Starting to see tidbits of this on social media. Cruz has mentioned this off and on over the past year or so that it was in the works. He finally did a full podcast on it.

He does have good bipartisan support here. As a rule I'm not a fan of government involvement, but if there's an avenue for congressional involvement that isn't over-reach then I'm for it. The current path of NIL is completely beyond the intent of why it was created. In the current form, it isn't "Name Image & Likeness" it is straight up pay for play.

Highlights...

• Going to end the recent trend of 7,8+ years of eligibility. Age restrictions on college athletics (exception for military service)... Lebron for example could go back to school and play. Once you play pro your college days are over.
• Can still be paid for true "NIL." You can be in commercials, you can do autograph sessions, you can endorse products, etc
• Schools can fund travel, lodging, tickets, & meals for players families to see kids play
• Schools must provide health insurance/coverage not just during play but create funds/insurance for longer term issues that arise from play
• Ends the unlimited transfer merry-go-round. You get 1 no questions asked, I picked the wrong school, it's not a good fit transfer. You can transfer penalty free when the coach leaves, the program at your school is cut, or cases of sexual misconduct. Otherwise you sit for a year...
• I need to re-listen to the changes in media rights

Been a few days since I listened to the Pod while driving, so I'm likely leaving out a bit.

EDIT.... Skip to about the 9 min mark to skip the banter about Ted's 25th wedding anniversary.

I'm really worried that the SEC/Big Ten will get forced into a consolidation of media rights...socialism of money. Sam Houston getting same money as Texas A&M.

Its written in a way that puts the 2 power conferences from expanding and from having enough votes to overrule all the other schools on a future vote for consolidating media rights.

Pooling is nothing but socialism. The SEC/B10 has more teams than the NFL. It makes no sense. We don't need the pooling stuff.

I guess there is no more possibility of self regulating? I know the NCAA is toothless, and there needs to be something different done there as an association that can enforce agreed upon rules.

That said, is it the courts that would end up mostly or completely nullifying agreed upon rules because of litigation against the institutions or their association? Is this why legislation might be a good idea? So is it worthless to attempt self regulation instead?

I am usually against federal government involvement in these situations. I love college sports, but how can I not say the free market should decide what is effectively a segment of the entertainment industry?

I love Ted but I don't think the federal government should be involved in regulating sports. For as much as people *****ed about the NCAA, this should be their exclusive turf.

BTW... Federal government has been in College Sports media in a major way since at least 1984
NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma

If you've never seen the TexAgs documentary "SEC Ready" find a copy. It has a good section in about this case and how it paved the way for a multitude of events including the breakup of the SWC and ultimately the TV media world we're in today.

Regulate away on this topic. If it were up to me all money would be out of college sports.

A prospective player gets:

Education
Room & Board (bring back on campus dorms)
Stipend (relative to sport they play)
And all the other goodies they get by playing for a university
They get 1 free transfer plus 1 for graduating
They get a free transfer if their coach leaves

If they want to go attempt to capitalize on their ability above and beyond what the ncaa offers- they are more than welcome to, just like any other student or prospective student can, before or after or instead of their university career.


College sport is so unique to the American system, tradition and character. Its far too valuable to us to let it devolve into a mini pro sports league mostly unrelated to the schools themselves, other than the name on the front of the jersey.

All I know is Nick Saban lecturing everyone about pay for play is rich as richie rich rich, rich.

Will say with the media pooling stuff- if they really let schools or conferences opt out, it will officially kill college sports.

P.H. Dexippus said:

---

I love Ted but I don't think the federal government should be involved in regulating sports.

---

Some additional commentary....

P.H. Dexippus said:

---

I love Ted but I don't think the federal government should be involved in regulating sports. For as much as people *****ed about the NCAA, this should be their exclusive turf.

---

Same. This bill goes WAY too far and will outdate itself in no time. Getting involved in conference formation and who plays who is a terrible idea for instance, that's not something the government should regulate. It's filled with good intentions that will have terrible results.

As for college sports evolving into something different that's inevitable and can't really be stopped. You can't put pandora back in the box on NIL and conference re-alignments. The money is way too big now and you can't turn back the clock. If they must they can grant some powers to the NCAA but passing specific government bills that apply so broadly is going to be a disaster and I hope it dies.

P.H. Dexippus said:

---

I love Ted but I don't think the federal government should be involved in regulating sports. For as much as people *****ed about the NCAA, this should be their exclusive turf.

---

As mentioned by Kenneth_2003, the federal government has been unintentionally involved in college athletics forever. All the lawsuits brought against the NCAA are based upon anti-trust laws, the first of which was the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890. Only Congress can fix this by amending the anti-trust laws.

The bill proposed by Cruz and Cantwell has some stupid stuff in it, and, like every other bill, the final form will not be the same as what was originally introduced. I have looked at the sports broadcasting portion of the bill, and the rights pooling is optional, so no one is going to force the SEC and Big Ten to opt in to that. There are some limitations on conference expansion that will raise some eyebrows, but given that I'm fine with where we are now, I'm not too bothered by that. I don't want any more expansion. There are some really crazy provisions aimed at preserving historic rivalries, but, as they are all keyed off the state of play at the time of enactment, wouldn't really affect A& M, so, again, I don't care.

Yeah, I've done some reading. I've already said what'd I'd prefer if I had my way....

This bill is, predictably, insufficient. I think there's a very real chance it helps end college sports as we've known them.

Congress is basically piling on new, expensive requirements schools have to meet- more insurance and medical coverage, more guaranteedstyle scholarship protections, expanded benefits, and higher expectations for facilities, access, and promotion around women's sports. On top of that, they're codifying direct pay to players off the House settlement model, so that's no longer a gray area or a temporary thing.
The only piece that might actually raise meaningful new revenue for most schools is the mediarights pooling setup, and even that is designed to fail. It takes 75% of FBS to make it work, but the SEC/ B1G are already saying that they're not interested and that pooling hurts their bottom line. If they stay out the pool never really happens, and everybody else is left holding the bag.

To me, that's exactly how you push the SEC/B1G closer to the exits. You're asking them to live under a tighter rule set on transfers, eligibility, and pay, while preserving their ability to run their own media game on the side. At some point they're going to decide it's cleaner to just walk away from the NCAA and set up their own structure, on their own terms.

And for the rest of college sports, smaller and midtier schools get higher costs, more red tape, and more pressure to spend on Olympic and women's sports, but without any realistic way to grow revenue to match. A lot of them are going to respond the by cutting sports, roster spots, and having less opportunities in general, especially in Olympic and women's programs.

this bill may actually accelerate the process of breaking them apart, not having them.

Thereal solution is to either completely remove any and all regulstion and let the market decide, or, to simply restrict it so that forces revenue sharing, set limits, establishes strong rules protected by anti trust protections. I dont think theres much a middle ground.

I think you need a religious exemption as well for eligible age. There are a lot of Mormon and Christian players that do mission work right out of high school.

If college sports want to survive, there will have to be something done by Congress. Otherwise you will end up with 30 teams fighting it out, with 3-4 of those at the top every year because they can afford to outspend everyone.
The NFL model works because while everyone screams socialism about how it's set up, because it is, it's still the most popular sport in the United States by far. It's because of the mostly level playing field that fans of the Jets and Cowboys think this year is their year, and they have a chance. That keeps butts in the seats and eyes on the television, and it makes everyone a boatload of money. Plus, the league has methods to self-police themselves, because the penalties if you get caught breaking the rules are strong enough to deter bad behavior.

This bill is already dead

I am opposed to absolutely anything Maria Cantwell supports, on first principles. That lifetime hypocrite award Nick Saban seems to be in support only makes me somehow even more incredulous.

Nick Saban, discussing collectives, outlines what Alabama was working with

Says he had $2.7 million in his first year of NIL, then $7 million, and then $10 million.

After he retired, he said it jumped to $17 million, then $24 million.

“Now you have schools at $40 million” pic.twitter.com/qUdkdUW8Bm

— Trey Wallace (@TreyWallace) June 3, 2026

I don't trust any of these people, D nor R to 'fix' this problem.

You may not trust them, but the only path to a solution is through legislation. Period. Doing nothing means we continue down the present path which is not viable.

It's not that I don't trust them, it's that I know full well they are absolute liars and care not one whit about college sports. One doesn't partner with a halfwit like Cantwell just for the brand of 'bipartisanship.' It's pathetic.

And Saban as the star witness only adds to the hilarity. He's only mad Alabama is losing the money game nowadays, harming his precious legacy.

This lame as it get
Bruh paid players when it was illegal, quit when it was no longer an advantage and after he made 100 million he now wants to control how much the players can get
Boy talking bout fan bases like I’m supposed to believe Saban care about Iowa State football https://t.co/xKzK0cguTQ

— rock. (@do_u24) June 3, 2026

The only thing funnier would be if they called Lane Kiffin and Kirby Smart to testify about coaching morality and academic standards today (or racial equity in the former case). Maybe Schloss to talk about marital values to boot.

So, what's your solution?

I watched this video, and I agree with Senators Ted Cruz and Maria Cantwell about saving college sports. College athleticsespecially in the U.S. (NCAA system)play a major role in developing Olympic athletes. College sports act as a primary training pipeline for Olympic talent. In the U.S., a large majority of Olympians have college sports backgrounds. Colleges provide elite coaching, advanced training facilities. and regular high-level competition. This helps athletes reach Olympic-level performance. If Olympic sports disappear at colleges, the U.S. could lose its competitive edge globally.

I think the following guardrails would be good.
1. Cap how much schools can pay athletes directly.

2. 5-year/5-season limit and no former pro athletes: start the clock when athlete enrolls full-time in college and pause the clock for military service or major injury

3. One free transfer before graduation and one free transfer for graduating

twk said:

---

So, what's your solution?

---

Off hand? Nothing. As in, do not pass this or the SCORE act (giving NCAA anti-trust protection). Let the colleges and broadcast partners figure out how to address this, without federal legislation.

The NCAA needs to just die, and we don't need congressional oversight of a national NIL framework. Forcing the colleges that matter to figure this out in an interstate agreement with a real governing body should be the goal, not having absolute blow hard ass hats like Cantwell etc. somehow lording over the future of college athletics. And if the short term wreckage means a lot of women's sports/low viewership/revenue programs go by the wayside I couldn't give a crap less.

nortex97 said:

---

twk said:

---

So, what's your solution?

---

Off hand? Nothing. As in, do not pass this or the SCORE act (giving NCAA anti-trust protection). Let the colleges and broadcast partners figure out how to address this, without federal legislation.

The NCAA needs to just die, and we don't need congressional oversight of a national NIL framework. Forcing the colleges that matter to figure this out in an interstate agreement with a real governing body should be the goal, not having absolute blow hard ass hats like Cantwell etc. somehow lording over the future of college athletics. And if the short term wreckage means a lot of women's sports/low viewership/revenue programs go by the wayside I couldn't give a crap less.

---

They can't address it without legislation. It is federal legislation, as interpreted by the courts, that has changed the landscape.

The Sherman Act of 1890 is the root cause of this problem. Only Congress can fix that. The NCAA and the schools would just be applying first aid -- they have no cure without Congressional action.

Yesterday's hearing was awful.

There are several things that Congress could do to make having an Athletic Dept less expensive that have nothing to do with today's particulars - those include incenting making college cheaper for all payer's of college expenses (i.e. parents, student paying their own way, and athletic departments paying athletes scholarships). and then reform Title IX.

Instead the primary thing they did yesterday was beat up on the two leagues with the fan base and fan interest to make it work in today's insanely expensive and out of control landscape. That reforms and improves nothing for the smaller programs just trying to stay afloat or the "big boys" looking for where the boundaries are as everyone trying to get their last dollar out of them.

Instead of addressing the big issue in the current environment (the sham-iness of NIL and the out of control one and transfer actions), the days was allowed to devolve into revisiting (in some cases) decades old conference realignment wounds.

A really sad display and especially so for our Senator Cruz (who I am usually quite a supporter of).

Ted Cruz says the SEC & Big Ten “want to form a super league.” But Tony Petitti rebukes that as “fabrication.”

The Cruz bill marches on without support from two leading stakeholders, now in a fight with US senators.

“A first in modern political history.”https://t.co/2KWJ4lHNV4

— Ross Dellenger (@RossDellenger) June 4, 2026

NEW - Scalise slams Ted Cruz's bipartisan college sports bill

"Nobody can credibly say they're going to move a bill to address college athletics and have opposition from the two major college athletic conferences," House Majority Leader Steve Scalise tells @politico

The…

— Meredith Lee Hill (@meredithllee) June 4, 2026

A very small part was dedicated to realignment. That said, imo, the bill does little to address the major challenges.

Of course it's not going to have the support of the sec/b1g. I'm not sure anything that would constrain them would.

This bill would keep them from expanding, would strip their collectives and remove pay to play.

**** the sec and b1g. They're part of the damn problem

Who?mikejones! said:

---

A very small part was dedicated to realignment. That said, imo, the bill does little to address the major challenges.

Of course it's not going to have the support of the sec/b1g. I'm not sure anything that would constrain them would.

This bill would keep them from expanding, would strip their collectives and remove pay to play.

**** the sec and b1g. They're part of the damn problem

---

A very big part of the bill presented is to give control of college sports to the bottom 75% if certain things happen. These are the mainly irrlevant programs in FBS. However, all that would mean is a payout to them if the lead conferences wanted to do something. Yes, there are 136 schools in FBS. Most people don't even know most of these programs are even at the same level as our Aggies.

And you couldn't be further from the truth on the SEC and Big 10 not wanting boundaries. They are basically the only ones paying max costs associated with the House case rulings. This ruling made it very expensive to play at the highest level. The collectives were an answer to the House case. That money just flows back into facilities and coaching salaries, but that is more easily controlled and planned for.

Gap said:

---

Who?mikejones! said:

---

A very small part was dedicated to realignment. That said, imo, the bill does little to address the major challenges.

Of course it's not going to have the support of the sec/b1g. I'm not sure anything that would constrain them would.

This bill would keep them from expanding, would strip their collectives and remove pay to play.

**** the sec and b1g. They're part of the damn problem

---

A very big part of the bill presented is to give control of college sports to the bottom 75% if certain things happen. These are the mainly irrlevant programs in FBS. However, all that would mean is a payout to them if the lead conferences wanted to do something. Yes, there are 136 schools in FBS. Most people don't even know most of these programs are even at the same level as our Aggies.

And you couldn't be further from the truth on the SEC and Big 10 not wanting boundaries. They are basically the only ones paying max costs associated with the House case rulings. This ruling made it very expensive to play at the highest level. The collectives were an answer to the House case. That money just flows back into facilities and coaching salaries, but that is more easily controlled and planned for.

---

1. I think youre referencing the pooling of media rights on your first point. It will never happen because the sec/b1g would have to agree and they won't

2. That said, this isn't necessarily about the sec and b1g and certainly not about their football programs. This is about the other conferences and teams and their durability

3. Of course the sec and b1g want boundaries. They'd love nothing more the have their cake and eat it too. They'd love to restrict potential payments to players, transfers, etc yet keep all their media deals and relative power. Of course.

4. The collectives were not an answer to the house agreement. Collectives started popping up as early as 2021 as a way to directly play players. The house argeement was done in 2025.

5. Collectives are basically a straight pay to play scheme.

The federal government should stay out of this.

Quote:

---

4. The collectives were not an answer to the house agreement. Collectives started popping up as early as 2021 as a way to directly play players. The house argeement was done in 2025.

---

I'm not sure if you are a college sports fan or not but this is not how it occurred at all. NIL was allowed starting in 2021 as a result of the courts in the O'Bannon case. That was a precursor to the more comprehensive House case finalized in 2025. Collectives weren't some new fangled trick around long standing amateurism rules. The were just a way to pool money in the new era on NIL started in 2021 by the courts in O'Bannon.

Quote:

---

1. I think youre referencing the pooling of media rights on your first point. It will never happen because the sec/b1g would have to agree and they won't

---

The top 25% (SEC and Big 10) don't have to pool their own media rights for the 75% to take control. Many of the beneficial anti-trust concepts are triggered only if you join the 75% pool. And then there is language even on who you have to play on pages 99-102.