Missouri athletic director Laird Veatch struck a relatable tone to begin a nearly half-hour-long press conference with local media to address the changes coming to college athletics.

“I really have a disclaimer,” Veatch said from inside Mizzou Arena on Thursday. “And that is that this is, as you know, very much an evolving landscape. So, I don't pretend to be the expert on everything.”

A lot has changed in college athletics this month, and that’s before the biggest waves have even reached the shore.

A new era of student-athlete compensation is set to go into effect July 1 after U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken granted final approval June 6 to a settlement that will usher in a proposed revenue-sharing model to college athletics.

That means Missouri, like any other institution that opts into the model, will be able to share an estimated $20.5 million directly to student-athletes across this fiscal year. That number will incrementally increase each year.

That’s the foundation of the settlement, but the approval is going to bring a multitude of changes to the way players are paid, the types of deals that will be sanctioned via third-party NIL, and, of course, the way athletic departments handle the upcoming changes.

There is a lot of ground to cover, and not all of it is stable or particularly transparent.

Do know: ‘Bulk’ of Missouri’s revenue will go to football, men’s basketball

As expected, a majority of Missouri’s delegated revenue will go to football and men’s basketball. That’s following a common pattern around the country, as the two sports that generate the most revenue will get the most to pay players.

Veatch said there will be other sports and athletes that earn revenue-sharing money, but Eli Drinkwitz and Dennis Gates’ squads are getting the lion’s share.

“The bulk of our revenue-share funds will go to football and men's basketball, similar to the conversation you're seeing across the country,” Veatch said. “In large part in line with how money is generated, but also the brand value that those student-athletes bring to Mizzou.”

Don’t know: How money will be distributed, who else can earn share

What we do not know, however, is exactly how much each sport will earn. Some universities have provided the percentages that will go to football, men’s basketball and other sports.

For instance, Georgia has announced they plan to mirror the house settlement’s back damage formula amounts, which, per Ross Dellenger of Yahoo, would allocate 75% to football (approx. $13.5 million), 15% to men’s basketball (approx. $2.7 million), 5% to women’s basketball (approx. $900,000) and 5% to the remainder of the sports.

Ohio State AD Ross Bjork has announced it will start by paying football, men’s basketball, women’s basketball and women’s volleyball.

But, for now, Mizzou will not be disclosing how or where exactly it allocates its money.

“I don't feel like we're in a position to share specific sports or specific details and amounts,” Veatch said. “And the reason for that, candidly, is because until we're at a point where this process allows for that kind of transparency across the board of all sports, I just candidly don't see a competitive value or a strategic incentive for us to disclose those specifics.

“I do think that will likely happen in time across the board, but until that time, I just don’t think it's in the best interest of Mizzou.”

Do know: Scholarships are being added, with money to come out of rev-share pool

Scholarship limits have been eliminated in favor of roster limits across the board are coming as part of the settlement, meaning most sports will have fewer walk-ons. Missouri will spend about $3 million adding 60 new scholarships for the upcoming season. Seemingly, $2.5 million of that will come out of the revenue-sharing pool.

That means, like most schools, Mizzou is probably operating with approximately $18 million to pay players in revenue-sharing money in the 2025-26 fiscal cycle.

Don’t know: How ‘NIL Go’ — third-party NIL clearinghouse — will work

Revenue-sharing comes directly from the school. That’s new and will come directly from the school.

But, third-party NIL — old NIL — still exists. Third-party NIL is the method of paying players that has existed since it originated in 2021. Now, however, any NIL deals from businesses or boosters, or any other source will go through a clearinghouse review and can be approved or denied.

The power conferences have spearheaded the implementation of a ‘College Sports Commission,’ tabbing LBi Software and accounting firm Deloitte to create a clearinghouse system to review any third-party NIL deal that is greater than $600 in value. The clearinghouse will be called ‘NIL Go.’

Qualifying third-party deals will be submitted by the student-athlete to NIL Go, and a commission-created computer algorithm will determine whether those deals are legitimate or not.

Legitimate deals are meant, per the algorithm’s calculations, to be for a “valid business purpose” and be within “a reasonable range of compensation” for that particular student-athlete. Both of those are extremely open to interpretation (and probably, at some point, lawsuits).

But, until litigation happens, that’s besides the point. The clearinghouse’s main goal is to crack down on illegitimate deals.

So, what’s an example of a legitimate and likely-to-be-approved submission versus an illegitimate and unlikely-to-be-approved submission?

Well … nobody really knows. Not even Veatch, an SEC AD.

“We don't know, again, because we haven't gone through the process,” Veatch said. “So, I think we'll have to learn as we go over the coming months, and as those third-party NIL deals are entered by student-athletes and they receive information and feedback, then we'll learn with them. But until we go through that process, … we can't speculate really any more than you can.”

Do know: How most Missouri/student-athlete contracts will be paid

Veatch said most of the revenue-sharing contracts that Missouri creates with student-athletes will include monthly payments to the player.

The AD also said that it will be possible to sign multi-year deals with an athlete.

There is no current status quo for this. Likely, universities across the country operate differently when it comes to contracts.

Don’t know: What those contracts will look like

These contracts are not expected to be public record, and universities seemingly will do their best to keep them from entering the public sphere.

That means if you want to know how much Mizzou is spending on its football team through revenue-sharing this upcoming year, you’re out of luck. Mizzou, realistically, like most institutions, will not disclose that information.

“I think we are tracking more and more toward an atmosphere where we have … that type of transparency,” Veatch said. “I don't think we're there yet, and in large part because we are still dealing with student-athletes, and they are young people with protections, legal protections, from some of those areas that have to be worked through, and we have to get advice on (it) before we can provide those kind of specifics.

“So, I could see that happening down the road, and maybe that's in our future, but I think that's one of the many, many questions that has to be answered on the legal front first.”

That also means it’s unlikely that we know exactly what the ramifications are for breaking the terms of a contract by, say, transferring after one season on a multi-year contract.

Don’t know: If any of this will work

Let’s play the hypothetical game for a moment.

What’s stopping a willing booster from filing a series of $599 payments to circumnavigate the clearinghouse threshold?

What’s stopping a university situated in a state with supremely lenient NIL legislation — Tennessee, for instance — from suing the NCAA or the clearinghouse when its rules and decisions counter what they have written in law at the state level?

What’s stopping a never-ending stream of lawsuits for any number of reasons, including but not limited to eligibility, Title IX or contract disputes?

What is binding any university to, plainly, play ball with the new rules when it may be more advantageous not to?

At present, it appears to mainly be faith, hope and wishes.

Veatch indicated that his recent meetings on the subject have shown him that coaches and administrators want to get on the same page with a uniform set of rules; that a widespread frustration with the current landscape of college athletics may bring the nation’s athletic departments together to embrace this next step.

That does, frankly, seem a little friendly for the often-cutthroat business that is college sports.

Some universities and states have gone to great lengths to circumvent upcoming changes and to create advantages for paying players. Missouri led the charge on that back in 2023, by the way.

Now, a proposed set of uniformity is coming, and the coaches who cried chaos will get the chance to play by the same set of rules.

Will it happen?

“This is only (going) to be as successful as the members decide to make it, right?” Veatch said. “And if we are committed to it and give it a chance, then that's a starting place. Will there be lawsuits, will there be continued outside pressures? Absolutely, right? And that's why it is a step, but it's not the last or final step.

“It's also why we need congressional support, why we need to have, at some level, some federal action that gives us a level of protection so we can continue to move forward with the collegiate model in a new way, in a new day. And we've taken an important step to move that forward, but it is only a step.”