Why power conferences aren't all-in on Congress' latest college sports fix

• The proposed legislation has received mixed reactions, with some critics arguing it limits athlete compensation while protecting high salaries for coaches and administrators.
• Conference leaders have taken a cautious approach, expressing thanks for the effort but indicating a need for further review.
• The bill aims to provide the NCAA with narrow anti-trust protection, set guidelines for transfers, and mandate long-term medical coverage for athletes.

While leaders of the four power conferences in college sports took encouraging but wait-and-see approaches to the proposed “Protect College Sports Act of 2026” in their public statements, the bipartisan bill led by U.S. Senators Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas) has been met with both wholesale and granular resistance.

Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) blasted the legislative measure proposed Wednesday, May 27, by Cantwell and Cruz as thwarting the potential earnings of student-athletes while doing nothing to address the six-, seven- and eight-figure earnings of college administrators and coaches.

“We are all still reading this bill, but its primary effect seems to be to limit the compensation of athletes while protecting the huge salaries of all the adults - coaches, (athletics directors), sports industry executives - who are getting rich off the performance of the players,” Murphy said in a statement provided to USA TODAY Sports. “And it gives the NCAA an antitrust exemption that no other industry gets just so they can keep underpaying the athletes.

“Sure, there are some good things for players in this bill, but this seems like a great deal for the NCAA and the rich guys who run college sports, and a bad deal for athletes.”

The bill pitched by Cantwell and Cruz seeks, among other things, to provide narrow anti-trust protection for the NCAA, college athletics’ governing body, as well as to present guardrails for player movement via transfer; curb coaching movement during an ongoing season of competition; mandate medical expense funds as well as medical expense coverage for at least five years following an athlete’s playing career; thwart additional conference expansion/contraction; facilitate a path for growth in allowable payments to student-athletes while also capping expenses; cap maximum commissions/fees for agent-representative of student-athletes.

Curt Cignetti, Indiana’s third-year coach who guided the Hoosiers to the program’s first-ever college football national championship after the 2025 season, on Thursday, May 28, sounded an alarm about the future of college athletics.

The House Settlement, approved in June 2025, stipulated that former college athletes would receive billions in retroactive payment in the antitrust lawsuit and also provided schools that opted into the settlement to distribute up to a maximum of $20.5 million in Year 1 of revenue-sharing monies per each fully participant institution.

While that figure was scheduled for at least a 4% annual increase across the term of the settlement (up to $21.35 million in 2026), it also was an attempt to cap roster spending in college athletics – most notably college football, as well as men’s and women’s basketball.

Instead, third-party NIL deals – some approved by the College Sports Commission’s NIL-Go clearinghouse, some deals that agents and school representatives have told USA TODAY Sports are never submitted – have ballooned roster spending well beyond $40 million.

“The market is pretty expensive,” Cignetti told the crowd and as chronicled by USA TODAY Sports. “It’s scary. I think players should get paid.

“But something’s going to have to be done in the next 12 to 24 months, or universities might not be able to handle this. College football won’t exist the way we’re going right now.”

The conference leaders adopted more measured approaches in their initial comments to the Protect College Sports Act.

“On behalf of the Big 12 Conference, we thank Chairman Ted Cruz and Ranking Member Maria Cantwell for their leadership and efforts to address the challenges facing college athletics,” Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark said in a statement. “We look forward to reviewing the legislation and providing constructive feedback as part of the process, and remain committed to empowering student-athletes while helping build a sustainable future for college sports.

Added the Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti: “We would like to thank Senators Cruz and Cantwell and their staffs for their efforts and interest in returning stability to college sports.

"We are reviewing the bill and working through all of its provisions. We are committed to a future that best serves our student-athletes and will continue to work with our colleagues and members of Congress as this process moves forward.”

ACC commissioner Jim Phillips pointed to the bipartisan efforts from Cantwell and Cruz but stopped well short of full endorsement on the proposal, noting his league’s institutions would want input on legislation.

“We appreciate Senator Cruz and Senator Cantwell working together in a bipartisan manner to sponsor the Protect College Sports Act,” Phillips said via statement. “We look forward to reviewing the proposed legislation and working collaboratively with our elected officials, constituents and most importantly our student-athletes, to provide stability to college athletics.

“The ACC will remain active in our efforts to preserve the athletic and academic opportunities for the next generation of student-athletes and build upon today’s positive momentum.”

The SEC, which like the Big 12 is hosting its annual spring business meetings this week, touted the “critical” nature of “bipartisan engagement to help shape a sustainable future for college athletics.”

However, the SEC on Thursday, May 28, issued a statement that proclaimed the league would protect its right to own its conference’s broadcast media rights – an element also addressed in Cantwell’s and Cruz’s “Protect College Sports Act of 2026.”

The bill proposes that parties selling media rights would only get antitrust protection if the party/parties fully “complies with the requirements under (Section 5, requirements for entities selling media rights) and Section 6 (Market-level broadcast access for college football and basketball).”

“The Southeastern Conference recognizes and appreciates the many ongoing discussions regarding potential system-wide improvements to ensure the future success of college athletics,” the SEC’s 16 member schools’ presidents and chancellors said in a joint statement. “The SEC has been intentional through years of thoughtful planning and decision-making in strategically positioning itself for future media negotiations.

“The conference must retain the ability to act in the best interests of its membership. As such, the SEC does not support assigning its media rights to a third party and remains firmly committed to independently conducting its media negotiations.”

While much of the focus on the proposed bill has centered on student-athlete earnings, protections and rights, noted attorney Tom Mars – who has represented numerous college athletes in courtroom battles with the NCAA, most recently Ole Miss quarterback Trinidad Chambliss – took aim on X (formerly Twitter) at the bill’s proposed regulations against the firing/hiring cycle of NCAA coaches.

“Since when does Congress have the power to say when someone is allowed to take a new job in the private sector that has nothing to do with the federal government?,” Mars asked on X.