The Senate has voted 77-22 to pass the Protect College Sports Act, a measure that hands the NCAA a limited antitrust exemption to restore its five-year eligibility rule and transfer limits. The bill also codifies regulation of name, image and likeness (NIL) deals, allowing athletes to be paid — some earning millions of dollars per season.
The NCAA, powerful schools and their conferences, and President Trump, who pushed for it on Truth Social on Sept. 17, back the measure. Senators Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., led talks that took more than a year to complete, drawing co-sponsors from both parties along the way.
On ESPN’s College GameDay, Cruz made an appearance to promote the bill, and he later addressed reporters at a mid-September news conference where he said: “Right now, it is the Wild West. The Protect College Sports Act is bipartisan legislation designed to bring order to the chaos.”
The bill now moves to the House, which is on recess until after the November midterm elections. Opponents — including labor groups, athletes organizations, the NAACP, and the 22 senators voting against it — argue it unfairly limits athletes without giving them equal representation.
The Numbers Behind the Bill
Each academic year sees more than half a million athletes competing in college sports, with the vast majority taking part in revenue-producing sports such as football and basketball at the Division I level. A mere fraction of those athletes make six figures or more, and that income is largely confined to football and men’s basketball players in the SEC, Big Ten, ACC and Big 12.
College athletic budgets have grown dramatically. Coaching pay climbed 370% from 2005 to 2023, according to Cantwell’s Sept. 15 report. Recruiting spending went up 322%, sports gear nearly 300%, medical and gameday costs rose around 250%, and travel jumped more than 200% during the same time frame.
Big athletic departments now regularly keep people on staff whose job is to manage games and handle video production in-house.
Some critics argue the bill places limits on what athletes can earn while failing to curb excessive spending on coaching staffs, administrative personnel, gear, or trips. One senator who played tight end at Stanford voted against the measure. That senator, Sen. Cory Booker, a Democrat, said: “That’s what frustrates me — is we have a bill that’s going to protect the wealth and the gravy train for a lot of folks but puts burdens on college athletes.”
More than 100 women’s and Olympic sports teams, according to Cantwell’s reports have been removed from schools since 2023.
What the Bill Actually Does
The legislation mandates that schools preserve scholarships and roster positions for women’s and Olympic sports, though those requirements lapse after nine years at large institutions and four years at midsize ones. Exceptions may be granted to schools experiencing declining athletics revenues or other “demonstrable financial hardship.”.
The bill includes a 5% cap on NIL agent compensation and allows conferences to pool media rights. It sets health and safety guidelines and caps conference membership at 20 schools to block “super leagues.”
The Critics Have Their Own Numbers
An associate professor at Boise State University who tracks college sports litigation says the NCAA has used its legal standing to push back against players challenging its operations. Sam Ehrlich told reporters: “I think the better way to frame it is ‘The Protect the NCAA Act.'”. He added that the organization’s institutional power is being used to control college sports at the expense of athletes who pushed the NCAA on illegal business practices.
A University of Baltimore School of Law professor who led a bipartisan congressional commission on the state of the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic movements, Dionne Koller, made this statement: “In the strongest-possible terms, there’s no reason why that needs to happen. There’s lots of other ways we could address the financial piece without saying that necessarily we would have to cut Olympic, Paralympic — which is a small number of college programs, but growing — and women’s sports.”
How the Bill Got Here
The bill was negotiated by Cruz and Cantwell over more than a year, during which they gathered co-sponsors from both parties. This month, television commercials featuring Nick Saban, an Alabama great, have appeared during college football broadcasts. Cruz also showed up on ESPN’s College GameDay to promote the legislation.
On Sept. 17, Trump posted a call for the bill’s passage on Truth Social, while Booker opposed it, citing his frustration over protecting wealth for many while burdening athletes.
What Comes Next
After the midterm elections, the House reconvenes. What happens to the bill in that chamber remains uncertain.
A narrow antitrust exemption allows the NCAA to bring back its five-year eligibility rule and transfer limits. At the same time, athletes gain a legal right to be compensated through NIL deals — some collecting millions of dollars per season.
The Senate has spoken. The House will decide.
The Order of Events
- The Senate votes 77-22 to pass the Protect College Sports Act on Monday.
- Cruz and Cantwell negotiate the bill for more than a year, gaining co-sponsors from both parties.
- Trump calls for passage on Truth Social on Sept. 17.
- Booker votes against the bill, citing frustration over protecting wealth for many while burdening athletes.
- The bill moves to the House, which is on recess until after the November midterm elections.
| Stat | Figure |
|---|---|
| Senate vote | 77-22 |
| Coaching salary increase | 370% from 2005 to 2023 |
| Recruiting costs rise | 322% |
| Sports equipment rise | Nearly 300% |
| Medical/gameday expenses rise | Around 250% |
| Travel rise | More than 200% |
| Women’s/Olympic sports cut since 2023 | More than 100 teams |
Action has come from the Senate. The House now controls the game’s pace. The NCAA watches, waiting to see what happens next.
Where the paper stands
The paper backs small colleges and athletes against the NCAA’s expanded power and is against the broad new antitrust exemption and NIL rules that favor the biggest schools and their conferences. The NCAA has become too powerful, and this bill makes it worse by letting it write its own rules while leaving athletes without a seat at the table.
The bill gives the NCAA a limited antitrust exemption to restore its five-year eligibility rule and transfer limits. It also codifies regulation of name, image and likeness (NIL) deals, letting athletes be paid — some earning millions of dollars per season. The NCAA, powerful schools and their conferences, and President Trump, who pushed for it on Truth Social on Sept. 17, all back the measure.
The deal is a bargain between big schools that leaves smaller colleges and athletes behind. Senator Cory Booker, a Democrat who played tight end at Stanford, voted against the measure and said it protects the wealth of coaches and administrators while putting burdens on college athletes. Booker’s point is simple: the bill helps the wealthy few at the expense of the many.
See the video the story is built around at NPR.
Get the Notebook.
The day's best stories and every fresh verdict, in plain English, in your inbox by seven. One email a day, no more.