A look at changes the SEC and Big Ten would like to see in college sports legislation

the way college sports operates in the United States has the backing of many key players, except for possibly the two most important: The Southeastern and Big Ten conferences.

The leagues are negotiating with lawmakers for changes in the Protect College Sports Act, which has bipartisan support in the Senate but almost certainly can’t become a law without changes supported by two conferences whose footprint covers 26 states (52 senators) and no fewer than 220 House districts.

鈥淭he SEC and its member universities have been vocal and collaborative with the senators throughout the bill drafting process,鈥� Tennessee chancellor Donde Plowman, the chair of the SEC presidents, said in a statement Monday. 鈥淎nd over the course of several weeks (we) have provided feedback from the perspective of university leaders who are trying to navigate the current state of college athletics.鈥�

Sponsors of the bill have called the upcoming weeks crucial as they try to enshrine into law and clarify many of the provisions included in the , the lawsuit agreement that opened the door for schools to share revenue with their players.

鈥淲e can鈥檛 afford to see more women鈥檚 sports and roster slots cut,鈥� said bill co-sponsor Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., speaking to the threat posed by spiraling costs. 鈥淐ongress should work together to create more stability and opportunities for all athletes, but especially women and Olympic roster slots.鈥�

The leagues put out a memo with a 10-point list of provisions they’d like to see changed. They fall into two categories: Fixes they’d like for Title I of the bill, which has to do with the details of what gets regulated and how. And fixes for Title II, which has mostly to do with leagues pooling broadcasting rights and preventing the .

What exactly constitutes NIL now in college sports?

One of the most important issues hovering over college sports is determining what name, image and likeness compensation is. There is an argument that payments that come from third parties are specifically designed to circumvent the salary cap put in place for schools under House, which is the amount that can come from the colleges. (It will be around $21.3 million this year.)

Third-party payments above $600 have to be approved by the new , which ensures the deals are for a 鈥渧alid business purpose鈥� and also pay a fair market value for what the players are providing. In short, they鈥檙e making sure players aren鈥檛 simply being paid to play at the schools, which is still forbidden under NCAA rules. They have to provide something beyond playing.

鈥淚nstitutions and third parties can exploit these gaps, distorting recruiting, and competition,鈥� the memo said. 鈥淎 comprehensive framework is essential to preserve integrity and prevent an unchecked system.鈥�

Preventing a super league

The two big conferences got one thing they sought: Including the Atlantic Coast and Big 12 conferences among those that could not expand to create a super league, the likes of which have been floated by private-equity groups over the last year.

A few weeks after that tweak was made, the Big Ten and SEC wrote they鈥檇 like further clarifications. They want the law to forbid any new entity from coming along, swooping up dozens of teams and creating a super league, while also making sure schools remain free to .

The SEC also wants more certainty that pooling media rights will be voluntary, not mandatory (many agree that鈥檚 an easy fix) and to keep scheduling decisions out of the reach of the law.

Clearer language on what can wind up in court

One of the longstanding issues for the NCAA and the leagues was to eliminate the possibility of , mostly for actions that would restrict an athlete’s eligibility.

The lawsuits that sprung from the NCAA’s recent decision to give most athletes five years to complete five seasons of eligibility are Exhibit A of the sort of lawsuits college sports is trying to avoid.

The bill does create some limits to liability, but the leagues say that doesn’t go far enough. They want clearer language defining what sort of legal action the law would prohibit.

鈥淭hese loopholes can efficiently and effectively be closed with minor edits to the liability section,鈥� the memo said.

More certainty about preempting state laws

Another key issue has been a federal law that would override state laws dealing with NIL. As SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey frames it, a player in Tennessee wants to know he or she is playing by the same rules as an opponent in Florida or Georgia, or Indiana, for that matter.

As written, the leagues say, the bill takes important steps in that area 鈥渂ut it does not go far enough.鈥�

鈥淚t leaves several important areas 鈥� including non-NIL compensation, recruiting, and tampering, and broader eligibility issues 鈥� subject to different state laws,鈥� the memo said.

___

AP college sports:

樱桃视频