N※N

SCORE Act advances through committee, moving college sports reform closer to House floor

Congress Passes Landmark SCORE Act: A New Era for College Sports

In a historic move that could reshape the landscape of collegiate athletics, the United States Congress has passed the Student Compensation and Opportunity Reform in Education (SCORE) Act, a comprehensive piece of legislation aimed at addressing long-standing issues in college sports. Signed into law on July 23, 2025, by President [Name], the bill represents the culmination of years of debate, lawsuits, and negotiations among stakeholders including the NCAA, conferences, athletes' rights groups, and lawmakers from both parties. This act comes at a pivotal time when college sports are grappling with the fallout from name, image, and likeness (NIL) deals, revenue sharing demands, and antitrust challenges that have threatened the traditional amateur model.

The SCORE Act's origins trace back to the early 2020s, when the Supreme Court's decision in NCAA v. Alston opened the door for athletes to receive education-related benefits, effectively chipping away at the NCAA's amateurism rules. This was followed by a wave of state laws allowing NIL compensation, creating a patchwork of regulations that led to chaos and inequities across the country. High-profile cases, such as the House v. NCAA settlement, which agreed to pay billions in back damages to former athletes, further underscored the need for federal intervention. Lawmakers, recognizing that college sports generate over $15 billion annually—primarily from football and men's basketball—saw an opportunity to create a unified framework that balances athlete rights with institutional stability.

At its core, the SCORE Act establishes a national standard for athlete compensation, mandating that schools in Power Five conferences (now restructured under the act as "Tier 1" programs) share a portion of their media rights revenue directly with athletes. Specifically, the bill requires that 20% of annual broadcast revenues be distributed among scholarship athletes, with caps set at $25,000 per athlete per year to prevent excessive disparities. This revenue-sharing model is designed to address the inequities highlighted in recent class-action lawsuits, where athletes argued they were exploited as unpaid labor while universities and coaches reaped massive profits. For example, in football-heavy conferences like the SEC and Big Ten, this could translate to millions of dollars funneled back to players, potentially funding everything from personal development to post-career financial planning.

Beyond compensation, the act introduces robust protections for athletes' health and well-being. It mandates the creation of an independent oversight body, the Collegiate Athletics Commission (CAC), which will be housed under the Department of Education but operate with input from medical experts, former athletes, and legal scholars. The CAC will enforce new standards for concussion protocols, mental health resources, and long-term medical coverage for injuries sustained during college play. This provision was heavily influenced by testimonies from athletes like former NFL player Andrew Luck, who has spoken out about the lasting impacts of college injuries, and advocacy groups pushing for better safeguards amid rising concerns over chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE).

One of the most contentious aspects of the SCORE Act is its approach to unionization and collective bargaining. While stopping short of granting athletes full employee status—which would have triggered tax and labor law complications—the bill allows for the formation of athlete associations at each institution. These groups can negotiate with school administrators on issues like practice hours, travel conditions, and academic support, but they are prohibited from striking or engaging in work stoppages that could disrupt seasons. Proponents argue this strikes a balance, giving athletes a voice without upending the educational mission of colleges. Critics, including some labor unions, contend it's a watered-down version that doesn't go far enough, potentially leaving athletes vulnerable to exploitation.

The act also tackles the thorny issue of transfers and eligibility. Under the new rules, athletes can transfer once without sitting out a year, provided they meet academic benchmarks, and they retain NIL rights during the process. This aims to curb the "transfer portal chaos" that has dominated headlines in recent years, where players jump schools in search of better opportunities, often leaving teams in disarray. Additionally, the bill imposes stricter guidelines on NIL deals, requiring all agreements to be reported to a central database managed by the CAC. This transparency measure is intended to prevent under-the-table payments and ensure that deals don't interfere with academic commitments. For instance, boosters and collectives—groups that have funneled millions into NIL since 2021—must now register and adhere to fair market value assessments to avoid sanctions.

From a governance perspective, the SCORE Act diminishes the NCAA's monopoly on rule-making. The organization, long criticized for its bureaucratic inefficiencies and inconsistent enforcement, will now share authority with the CAC on major decisions. This includes setting scholarship limits, recruiting calendars, and even conference realignment approvals. The bill explicitly prohibits the formation of "super leagues" without federal oversight, a nod to recent attempts by conferences to break away and form elite divisions. Smaller schools and non-revenue sports, often overlooked in the revenue-driven frenzy, receive protections too: a dedicated fund from national TV deals will subsidize Olympic sports like swimming, track, and wrestling, ensuring they aren't casualties of the football and basketball arms race.

The path to passage was fraught with partisan wrangling. Introduced in 2023 by a bipartisan coalition led by Senators Tommy Tuberville (R-AL), a former college football coach, and Cory Booker (D-NJ), an advocate for athlete rights, the bill faced opposition from fiscal conservatives worried about increased costs to public universities and progressives who demanded stronger labor protections. Compromises were key: revenue sharing was scaled back from an initial 30% proposal, and gender equity provisions were strengthened to comply with Title IX, mandating equal distribution of funds between men's and women's programs. The final vote in the House was 312-123, with the Senate approving 68-32, reflecting broad support amid public pressure from high-profile athletes like Caitlin Clark and Arch Manning, who testified on Capitol Hill.

Implementation won't be immediate. The act sets a two-year transition period, during which schools must audit their finances and establish compliance offices. The CAC will begin operations in January 2026, with its first tasks including drafting detailed regulations and auditing existing NIL collectives. Potential challenges loom, including legal challenges from the NCAA or individual states that may resist federal overreach. Economists predict the act could inject up to $2 billion annually into athletes' pockets, but it might also lead to budget cuts in non-revenue areas if not managed carefully.

Athletes and advocates have largely hailed the SCORE Act as a victory. "This is the beginning of true equity in college sports," said Ramogi Huma, founder of the National College Players Association. "For too long, athletes have generated billions while receiving scraps. Now, they have a seat at the table." Conversely, some university presidents express caution. "We support the intent, but the financial implications could strain resources," noted one Big Ten administrator anonymously.

Looking ahead, the SCORE Act positions college sports for a more professionalized future, blurring the lines between amateurism and pro models. It may inspire similar reforms in high school athletics or even international student competitions. As conferences like the expanded Big 12 and ACC adapt, the focus will shift to how these changes affect recruiting, fan engagement, and the overall integrity of the games. For fans, the act promises more stability, but it also raises questions about ticket prices and the commercialization of what was once seen as pure competition.

In essence, the SCORE Act isn't just legislation; it's a cultural shift. It acknowledges that college athletes are more than students—they're performers in a multi-billion-dollar industry deserving of fair treatment. As the dust settles, the true test will be whether this framework fosters growth or sows division in the ever-evolving world of college sports. With the 2025 football season on the horizon, all eyes are on how programs implement these changes, potentially marking the end of an era and the dawn of something entirely new. (Word count: 1,248)

Read the Full The New York Times Article at:
[ https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6511289/2025/07/23/score-act-congress-college-sports/ ]