The SEC and Big Ten have released a joint statement against the bipartisan Protect College Sports Act of 2026, introduced by Senators Ted Cruz and Maria Cantwell.
The bill was made to regulate NIL (Name, Image and Likeness), transfer portal movement, eligibility rules and revenue sharing. However, two of the most powerful conferences are against it.
Under this bill, schools, boosters and collectives will experience tighter restrictions on compensation structures. Moreover, athletes will receive one penalty-free transfer. Also, the proposal will limit athletes to strict five-year eligibility, with professional athletes restricted from re-entering the college space.
It also includes protection for athletes in Olympic and women’s sports with health insurance protections and scholarship guarantees. There is also antitrust protection for the NCAA so that they can enforce rules without constant legal challenges.
Why Are the SEC and Big Ten Opposing Protect College Sports Act?
Both SEC and Big Ten are in favor of national reform keeping in mind the evolving nature of college athletics. They released a joint statement in which they said that Protect College Sports Act leaves “critical issues unresolved.”
Here’s the full statement:
“The Big Ten Conference and the Southeastern Conference support a sustainable national framework for college sports – one with an effective transfer portal, clear eligibility standards, and protections and benefits for student-athletes. While we appreciate the leadership of Senators Cruz and Cantwell in pursuing these shared goals, we do not support the Protect College Sports Act as drafted.
“The bill leaves critical issues unresolved. It does not meaningfully preempt the patchwork of state laws or provide the protections needed to make and enforce consistent rules, both essential to long-term stability in college athletics. It also shifts ongoing rulemaking to Congress, limiting the ability to adapt quickly as the landscape evolves. Rather than reducing litigation, the bill likely expands it without offering clear alternatives for dispute resolution. Finally, the bill alters the House settlement revenue sharing framework in a way that may result in fewer student-athletes receiving direct revenue share payments.
“We are committed to working with Senators Cruz and Cantwell and other members of Congress to improve this legislation so that it can provide lasting stability for college athletics.”
SEC and Big Ten’s Sticking Points
The two powerful conferences are concerned that the bill doesn’t completely override conflicting state NIL laws. They argue that unless federal law clearly supersedes the state laws, schools in other states would gain competitive advantage, thereby undermining the entire national reform.
While the bill may have been designed for stability and hassle-free implementation, the structure could invite additional lawsuits.
One of the most important issue is television revenue. The bill encourages the conference to negotiate TV rights collectively and distribute money if majority programs agree. While for smaller programs it is beneficial, the SEC and Big Ten have little incentive to redistribute money generated by their brands.
In order for the bill to pass, the Congress will need a 60-vote threshold in the Senate.
Read More News:
Analyst Claims Browns Trading Myles Garrett Trade First Step In Race For Arch Manning
College Sports Network has you covered with the latest news, analysis, insights, and trending stories in College Football, Men’s College Basketball, Women’s College Basketball, and College Baseball!
