The Big Ten and SEC said they do not support the Protect College Sports Act in its current form, citing unresolved “critical issues,” including Congress-driven rulemaking, likely expanded litigation, and changes to the House settlement revenue-sharing framewor
When lawmakers are preparing to move a bipartisan college sports bill into committee review. the sport’s most powerful conferences just hit pause. In a joint statement issued Tuesday. June 2. the Big Ten and SEC said they do not support the Protect College Sports Act as drafted. pointing to unresolved “critical issues” they say the legislation leaves unaddressed.
Their concern is not just about how college sports are governed today. but about who will control the rules as NIL deals and the transfer portal keep reshaping the business. The leagues argued the bill does not “meaningfully preempt the patchwork of state laws” and does not provide “the protections needed to make and enforce consistent rules. ” which they said are “essential to long-term stability in college athletics.”.
They also warned the measure “shifts ongoing rule-making to Congress. ” describing that as a way to “limit the ability to adapt quickly as the landscape evolves.” Instead of calming the legal churn. the statement said the bill likely “expands” it—without offering clear dispute-resolution alternatives. The leagues added another specific worry: it “alters the House settlement revenue sharing framework” in a way that “may result in fewer student-athletes receiving direct revenue share payments.”.
The statement ends with a conditional promise. The Big Ten and SEC said they are “committed” to working with Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Washington) and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas)—the co-sponsors of the bill—to “improve this legislation so that it can provide lasting stability for college athletics.”
That backlash lands at a delicate moment for the bill’s timeline. The comments were released one day before a hearing scheduled for Wednesday morning before members of the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee. The hearing’s witness list includes former Alabama football coach Nick Saban. Notre Dame athletic director Pete Bevacqua. and Pac-12 commissioner Teresa Gould. It also comes just one week after the bill was first announced.
The Big Ten and SEC’s public stance follows specific provisions they say could complicate how the law would function for the nation’s major conferences. The legislation. as written. prohibits the two conferences from expanding beyond their current membership and prevents them from merging to form a so-called “super league.” The bill also includes an option for FBS media rights to be pooled rather than handled conference by conference. though that pooling would be “purely voluntary.”.
Support for the bill is not limited to one corner of college sports. The legislation has backing elsewhere in the broader sport, including from the Power Four conferences. On Sunday, May 31, commissioners of the ACC, Big 12 and American sent letters to members of Congress in support of the bill.
After the markup process—assuming changes are made and enough support materializes—the bill would head to the Senate floor for debate and a vote. To advance, it would need to reach a 60-vote threshold. If it clears that bar, it would move to the House of Representatives for another vote.
For now. the lawmakers heading toward committee review are facing a clear reality: two conferences that set the tone for much of college football are signaling that the “Protect College Sports Act” needs more than polish. Their objections frame a law that may not be ready to deliver the stability they say college athletics urgently needs—especially in an era when every new NIL deal. transfer cycle. and revenue arrangement can quickly turn rules into litigation.
SEC Big Ten Protect College Sports Act NIL transfer portal U.S. Senate Commerce Committee Maria Cantwell Ted Cruz college sports legislation student-athletes revenue share
So they don’t like the bill but want control anyway?
Wait, I thought this was supposed to protect athletes. But now they’re worried about Congress making rules? That sounds like lawmakers are the ones with the power, not the SEC/Big Ten. Also NIL stuff confuses me.
This is just the conferences stalling because they don’t want any “preemption” of state laws. But if it shifts rulemaking to Congress like they say, isn’t that literally already happening in sports with NIL? And the revenue sharing part… I swear they’re gonna cut payments to athletes again.
They keep saying it would expand litigation like that’s a bad thing? Courts are already involved, right? And House settlement revenue sharing framework?? I don’t even know what that means, I just saw “fewer athletes receiving money” and that’s all I needed to hear. Smh, just let Cantwell/Cruz fix it and stop making everything political.