Institutions can save time and resources by actively adjusting compliance efforts to fit evolving CSC and NCAA regulations. In this week’s Film Room, we give you a head start by drawing your attention to the important areas that are to come into greater focus. We also note reporting on potential federal legislation that would support the college athletics regulatory environment.
With the House settlement approved, two immediate regulatory open items remain: (1) College Sports Commission details and (2) federal action that can add stability to the new system.
Adjusting Compliance Approach to Match CSC and NCAA Process
Earlier this week, we flagged items to keep top of mind as we learn more about College Sports Commission (CSC) processes in the coming weeks. It’s also worth considering how the CSC will fit with NCAA regulations and enforcement.
The CSC website states that “the NCAA’s enforcement department (not the College Sports Commission) remains responsible for enforcement of rules not created in connection with the settlement.”
The rule book is complicated, and it’s not hard to conceive of fact patterns that both present settlement compliance issues and implicate NCAA bylaws “not created in connection with the settlement.” For example, assume a fact pattern in which a hypothetical student-athlete not in the transfer portal (1) is impermissibly contacted by a coach at institution X and (2) accepts a third-party NIL offer from an Associated Entity of institution X that the clearinghouse determines does not support a valid business purpose and is outside an acceptable range of compensation.
What rules and procedures apply in an investigation? Are there two separate investigations—in which case, could fact gathering, procedures and potential penalties be staggered? This is just one example of many potential complications.
In late April, the NCAA Division I Board of Directors published a document regarding anticipated actions contingent on final approval of the House settlement that included potential changes to NCAA bylaws. As changes become official and CSC processes are announced, institutions can spare themselves wasted resources and headaches later by reassessing compliance efforts now and syncing them with the new structure.
Movement on Potential Federal Legislation
Even after House, various college athletics legal issues remain, including the following (to name just a few):
- student-athlete employment status
- state NIL law conflicts with proposed CSC regulation
- additional antitrust challenges, including in connection with eligibility rules
Earlier this week, Jesse Dougherty of The Washington Post reported details of draft legislation that would address many of these items, including “a preemption of state laws that conflict with rules set by the NCAA and/or its conferences, a prohibition on college athletes being classified as employees and broad antitrust protection that lines up with the House v. NCAA settlement.”
The proposed antitrust considerations include protection for rules “[p]reventing an associated entity or individual from providing a student-athlete compensation greater than fair market value for NIL agreements.”
Comprehensive federal legislation has the potential to provide lasting stability to the college athletics regulatory space. We’ll continue to keep you posted on related developments.
[View source.]
