Most of the revisions aim to better define the term “booster” and what constitutes the pay-for-play inducements the NCAA hopes to eliminate.

Three weeks after being asked to modify a $2.78 billion deal that would dramatically change college sports, attorneys excised the word “booster” from the mammoth plan — in hopes of satisfying a judge’s concerns about the landmark settlement designed to pay players some of the money they help produce.

The NCAA and plaintiff attorneys in the most significant antitrust case in college sports history have agreed to amended language in a settlement that the two parties hope will be approved by a federal judge as early as this week.