NCAA, Congress miss another opportunity to have serious NIL reform discussion
Another Congressional hearing came and went, and the NCAA remains a Hail Mary throw away from securing the federal NIL reform bill it has long sought.
The most consequential comments were made after the lengthy 11th NIL-related legislative hearing when Rep. Lori Trahan (D-Massachusetts) told reporters she doesn’t envision Congress passing a bill that would give the NCAA its two big-ticket requests: codification that athletes are not employees and limited antitrust protection.
UCLA quarterback/NIL entrepreneur Chase Griffin – a refreshing presence as the first Power Five football player at these hearings – was a five-star witness. He was a needed counterweight to the NCAA talking points espoused by NCAA President Charlie Baker and some other witnesses.
“Momentum is in favor of the athlete and in favor of athlete compensation,” Griffin said.
Later, on the employment model question hovering over the entire enterprise, Griffin said: “That’s not really up to the athletes. That’s up to the NLRB (National Labor Relations Board). But based on the time, effort and hours, we operate as employees currently.”
Revenue sharing was not part of discussion
As usual, lawmakers veered off on tangents ranging from donor-driven collectives to transgender rights. The inclusion of a wide swath of witnesses – Missouri Valley Conference Commissioner Jeff Jackson, Radford volleyball player Meredith Page and Michigan softball player Kaitlin Tholl – underscored just how disparate the members are in college sports’ Big Tent.
Arizona State Associate Clinical Professor of History Victoria Jackson didn’t get near the ample time she could have used to lay out what future college sports models could entail.
Even when Baker has been pushing for schools to be able to directly pay athletes, no lawmaker asked why stop there – what about athletes receiving a slice of the broadcast rights pie? And even in light of college football’s national championship-winning coach, Jim Harbaugh, endorsing revenue sharing, and Baker himself stressing the need to prioritize student-athlete interests, no one asked why athletes should not be empowered to collectively bargain.
Top 10
- 1Breaking
Jim Larranaga
Miami HC set to step down
- 2New
CFP selection process
Urban Meyer predicts changes
- 3
National Championship odds
Updated odds are in
- 4
LaNorris Sellers
South Carolina QB signs NIL deal to return
- 5Hot
CFP home games
Steve Spurrier calls for change
Get the On3 Top 10 to your inbox every morning
By clicking "Subscribe to Newsletter", I agree to On3's Privacy Notice, Terms, and use of my personal information described therein.
“There was a clear agenda here – we had Charlie Baker, the conference commissioner and two athletes [not Griffin] who were speaking from the same set of talking points, and then were being prompted to espouse those talking points from primarily Republican members of Congress,” said Jason Stahl, founder of the College Football Players Association, who praised Griffin and Victoria Jackson.
“It led to a situation that was a massive missed opportunity.”
Why is NCAA pushing for Congressional help?
Baker was there because the NCAA is facing mounting legal threats. As if on cue, one threat became more problematic soon after the hearing, when the U.S. Department of Justice’s antitrust division joined seven attorneys general in their lawsuit against the NCAA. The complaint accuses the NCAA’s transfer policy of violating antitrust law.
The NCAA will continue to face legal challenges, sources say, until and unless Congress intervenes with antitrust protection. Count Trahan among those who say don’t hold your breath.
Also of note: The NCAA and Power Five conferences are defendants in the blockbuster House antitrust lawsuit, whose outcome could result in thousands of athletes being owed some $4.2 billion. If the NCAA loses, Baker said that damages payments would likely be absorbed across all college sports, which is significant.