Protect College Sports Act

IrishLax · Jun 18, 2026

Wanted to make a separate thread for this, because a lot of the discussion has been mixed in with the Sorsby and NIL stuff. How does this provision affect Notre Dame? Does it force ND's hand into the ACC or cement independence?

Dale · Jun 18, 2026

Does it matter since it won’t pass?

IrishLax · Jun 18, 2026

Dale said:
Does it matter since it won’t pass?

It just moved out of committee, there is certainly a chance it will pass. If there wasn't, there wouldn't be all of this money and ink being spent on it.

IrishLax · Jun 18, 2026

Huntr · Jun 18, 2026

For the life of me I can't figure out why anyone should gaf what the admins and owners in major sports leagues and their Unions think about this bill. Their opinions are breathlessly reported, tho.

IrishLax · Jun 18, 2026

The whole bill is basically written to the detriment of the "haves" for supposed parity/stability. It also is set to artificially suppress athlete earnings in a way that I'm not sure will hold up under scrutiny from the Supreme Court.

tussin · Jun 18, 2026

I am mentally exhausted by all aspects of NIL, conference realignment, transfer portal, etc. It is really affecting my enjoyment of the sport. I can't even follow (nor do I want to follow) all of the shenanigans at this point.

Lord Jim · Jun 18, 2026

Congress has the same handicap that the NCAA has. They want to protect non-revenue sports (read women's sports Title IX) at the expense of getting revenue-generating athletes their fair share of the pie. Until there is TV revenue sharing by sport, this will continue to be a problem.

SeekNDestroy · Jun 18, 2026

tussin said:
I am mentally exhausted by all aspects of NIL, conference realignment, transfer portal, etc. It is really affecting my enjoyment of the sport. I can't even follow (nor do I want to follow) all of the shenanigans at this point.

There’s an easy solution. Just pay attention to the product on the field. Fuck all the peripheral stuff. This season is set up to be great.

IrishLax · Jun 18, 2026

Lord Jim said:
Congress has the same handicap that the NCAA has. They want to protect non-revenue sports (read women's sports Title IX) at the expense of getting revenue-generating athletes their fair share of the pie. Until there is TV revenue sharing by sport, this will continue to be a problem.

What they should do -- and is very easy in my opinion -- is you set a provision in whatever law passes that says something like :

"Any team with a P4 football program is also required to fully fund 10x Men's and 10x Women's teams"

The end. Solves the question instantly and simply. So much of what is happening by right now is broke schools trying to control cost but the real answer is to raise the floor and ignore the ceiling. Anything else leads to tomfoolery.

lefty5258 · Jun 18, 2026

IrishLax said:
The whole bill is basically written to the detriment of the "haves" for supposed parity/stability. It also is set to artificially suppress athlete earnings in a way that I'm not sure will hold up under scrutiny from the Supreme Court.

detriment of the "haves"? Isn't part of the bill locking down P4 expansion which essentially would stop any "have-not" in the G6 to move up?

IrishLax · Jun 18, 2026

lefty5258 said:
detriment of the "haves"? Isn't part of the bill locking down P4 expansion which essentially would stop any "have-not" in the G6 to move up?

Here's how I see it:
-Poorly financed P4 teams ... in the Big 12 and ACC in particular ... are VERY well served by this bill.
-Well financed teams in the Big Ten and SEC get artificially enforced parity and diminished revenues in the long run, plus a host of other potential issues. The late adds to those conferences, in particular, get sorta doubly fucked here. Both conferences are lobbying hard against the bill because of how it impacts their current status quo.
-G6 gets curbed cost + roster stability but lose the hypothetical ability to ever "ascend" to P4. Bad for individual schools in the G6 but overall probably more benefits than drawbacks.

Biggest Winners: Big 12, ACC
Biggest Losers: the players, well-financed P2 schools
Some Pros and Cons: Everyone else

Irish5Saint · Jun 18, 2026

IrishLax said:
The whole bill is basically written to the detriment of the "haves" for supposed parity/stability. It also is set to artificially suppress athlete earnings in a way that I'm not sure will hold up under scrutiny from the Supreme Court.

Alston was not this big sweeping rebuke of the NCAA model contrary to what lawyers like that guy say.

You amend the Sherman Antitrust act, SCOTUS will say it’s fine.

Lord Jim · Jun 18, 2026

IrishLax said:
What they should do -- and is very easy in my opinion -- is you set a provision in whatever law passes that says something like :

"Any team with a P4 football program is also required to fully fund 10x Men's and 10x Women's teams"

The end. Solves the question instantly and simply. So much of what is happening by right now is broke schools trying to control cost but the real answer is to raise the floor and ignore the ceiling. Anything else leads to tomfoolery.

That would be a very honest and transparent way to do solve it, which is why it will never be done.

IrishLax · Jun 18, 2026

It really seems like many powerful lobbyists are firmly behind this bill and the primary intent is to protect the "lower end" of the P4 while excluding the G6 from every joining a P4 conference.

zelezo vlk · Jun 18, 2026

IrishLax said:
It really seems like many powerful lobbyists are firmly behind this bill and the primary intent is to protect the "lower end" of the P4 while excluding the G6 from every joining a P4 conference.

The Big 12 and ACC are just temporarily embarrassed P2 conference members. They're not actually poor

irish2104 · Jun 18, 2026

Article in Politico where congress said it is DOA.. and there upset the senate even is trying to pass a bill without there input.. I see zero chance this passes house and becomes law.. Think next year after election yes something will get put into place

IrishLax · Jun 18, 2026

Interesting clarification. If true, means ND's options are wide open under the framework (unless they somehow got classified as an ACC member, which I'm sure would be challenged in court)

IrishLax · Jun 18, 2026

irish2104 said:
Article in Politico where congress said it is DOA.. and there upset the senate even is trying to pass a bill without there input.. I see zero chance this passes house and becomes law.. Think next year after election yes something will get put into place

Hope so. At this point, I don't know who the hell Cosy Campbell thinks he is.

GATTACA! · Jun 18, 2026

It seems like at least based on the framework of any of these the idea of a B1G/SEC super league is dead. Which is certainly a positive.

IrishLax · Jun 18, 2026

All we need is a clean bill that says:
1. 5-and-5, 1 free transfer
2. No private equity
3. No local courts

That fixes 95% of issues.

Then a heavier bill would have something like:
1. All P4 schools must fully fund X amount of men's and women's teams
2. No super league
3. Increase direct rev share cap to be in line with current market rates and have it adjusted yearly for inflation

There is a bunch of other "nice to have" but really it's all as simple as the above. The politicians are drastically over-complicating it because the main purpose appears to be to appease two factions: 1. Cody Campbell / parts of ACC/Big 12 2. Teams that do not have enough money to compete in the current environment

Dale · Jun 18, 2026

IrishLax said:
It just moved out of committee, there is certainly a chance it will pass. If there wasn't, there wouldn't be all of this money and ink being spent on it.

It’s Cody Campbell’s money and Cruz’s passion project in a state full of college football constituents.

Cantwell is the only pushing for things that might actually viably protect college football, but those are the things that are gonna end up not getting the votes needed.

lefty5258 · Jun 18, 2026

It’s funny that like half these things that they want out of this bill could be accomplished by admitting the players are employees and collectively bargaining with them

IrishLax · Jun 19, 2026

lefty5258 said:
It’s funny that like half these things that they want out of this bill could be accomplished by admitting the players are employees and collectively bargaining with them

There was a school president somewhere that just said this yesterday... that they have tons of students that are already both employees + students, and that a CBA is by far the easiest way to actually fix all of this rather than getting the feds involved.

TNUtoNotreDame · Jun 19, 2026

The lawsuits that will fly if this passes will be exciting to watch.. It is a landmine.

ab2cmiller · Jun 19, 2026

IrishLax said:
There was a school president somewhere that just said this yesterday... that they have tons of students that are already both employees + students, and that a CBA is by far the easiest way to actually fix all of this rather than getting the feds involved.

I haven't paid very much attention to this issue. Would this proposal mean a one CBA negotiated with implementation nationwide or each Institution would negotiate independently?

IrishLax · Jun 19, 2026

ab2cmiller said:
I haven't paid very much attention to this issue. Would this proposal mean a one CBA negotiated with implementation nationwide or each Institution would negotiate independently?

One global CBA for all of FBS CFB or a CBA just for P4, negotiated with a union. Would not be school-by-school, it would be to generate mutually acceptable bylaws for the sport.

The problems with that is that there are so many steps to even elect "representatives" from each side that have the power to negotiate/sign a deal.

Huntr · Jun 19, 2026

IrishLax said:
There was a school president somewhere that just said this yesterday... that they have tons of students that are already both employees + students, and that a CBA is by far the easiest way to actually fix all of this rather than getting the feds involved.

Danny White, Vols AD.

While I don’t disagree that federal intervention would be necessary for student-athletes to be employees of public universities in some states, it’s not needed with a single, national employment agency. Student-athletes can be students of our universities while also being employed by that entity. Just like other students all over our campuses who also have jobs. Those of us who understand that a CBA is by far the best long term solution for college sports, have not been assuming help from congress. There is a way to do this, within the current laws of our country, that rightfully gives the players a voice and can be legally defendable. It’s working fairly well for the NBA and NFL. The longer we keep our heads in the sand about our legal reality, the worse things are going to get for college sports - a uniquely American treasure that I care deeply about.

Free Manera · Jun 19, 2026

The less regulation the better for ND. Because ND will follow any and all rules. And others won't. That's literally all there is to it. You can't convince me that any guardrails will ever benefit ND.

Lord Jim · Jun 19, 2026

A CBA is all well and good until teams start to go on strike. A CBA basically institutionalizes the "uncles" and adds another layer of middlemen feeding at the trough. The current students may be employees but they don't pay union dues.

Protect College Sports Act

Something Witty

Well-known member

Something Witty

Something Witty

24 Karat Shamrock

Something Witty

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Something Witty

Active member

Something Witty

Well-known member

Member

Something Witty

Well-known member

Well-known member

Something Witty

Something Witty

It's about to get gross

Something Witty

Well-known member

Active member

Something Witty

Voted must gracious poster for seven years running

Troublemaker in training

Something Witty

24 Karat Shamrock

Well-known member

Member