-
New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Should semipro/college players be paid, or allowed to sell their stuff? (NIL and Revenue Sharing)
- By ScriptOhio
- College Football
- 1707 Replies
S.4668 - Protect College Sports Act of 2026
This bill establishes requirements for name, image, or likeness (NIL) agreements for college student athletes and provides a limited antitrust exemption for schools and conferences to pool and sell certain college sports media rights. The requirements address elements of the court-approved agreement to settle In re College Athlete NIL Litigation (i.e., House settlement).First, the bill statutorily prohibits institutions, conferences, or interstate intercollegiate athletic associations (e.g., the National Collegiate Athletic Association [NCAA]) from restricting student athletes from entering NIL agreements (subject to specified limitations). Students must report to their institution NIL compensation greater than $600.
The bill requires agents to register with a state and caps agent endorsement contract fees at 5%.
The bill also provides student athletes with one transfer without losing athletic eligibility and restricts football personnel from becoming the head football coach at a different institution during the same season.
Further, the bill prohibits institutions, conferences, or specified entities acting for the benefit of an institution from providing athletes with compensation that circumvents the limit on sharing revenue with student athletes established under the House settlement. The bill also makes the limit permanent and provides for an annual inflation adjustment.
Additionally, the bill establishes (subject to specified conditions) a limited antitrust exemption for institutions or conferences that form joint agreements to transfer their sports telecasting rights to a third party. Such an agreement requires participation from at least 75% of the institutions in the Football Bowl Subdivision.
Login to view embedded media
Ohio State’s Ravi Bellamkonda, Other Big Ten Presidents Have “Very Productive” Meetings with U.S. Senators About National College Sports Legislation
Ohio State’s Ravi Bellamkonda was among four Big Ten presidents who met with a group of U.S. Senators on Tuesday as the push for national college sports legislation continues.
Bellamkonda, Michigan president Domenico Grasso, Penn State president Neeli Bendapudi and USC president Beong-Soo Kim met Tuesday with a group of seven U.S. Senators – Ted Cruz and Maria Cantwell, the authors of the Protect College Sports Act, as well as Ohio’s Jon Husted and Bernie Moreno, Michigan’s Gary Peters and Elissa Slotkin and Pennsylvania’s John Fetterman – to “work toward a national legislative solution that serves student-athletes, provides regulatory certainty, and maintains America’s long tradition of exceptional collegiate athletics.”
A joint statement released by Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State and USC described the meetings as “very productive.”
The Protect College Sports Act, introduced by Cruz and Cantwell in late May, is a bipartisan college sports bill that would grant the NCAA a limited antitrust exemption that would allow it to enforce rules around transfers and eligibility without facing challenges from state and local courts. The Senate is expected to vote on the bill before its recess in early August.
That said, the current framework of the bill has faced opposition from both the Big Ten and SEC. Specifically, the Big Ten and SEC are opposed to provisions in the bill that would allow FBS schools to pool their media rights if 75% or more of FBS institutions vote in favor of a joint agreement, as well as prohibiting the Power 4 conferences from expanding. The conferences have also expressed concerns that the bill “leaves critical issues unresolved.”
“It does not meaningfully preempt the patchwork of state laws or provide the protections needed to make and enforce consistent rules, both essential to long-term stability in college athletics. It also shifts ongoing rulemaking to Congress, limiting the ability to adapt quickly as the landscape evolves,” the Big Ten and SEC said in a joint statement in June. “Rather than reducing litigation, the bill likely expands it without offering clear alternatives for dispute resolution. Finally, the bill alters the House settlement revenue sharing framework in a way that may result in fewer student-athletes receiving direct revenue share payments.
.
.
.
continued
Upvote
0