The collegiate athletic-industrial complex is in an unprecedented state of flux. That makes it exactly the wrong time to impose a new set of federal rules that would lock in protections for the already-powerful schools and conferences at the expense of student-athletes.
The vehicle for those rules is the Student Compensation and Opportunity through Rights and Endorsements Act. A more candid name would be the Defend the NCAA Football Powerhouses Act. As it happens, most of the bill’s co-sponsors come from states with top-tier football schools. Think Oregon, Ohio, Texas, Michigan, Alabama, Florida and so on.
Two recent developments in college athletics prompted the bill.
First, courts have recognized student-athletes’ right to be compensated for the commercial use of their names, images and likenesses, or NIL. In June, a federal judge approved a $2.8 billion settlement in a lawsuit by athletes demanding a bigger piece of the NIL action.
Second, collegiate athletic conferences are cleaving into two camps, the haves and the have-nots, as evidenced by the disintegration of the Pac-12. The University of Washington, hoping to retain its position among the haves, has joined the Big Ten Conference. Washington State University is scrambling to avoid permanent have-not status in a rebuilt Pac-12.
The SCORE Act addresses both developments in ways that favor the NCAA and the richest football programs. It would shield the NCAA against antitrust suits, override state laws dealing with athletes’ NIL payments and prohibit athletes from being classified as employees. The bill could also lift the cap on the aggregate amount that colleges can pay athletes for their NIL, giving the biggest programs an even more decisive edge in bidding wars for star talent.
Even more important is what the SCORE Act does not provide. Its protections for sports other than football are weak. It does not address the threat that the football arms race poses to Title IX, the law that guarantees equity for women’s sports. And it does not promote the values of sportsmanship, teamwork and character-building that are supposedly why college sports exist in the first place.
On Aug. 25, U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., wrote to the leaders of 350 U.S. colleges and universities outlining the deficiencies of the SCORE Act. As the ranking minority member of the committee that will review the proposal, if it passes the House, Cantwell’s cautions should carry great weight.
The chaos in college sports needs to be resolved, but it must be done in a way that protects the rights of all athletes, ensures equity for women in sports and prevents any conference from gaining prohibitive competitive advantages. The SCORE Act falls short of those goals.
