The landscape of college sports continues to change, from new eligibility rules and athlete compensation to lawsuits challenging the NCAA’s authority. On Monday, the Senate took another major step toward reshaping college athletics and passed the Protect College Sports Act in a bipartisan 77-22 vote.
The Protect College Sports Act (PCSA) would grant the NCAA limited antitrust protections and would establish federal rules for NIL compensation, player eligibility, transferring and more.
There is no further action that can be done on the bill until after the November midterms, as the House of Representatives is not currently meeting to vote on legislation.
If passed by the House of Representatives at a later date, the bill would then go to President Trump to sign into law.
Recently, many legal actions have challenged the NCAA over restrictions and compensation, opening the door to direct revenue sharing for Division I athletes in July 2025.Â
Universities were not allowed to directly share athletic department revenue with student-athletes until the House settlement was approved in June 2025, following a legal challenge to the NCAA’s compensation rules.
Now, with the Protect College Sports Act led by Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash. and Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, the bill grants students a new federal right to earn compensation for their Name, Image and Likeness (NIL), replacing the current patchwork of state NIL laws with a federal standard.
“There are several things in this bill that are really important to enshrine into federal law at this time. First and foremost, the federal right to NIL [Name, Image and Likeness],” Sen. Cantwell said in a speech on the Senate floor ahead of the vote on Monday.
The PCSA could significantly increase the amount of money schools can provide directly to their athletes. The revenue share cap adopted by the House vs. NCAA Settlement for each institution that opted in is currently set at $21.3 million with an annual 4% increase.
The additional $27.5 million compensation allowed under the bill could raise that total to roughly $48.8 million per school year if it makes it to final presidential approval.Â
It’s no secret that larger, wealthier schools have been controlling college sports for a long time. Of course, if a school can offer more money, which they generate through extreme media rights deals and ticket sales, athletes are more likely to turn their attention to those power conference schools that can offer a lot more than mid-major programs like Cal Poly.
The PCSA will attempt to limit certain NIL deals used to get around revenue sharing limits. The money from entities closely associated with the university would need to be tied to the university’s revenue sharing cap.
Supporters of the PCSA argue the bill would create stricter rules to prevent NIL agreements from being used as a way to exceed compensation limits.
While the NIL crackdown can improve competitive balance and make it harder for the richest programs to simply spend around the rules, it still does not create an entirely even playing field. Wealthier schools still benefit from large donor networks, media rights deals and legitimate third-party NIL opportunities that fall outside the revenue-sharing cap.
Sen. Cory Booker, D-New Jersey, slammed the bill, arguing that its limited antitrust protections would give the NCAA and wealthier programs greater control while weakening student-athletes’ rights and ability to challenge the NCAA rules.
“This is a bill not about college athletes. This is a bill about wealthy people, wealthy coaches, wealthy institutions and an NCAA who’s enjoyed unbridled power for decades as we watch discrimination, hardships in justice,” Booker said in a floor speech on Monday.
The bill would also establish national rules for athlete eligibility and transfers. Student-athletes would generally have a five-year window to compete in college sports and would be allowed one transfer without having to sit out a season. Any transfer after that would require a player to sit out a year, with exceptions for certain circumstances such as coaching departures.Â
Cal Poly is a mid-major program with fewer resources compared to the Power Four schools, which relies heavily on donor investment to support its 22 varsity athletics programs. The University has recently established The Stampede, an official philanthropic giving program for Cal Poly athletics.
The financial aspect of the legislation could vary significantly between athletic departments across the country. Power Four programs generally have access to larger media rights, ticketing and donor revenues than mid-major programs like Cal Poly.
Questions continue to loom about whether schools with fewer resources could keep pace or even closely match the spending power of wealthier programs if the legislation becomes law.
The University declined to provide any comment at this time as the bill is still pending in Congress.
