse teams in the garage, from driver Wallace to crew members and non-competition employees.

The lawsuit has raised another concern around the garage: Team owner Richard Childress said he was not sure if the agreement he signed is the same terms that, say, Hendrick Motorsports received — and if 23XI and Front Row eventually reach an agreement with NASCAR will organizations that have already signed be guaranteed the same terms?

“I don’t know what’s going to happen because it’s just so unprecedented in our sport,” Trackhouse Racing owner Justin Marks said. “There’s no historical precedent. I think in other cases like this, in other sports, you have collective bargaining unions. So it’s just a very, very different setting. I think we have a blank slate and we can land anywhere. I think whatever comes out of this, I have to believe that it should affect everybody the same.”