Lawyers dealing with the $2.8 billion NCAA agreement suggested a major change on Wednesday regarding the number of players teams can have. They proposed that athletes who lost their position could still play without being included in the new team limits, as long as they are still eligible.

The court ordered the lawyers to create a new plan. In court documents, the lawyers suggested that schools should make lists of all the players they removed from teams. They thought the agreement would be approved. The number of players could be hundreds, or even many more.

The students called "Designated Student-Athletes" in the new document can be asked to return and try for places on the team – but it is not sure – or they can go to other schools.

Either way, these athletes won't count towards the new team size limits. These limits are part of the plan shown last fall and first approved by Judge Claudia Wilken last October.

The plan would also let high school players keep playing in college if they were promised a place but then lost it, as long as they are allowed to play.

Wilken has agreed to the main parts of the deal. This means each school can give up to $20.5 million each year directly to their athletes. Also, more than $2.7 billion will be paid to players who did not get money they should have. These players said the NCAA and five biggest conferences unfairly stopped them from earning money from their name, image, and likeness.

The newest suggestion came after two weeks of hard work. Wilken had sent the lawyers for both sides back to talk because he said the plan's details about the number of players were not acceptable.

The plan proposes changing the rules for sports teams. Instead of a limit on the number of scholarships a team can give, there will be a limit on the total number of players on the team. For example, football teams used to have a limit of 85 scholarships, but now they will have a limit of 105 players. This means schools can offer scholarships to all players, but it will be expensive, and some people think that players who pay their own way or only get some money will not be able to join the team.

Wilken felt sorry for the hundreds of players who lost their places on school teams as schools got ready to follow the rules of the agreement. About twelve players shared their experiences during a meeting on April 7.

Wilken told them they must change it or the entire plan could fail.

The students' lawyers said they improved on Wilken's idea. They made it possible for schools to rehire players they had cut without it counting against their player limit. They also made it possible to use this rule for a new school.

In their court document, the plaintiffs stated that the changes to the agreement provide more protection than the court requested.

The lawyers said it's not certain the athletes will get their places on the team back.

They wrote that the defendants claimed the changes to the agreement meant schools could still decide which athletes were on their teams, which was always true. They said this is still true, even with limits on team size. The changes, they explained, ensure that athletes who lost or would lose their place because of the new limits will be in the same situation as if there were no limits.

The judge may give people against the plan a short time to send in new reasons for their objections before she makes her final decision. Steve Berman, one of the main lawyers for the people who started the case, said this week that those who object will probably not like the new plan.

The NCAA and its 1,200 schools have over 500,000 athletes, and they are running out of time. The agreement was planned to begin on July 1, and football practice starts soon after.