One key difference between Senate negotiators and the conferences still holding out on proposed legislation to regulate college sports is whether language in the bill would truly create a “hard salary cap” that would eliminate many third-party payments that have sent roster costs skyrocketing.
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, the chair of the Senate Commerce Committee and cosponsor of the bill, sent out a social media post that said “The cap is a hard cap. Full stop. That loophole is closed.”
But the refusal by the Big Ten and Southeastern Conference to sign off on changes to the Protect College Sports Act during a frenzied week of negotiating is a sign that they do not agree with Cruz’s assessment and would like to see stronger language in the bill.
The Senate broke for the weekend late Thursday without taking action on the bill. It goes on vacation next Friday and the likelihood of the bill reaching a vote before then has grown slim.
One of the key concessions made over the past week was the addition of an up to $27.5 million (up from $25 million) “retention pool” that could be used to keep players on rosters. It would be added to the $21.3 million salary cap already in place to make the new number $48.8 million.
The new cap would then presumably include many of the third-party name, image, likeness deals that circumvent the current cap – many arranged by schools’ multimedia rights groups. The bill would restrict future third-party deals to what Cruz called truly “open market” deals.
The Senate negotiators say language in the bill already does that.
“Some commissioners want more: bar any company doing business with a school from signing that school’s players,” Cruz said in his post. “So a QB couldn’t sign with Nike because Nike has a separate contract with his university. That’s not protecting a cap. That’s blocking a kid from selling his own name.”
A letter to the conferences from a key negotiator, obtained by Yahoo Sports, spelled out how the language in the bill deals with the commissioners’ concerns.
The letter also addressed concerns that the new salary cap would blow past revenue-sharing amounts established in the House settlement, which dictates the terms of paying players.
“To the extent the current House settlement framework or its implementation treats these payments differently, federal statute, and the rules that are protected by it, trump the settlement,” it said.
The letter did not explain how and plaintiffs’ attorney Jeffrey Kessler has said he would need to see the legislation before weighing in on how it impacts the settlement.
The NCAA, which has supported the bill, put out a statement from President Charlie Baker acknowledging the shrinking window to get this done.
“While no bill is perfect, I implore college sports leaders and Senators to support this bill now,” Baker said. “It is our best chance to deliver the benefits and level playing field student-athletes deserve while providing the protections institutions need to sustain college athletics long-term.”
