In this week’s column, California Sports Lawyer® CEO and Managing Attorney Jeremy M. Evans discusses the Protect College Sports Act, which was placed on the U.S. Senate’s September calendar and may well help determine the future of college sports.
College sports are fun to watch, but have become difficult to comprehend.
You can read the full column below. (Past columns can be found, here).
~
College sports are fun to watch, but have become difficult to comprehend. As much as people will applaud college athletes being paid while going to school and playing a sport, there is a growing concern that without guardrails and with continued greed, college sports will continue their push toward professionalism. College sports were built for amateurism, but now operate with professional-sports money.
The principles of free markets and capitalism are not mutually exclusive with the introduction of regulation. Markets need assurance, policy, and enforcement that the markets will remain open, free, and that the parties involved play by the rules. College sports and in particular men’s basketball and football in Division I are no different. There need to be assurances, policies, and enforcement mechanisms for paid college sports to remain competitive and resemble something familiar to fans, coaches, and athletes alike.
While the U.S. Congress is working on the bipartisan Protect College Sports Act, it is on the calendar for September. The Act’s journey has been a difficult one and nearly died like many of its predecessor college legislative bills. Whether the Act ultimately passes remains uncertain, but some financial terms for athletes and schools have already been established. The FBS season begins August 29, with North Carolina and TCU playing in Dublin, Ireland.
In another “bipartisan” effort, the SEC and Big Ten Conferences announced recently that they support the Protect College Sports Act. The two biggest and most powerful college conferences in the United States placing their support behind the Protect College Sports Act after much negotiation and compromise is major news. The Protect College Sports Act would establish national rules governing name, image, and likeness (NIL) compensation, revenue sharing, athlete eligibility, transfers, agent conduct, and health and educational protections. It would also provide schools, conferences, and athletic associations with limited antitrust protection and greater authority to enforce those uniform rules.
On its surface, the Act would seemingly address many of the concerns facing men’s college basketball and football: transfer portal issues, cash to pay for players, and limitations on eligibility to prevent 27-year-olds from playing 19-year-olds in college for example (not to mention the lack of pursuing an educational goal while enrolled in school). It also helps that the Act addresses the antitrust issues facing the NCAA and its member institutions anytime they try to regulate the sport. Somewhere down the line, colleges also need to address the acceptance of large payouts in head coaching contracts and a plan of action when it comes to conference realignment.
However, an Act of Congress will not be the end. While Congress debates and votes on the merits of legislative change to college sports, there is a simultaneous effort to unionize athletes outside of Congress. Players at Stanford University, which is located in Palo Alto, California, and competes in the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC), have formed the first college player-led chapter of the College Football Players Association. Private efforts to organize college sports are driven by the idea that college athletes deserve a seat at the proverbial negotiation table. One issue in this is that college sports are not professional sports and the life of a college athlete is sometimes roughly one to four years long in terms of playing time. On the other hand, the expansion of NIL compensation and pay-to-play has intensified unionization efforts.
The courts also play a role and often have in college sports governance. The NCAA Division I Cabinet adopted a new age-based eligibility model in June 2026, often called the “5-for-5” rule, that generally provides a continuous five-year eligibility period beginning with full-time college enrollment or the academic year following an athlete’s 19th birthday, whichever occurs first. A federal judge then ordered the NCAA to provide an additional year of eligibility to certain Division I athletes who began competing during the 2022–23 academic year and otherwise would have exhausted their eligibility. The judge later clarified that the order does not permit athletes who signed professional contracts to return to college or eliminate other NCAA rules governing professional participation and transfers.
For college sports to shape its own future, it is going to need Congress and the Protect College Sports Act. It will also need courts to define legal boundaries, conferences and schools to enforce workable rules, and athletes to have a meaningful voice in the process. However, this author would stop short of endorsing unionization for athletes whose college careers are brief and whose primary purpose remains obtaining an education.
Coaches and fans must be willing to support a system that protects competition, education, and opportunity. Otherwise, the piecemeal approach that has defined the NIL era will continue. College sports need one understandable rulebook for playing the game, conducting business, and obtaining an education.
~
About Jeremy M. Evans:
Jeremy M. Evans is the Chief Entrepreneur Officer, Founder & Managing Attorney at California Sports Lawyer®, representing entertainment, media, and sports clients in contractual, intellectual property, and dealmaking matters. An award-winning attorney and industry leader, Evans is based in Los Angeles and Newport Beach, California. He can be reached at Jeremy@CSLlegal.com. www.CSLlegal.com.
Copyright © 2026. California Sports Lawyer®. All Rights Reserved.
