The future of college sports is at a crossroads, and the question on everyone's minds is: Who will step up to bring order and clarity? Will it be Congress, with its proposed legislation, or the White House, through executive action?
Since the House v. NCAA settlement, universities have been navigating a complex and uncertain landscape. The settlement, effective July 2025, aimed to reshape the world of college athletics, but its implementation has been far from smooth. Universities have faced legal challenges, uncertainty over revenue sharing, and the looming question of student-athlete employment status.
The Race to Implement
In July, universities embarked on a race to meet the settlement's requirements. However, they encountered significant obstacles, including the newly formed College Sports Commission (CSC), which has struggled to keep up with the volume of submissions. With deals taking weeks to approve, some collectives have reportedly circumvented the process, paying athletes without waiting for clearance.
The SCORE Act: A Bipartisan Effort
Anticipating the challenges ahead, a bipartisan group of U.S. House Representatives introduced the SCORE Act in July 2025. This act aims to bring order to the chaotic world of college sports by addressing antitrust protection, federal preemption of state laws, and the preservation of amateur status. Despite initial progress, the act has stalled, with a full House vote repeatedly delayed.
But here's where it gets controversial: the SCORE Act has drawn criticism from both sides of the political aisle. Key figures argue that it disproportionately benefits the Power Five conferences and fails to protect smaller schools and women's athletics. Athletes.org, a players' association, has condemned it as a step in the wrong direction, pointing to restrictions on athlete monetization and the denial of labor protections.
The SAFE Act: Prioritizing Athlete Welfare
While the SCORE Act stalls, Senate Democrats introduced the SAFE Act on September 29, 2025. This act prioritizes athlete welfare and non-revenue sports. It consolidates media rights, protects Olympic sports, and provides athlete mobility and support. It also regulates agents and establishes revenue distribution oversight.
The SAFE Act stands in stark contrast to the SCORE Act, offering stronger athlete protections and explicitly supporting non-revenue sports. It does not provide an antitrust shield or classify athletes as employees, leaving room for future developments.
Initial feedback reveals support from athlete advocacy groups and smaller schools, while the NCAA and Power Five conferences remain skeptical. The SAFE Act's omission of antitrust protection and its approach to athlete classification are likely to face opposition from these powerful entities.
The Executive Order: A White House Intervention
In July 2025, President Trump issued an executive order, calling for a national solution to protect collegiate athletics, especially women's and non-revenue sports. The order sets scholarship and roster requirements, prohibits third-party pay-for-play, and establishes agency deadlines for developing regulatory and enforcement plans.
While the executive order lacks the force of legislation, it signals the White House's policy priorities. Its focus on preserving women's and non-revenue sports aligns more closely with the SAFE Act than the SCORE Act's institutional protections.
Steps Towards Clarity
The SAFE and SCORE Acts, if implemented, would provide much-needed direction for universities and stakeholders navigating the future of college athlete compensation. The executive order, though limited, offers a glimpse of the White House's stance on the matter.
As we await further developments, the future of college sports hangs in the balance. Will Congress or the White House take the lead in shaping this new era? And what impact will these decisions have on the athletes and institutions involved? These are questions that deserve our attention and thoughtful discussion.
