Sports
Congress Is Considering College Sports Regulations. How Did We Get Here?
College sports fans have watched the business of the game change dramatically in recent years, from rising payments to players to unlimited transfers between schools.
For some, these are signs of a rapidly changing regulatory system spiraling out of control. For others, college athletes are just exercising their rights and winning a hard-earned share of the revenue they bring into universities.
After the NCAA settled or lost a series of lawsuits, which accused the association of stifling economic competition and violating antitrust laws, Congress is now looking to change the law.
The Protect College Sports Act passed the U.S. Senate 77-22 last week and now heads to the U.S. House of Representatives. U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Illinois) voted for the act, while U.S. Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Illinois) voted against it.
Among the sweeping changes proposed in the bill, the act would cap athlete payments near $50 million per school annually and limit athletes to one penalty-free transfer.
While a salary cap and team control over player movement are not new ideas for sports leagues, the unique position of student-athletes leaves these player-management relations up to federal laws.
“The reason that the structures of professional sports look the way they do — trades, players getting cuts, drafts … that’s all the result of labor unions and the collective bargaining agreements they enter with their respective sports leagues,” said Noah Henderson, a clinical professor of sport management at Loyola University.
College athletes, despite the money their talents draw into universities, are not currently considered employees and do not have the right to collectively bargain. Without a negotiated agreement, the NCAA is open to antitrust lawsuits — and the association has not fared well, often losing or reaching settlements over their policies.
College athletes won modest payments in exchange for the use of their name, image and likeness in video games through O’Bannon v. NCAA just over a decade ago. Subsequent lawsuits expanded the scope of payments, opened the door for payments directly from universities and allowed unlimited transfers for players.
In a notable 9-0 decision from the U.S. Supreme Court five years ago in NCAA v. Alston, Justice Brett Kavanaugh cast doubt on the NCAA’s treatment of student-athletes as amateurs.
“The NCAA’s business model of using unpaid student athletes to generate billions of dollars in revenue for the colleges raises serious questions under the antitrust laws,” Kavanaugh wrote in the case’s concurring opinion.
Under the changing regulatory framework, school spending has grown quickly as teams race to attract the best players. But Henderson said Congress stepping in to enforce a cap on compensation would be unprecedented.
“Schools are facing massive financial pressure to remain competitive, to field athletics programs that can win on the field and ultimately serve as a marketing arm for the university,” Henderson said.
While player compensation isn’t the only factor driving up athletic department budgets, the Senate rejected an amendment to the Protect College Sports Act that would cap coach salaries at $5 million.
“The only group of individuals they’re interested in capping earnings on seems to be the players themselves,” Henderson said.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
