The newest proposal gives all college athletes five years with no redshirts. The athletes’ eligibility timetable begins with the academic year after they turn 19 or graduate from high school — whichever happens first. Sounds great.
The newest proposal gives all college athletes five years with no redshirts. The athletes’ eligibility timetable begins with the academic year after they turn 19 or graduate from high school — whichever happens first. Sounds great.
if those two items were the only thing in this proposal then it would be fine. however, there are other issues in this proposed Cruz bill which make this a no go.
as written, if on scholarship an athlete can not be removed from a roster for anything other than failing grades or breaking the law. If this is allowed a coach will have no way to control the roster and with limits now imposed it makes no sense. athletes need to be held accountable too.
it means coaches will need to actually recruit better instead of the lazy azz recruiting they do now.
No. The same number of athletes are available and the same number of schools exist. Nothing changes.
The proposal still has a loophole for missions, military service, etc.
That could create a huge loophole, though I guess it could be addressed down the road. No one takes advantage of the loophole that exists now - since there are so many ways to have ncaa eligility, even if an athlete has competed as a pro.
I like the irrevocable scholarships though - it will force coaches to actually coach, not recruit, burn through athletes, then pick up some more when they cut those. A scholarship should be a contract for the course of a student's education, not a professional sports league contract. Get the professionalism out of the NCAA - its not supposed to be the Diamond League's minor league, or the mlb's, soccer's, etc. If an athlete runs elite times while in the NCAA - great - but we shouldn't expect it to be the norm. There are states where a state champion probably can't get a scholarship to run for his state flagship university (New Mexico for instance).
I don't have a problem with coaches recruiting foreign athletes - if they are in this age range, but they should take the same classes as everyone else and be here getting degrees, not living as minor league athletes. As it stands, there will still be the opportunity to pick up international grad students for 2 years.
//This is the piece I see top colleges not liking:
Schools join a voluntary collective to pool and jointly negotiate their media rights, just like the NFL, NBA, and NHL. The bill amends the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961 to extend this antitrust protection to college sports.
//Seems it could favor mid-majors, though fans of sports in general, not just football and basketball should like it.
Schools must use pooled media revenue to maintain the same number of grant-in-aid opportunities and roster spots for non-football sports as provided in the 2024-25 academic year. Stops major programs from cutting non-revenue sports to fund football and basketball arms races.
//seems this could force some schools to add teams they cut in the past couple years
Bars any conference that had more than $1 billion in revenue in FY2025 from merging with, consolidating with, or acquiring another conference’s assets, media rights, or membership. Without this provision, the two largest conferences could consolidate control of college football under a closed super league.
//very good
_______________________
I think this is a good bill. The primary aim seems protecting nonrevenue sports and preventing college athletics to turn into just football and basketball minor leagues at the D1 level. That's the direction athletics are heading now. Through creative accounting, schools are claiming all the sports teams but football and basketball lose money, in hopes of throwing even more money into those programs. NCAA athletics is supposed to be a means of growth and development for young people as they get an education. Its not supposed to be a professional sports league.
There will be a lot of lobbying against this - from the colleges, raising their tutiont to pay for lobbyists and from those who hope to profit off the NCAA as a professional sports league.
more info on the bill: https://www.commerce.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Protect-College-Sports-Act-Section-by-Section-Final.pdf
recruit better wrote:
it means coaches will need to actually recruit better instead of the lazy azz recruiting they do now.
They will have more incentive to recruit American high schoolers - but many will hope to get 2-3 years out of Kenyan runners still and just keep recruting overseas.
I like the scholarship protection aspect of the bill, but I feel that coaches should have some more latitude. I have known too many athletes that made getting the D1 scholarship the goal and then lost the fire once in college. As a coach, I wouldn't want my hands tied using a roster spot and budget on an athlete consciously doing the minimum to stay on the team.
I would propose that incoming freshmen receive an initial two-year scholarship guarantee and only one-year for transfers. Any extension is at the discretion of the coaching staff based on meeting contractual standards (grades, code of conduct, attendance/participation/rehabilitation standards, and performance expectations). No team should be forced to keep an athlete that is not progressing or doesn't put forth a full effort.
HSXC Coach wrote:
I like the scholarship protection aspect of the bill, but I feel that coaches should have some more latitude. I have known too many athletes that made getting the D1 scholarship the goal and then lost the fire once in college. As a coach, I wouldn't want my hands tied using a roster spot and budget on an athlete consciously doing the minimum to stay on the team.
I would propose that incoming freshmen receive an initial two-year scholarship guarantee and only one-year for transfers. Any extension is at the discretion of the coaching staff based on meeting contractual standards (grades, code of conduct, attendance/participation/rehabilitation standards, and performance expectations). No team should be forced to keep an athlete that is not progressing or doesn't put forth a full effort.
It will be on coaches to find out more about athletes - you know actually talk to them - instead of just look up results. There should be no performance expectations - coaches use those to run athletes into the ground and see who is still standing, then bring in a new crop. It would just be another opportunity to destroy a 18 year old who can't keep up with "22 year old" Kenyans. With the scholarship guarantee, coaches have to coach instead of doing suicidal training. Those who can only recruit overseas will fall to the bottom of the conference and be replaced by actual qualified good coaches.
This bill mainly addresses the athletes, as always! How about the $10 million dollar coaches and huge athletic facilities. A coach shouldn't make more than the university president. Then of course they will increase the president's salary so how about no more than 10X the average full professor's salary. Until you address those making fortunes on the mostly football and basketball athlete's backs so to speak, any bill isn't addressing what started this mess, too much money going to too few.
recruit better wrote:
it means coaches will need to actually recruit better instead of the lazy azz recruiting they do now.
how exactly will they do that? how will they know who will become good and who won't? who will be motived and who will want to skate now that they get school for free?
removing a coach's ability to cut an athlete who no longer cares won't solve anything.
that element needs to be removed from this bill. both coaches and athletes need to be held accountable.
recruit better wrote:
it means coaches will need to actually recruit better instead of the lazy azz recruiting they do now.
Lol, it´s actually quite the opposite. Back in the day d1 coaches were generous and recruited all the white guys who finished top 300-500 in the nation per event. Nowadays the recruiting is a lot more creative. Africans get all the money.
1 post was removed from this page.