USOPC asks for tweak of college sports bill to set minimum spending limits for Olympic programs
U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee leaders are pushing lawmakers for tweaks to legislation that would regulate college sports by adding guarantees that schools will spend the same percentage on Olympic programs in the future as they do now.
USOPC CEO Sarah Hirshland told The Associated Press on Monday that a letter she and chair Gene Sykes sent to members of Congress last week was intended to restart a conversation about the SCORE Act, which currently calls for schools to sponsor at least 16 teams.
That's a number that conforms with current NCAA rules for Power Four schools, and one that Hirshland worries would give schools no incentive to fund non-revenue sports that power the Olympic pipeline.
'You look and you say, 'Is that effectively going to thwart the issue of allocating too many resources to football and not enough to other things?' And my assessment is, no, it's not going to do that,' Hirshland said.
The USOPC says all but three of the 67 Power Four schools sponsor more than 16 sports and the average school in that group has more than 21.
At last year's Paris Olympics, 75% of U.S. Olympians and 53% of Paralympians had a connection with U.S. college sports.
The SCORE Act recently passed a House subcommittee and is set for markup this week, a process in which lawmakers amend certain facets of the bill. Hirshland said USOPC leadership has long been in discussions about adding provisions that would compel schools to spend at least the same percentage on Olympic sports as they do now.
'The bill, as it's written, would make it too easy for a school to starve 15 programs and invest in one,' Hirshland said. 'It's important schools have the latitude to make decisions that are most effective for the school, but while also creating an environment that says 'You don't just need to be a football school.''
She said she was encouraged that lawmakers were including provisions for protecting Olympic sports in a bill that would regulate the shifting college landscape.
The SCORE Act proposes to provide limited antitrust protection for the NCAA and would place the college sports' name, image, likeness system under one federal law instead of a mishmash of state regulations.
Starting this month, schools are allowed to pay up to $20.5 million to athletes in NIL deals. Most of that money will be funneled to football and basketball players, whose sports generate the bulk of college athletics revenue. It has left many to wonder about the future of the Olympic programs.
The act also includes a section that purports to protect Olympic sports with the 16-team minimum, but in the letter to House leaders, Sykes and Hirshland were skeptical of that.
'The USOPC is committed to being a partner in this process and would welcome the opportunity to share further insights, data, and recommendations,' they wrote.
It also mandates that athletes not be turned into employees of their schools, a sticking point for some Democrats that figures to keep the bill from moving along in the Senate, where it would need 60 votes to pass.
Hirshland said the USOPC hasn't taken a 'strong position' on the employment issue, and is mostly concerned that any legislation includes strong protection for Olympic sports.
She says the USOPC-backed idea of keeping spending at certain percentages isn't the only answer to the issue, but might be the simplest and best.
'We don't want schools to starve Olympic sports by cutting them or starving them,' she said. 'We want them to continue to provide investment in the growth of these sports.'
___
AP college sports: https://apnews.com/hub/college-sports in this topic
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
China prodigy takes on swimming world aged 12
Yu Zidi discovered swimming as a small child in order to cool off and now aged just 12 the Chinese sensation will showcase her prodigious talents at the world championships from Sunday. The school girl with the cartoon dog themed swimming cap stunned the sport in May with a series of eye-popping times at China's national championships. Yu, who turns 13 in October, clocked a blistering 2min 10.63sec in the women's 200m individual medley, the fastest time in history at that age. She then romped to victory in the 400m medley in 4:35.53, which would have been enough for fourth place at the Paris Olympics last summer. Yu also triumphed in the 200m butterfly in another scarcely believable swim that would again have only narrowly missed out on a medal in Paris. Her performances easily qualified her for the world championships in Singapore. Yu, who trains in the northern province of Hebei and juggles swimming with her school work, took up the sport as a means of escaping China's searing heat. "The summer that year was too hot, so I went to the water park with my dad," she told the state news agency Xinhua. "I often went to cool off at swimming pools... (and) a coach discovered me." Swimming, homework and coping with the pressure of being China's latest big sporting hope makes for a hectic schedule for the youngster. "I am very busy every day and I don't have much time, but it's also very fulfilling," Yu said, according to Xinhua. Yu first came to national attention last year and drew comparisons at home to Ye Shiwen, who at 16 in London became the youngest Chinese swimmer to win a medal at the Olympics. As well as her speed and stamina, Yu's Hebei coach Li Chao has praised her "good sense" and said her focus "far exceeds her peers". Michael Bohl, China's storied Australian swimming coach, went much further. "I've never seen a 12-year-old that could swim like this," he told Chinese state broadcaster CCTV in May. - Team doping shadow - Perhaps with an eye on the Los Angeles Olympics in 2028, China have named their youngest squad for a swimming world championships, according to expert website SwimSwam. Along with Yu, the headline acts in the squad are men's 100m freestyle world record holder and Olympic champion Pan Zhanle, and Qin Haiyang and Zhang Yufei. Qin cleaned up in the breaststroke at the worlds in 2023, only to fail to win a medal in individual events at the Paris Games last summer. He did though win gold and silver in medley relays. "Butterfly Queen" Zhang has won 10 Olympic medals, among them 200m fly gold at Tokyo in 2021. China entered the Paris Olympics under a doping cloud following revelations that 23 of its swimmers had tested positive for a banned substance ahead of the Tokyo Games. In April 2024, The New York Times and German broadcaster ARD said they had tested positive for trimetazidine (TMZ) at a domestic competition in late 2020 and early 2021. Chinese anti-doping authorities determined the 23 had ingested trace amounts of the drug unwittingly from tainted food at their hotel. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) accepted that explanation and did not sanction the swimmers, which led US anti-doping authorities to accuse WADA of a cover-up. WADA denies this. Nine of the swimmers who failed doping tests are competing in Singapore, including Qin and Zhang. mya/je/pst
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
"You guys are out having a good time, I'm in the gym working" - Grant Hill said the encounter with Larry Bird in 1992 taught him how to be a pro
"You guys are out having a good time, I'm in the gym working" - Grant Hill said the encounter with Larry Bird in 1992 taught him how to be a pro originally appeared on Basketball Network. Before Grant Hill stepped foot in the NBA, he had the opportunity to rub elbows with not just ordinary professional ballers, but the supreme legends of the sport. In the summer of 1992, the Duke standout, along with college stars Chris Webber, Penny Hardaway, Allan Houston, Jamal Mashburn and others, were selected to play a scrimmage against the original Dream Team. Meeting Larry Legend Hanging out with the likes of Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen, Karl Malone, Clyde Drexler and other legends taught Hill a lot about the sport, from a technical, tactical and physical standpoint. Among all his encounters with the 1992 Dream Team, his random meeting with Boston Celtics Larry Bird was the most unforgettable. In just a few words, Bird taught them what it took to be a legend in basketball. "The thing that I saw was just the competitiveness and the work ethic. I remember, we had practice one day and then we all went to the beach -- we did something as players -- and we got back and we were getting on the elevator, and Larry Bird gets on the elevator," Hill recalled, per ESPN. "He's the oldest guy on the team. But he just came from the gym. He was shooting. And he was talking trash. He was like, 'You guys are out having a good time, I'm in the gym working.' And the next day he came and put on a clinic. He just was on fire," Grant stated. Hill and the others understood the assignment. Bird was at the tail end of his career then. He had back problems and all sorts of injuries. But this did not stop him from putting in the work. It didn't matter if he was expected to play limited minutes. Larry Legend stayed ready by warming up his hand every chance he the Dream Team Hill said their encounter with Bird boosted their confidence. It was what powered them to defeat the Dream Team in that infamous scrimmage that sent the nation into a frenzy. Americans expected the Dream Team to annihilate every foe placed in front of them. And so they were nothing but disappointed when word got out that a bunch of college kids destroyed them. However, it was revealed later that Jordan, easily the best scorer in the squad, did not play as much in the Dream Team vs Select Team scrimmage. Chuck Daly made a tactical choice to humble his team. Meanwhile, the Select Team's stock plummeted, and many claimed their victory wasn't worth celebrating. Webber clapped back against such arguments. "I thought it was such a disrespect," Webber said. "If I was Scottie Pippen, if I was Karl Malone, if I was John Stockton, it's such disrespect to say, 'Oh, they were winning. But I looked on the side and noticed Michael Jordan was sitting down.'" "Y'all the best players in the world, what Jordan got to do with this? First of all, even with Jordan and if Jordan didn't play, it's still a story," Chris added. Indeed, the Select Team should be properly acknowledged for defeating the 1992 Dream Team. But that alone should not define them as players. Hill, Webber and the other players part of that young squad established their own names later on when they stepped foot in the story was originally reported by Basketball Network on Jul 25, 2025, where it first appeared.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
President Trump's executive order on college sports: Here's what it actually means
WASHINGTON — On Thursday morning in the nation's capital, NCAA president Charlie Baker spoke to a few dozen members and guests of the National Press Club — an operation located in Washington's downtown, just a short walk to the White House. Just hours later, the association's years-long fight for federal intervention in college sports received, perhaps, a boost from the man living just a few blocks away. President Donald Trump released his long-awaited executive order related to college athletics, announcing in a five-page order titled 'SAVING COLLEGE SPORTS' that he is directing members of his cabinet to create policy around several aspects of the industry that protect the NCAA and conferences from enforcing and creating rules to govern it. But what exactly does Trump's executive order mean? What will it change, if anything, about college sports' athlete compensation and transfer environment? The short answer, at least for now, is not very much. The longer answer is … well … there are still questions. What are the most important items in the order? Trump's executive order has been a long time coming. In fact, just last week Yahoo Sports obtained a copy of a draft of the order, which isn't wholly different to the one he signed and released on Thursday. Above anything else, the order's preamble describes the college athletics landscape as having been subject to unfair court rulings that 'created an out-of-control, rudderless system' which is 'under unprecedented threat.' 'Waves of recent litigation against collegiate athletics governing rules have eliminated limits on athlete compensation, pay-for-play recruiting inducements, and transfers between universities, unleashing a sea change that threatens the viability of college sports,' Trump writes in the order. He goes on to write critically that some schools are paying their athletes as much as $50 million this year from a combination of House settlement-related revenue share and third-party NIL. 'A national solution is urgently needed to prevent this situation from deteriorating beyond repair and to protect non-revenue sports, including many women's sports,' he writes. How he plans to do this is to direct various members of his cabinet — the attorney general, secretary of labor, secretary of education, etc. — to create policy around several concepts that the NCAA and conferences have been requesting help on from Congress for years. Among those: Protecting scholarships for non-revenue sports: The executive order, most notably, requires schools to maintain or even increase the number of scholarships they provide to non-revenue sports. This is geared to protect Olympic and women's sports that are at risk of elimination as schools direct more funding away from those and to the sports that generate the revenue like football and men's basketball. Those with $125 million or budgets (most of the power league schools) must provide more scholarship opportunities than they did last year, for instance. Those with budgets of $50 million must provide at least the same. Prohibit third-party, 'pay-for-play': You might call this the prohibition of booster collective pay to athletes, which, in a way, codifies the House settlement terms that prohibit collective pay to athletes if they are not deemed to be for legitimate endorsement or commercial opportunities. This issue is at the heart of negotiations among attorneys that is expected to result in a resolution soon that permits collectives to operate in a more open capacity than first thought. The executive order reinforces that provision in the House settlement. How does Trump plan to enforce these parameters? Well, that remains a bit murky, but he suggests in the order that members of his cabinet, as well as the Federal Trade Commission, have 30 days to create a plan on the enforcement of such, including potentially withholding federal funding for violators, opening up Title IX investigations, etc. Athlete employment: Trump directs the Secretary of Labor and the National Labor Relations Board to 'clarify the status of college athletes' — an obvious gesture toward the ongoing debate over courts potentially deeming college athletes as employees. As stated in the order preamble, Trump is against college athletes becoming employees and is clearly, with this directive, ordering cabinet members and the NLRB — he appoints the board — to rule that college athletes are students. Ironically enough, while many college leaders fight against employment, some of them believe collective bargaining is the only solution for the industry. Limited liability protection: This is another issue the NCAA and conferences have spent millions of dollars and six years lobbying for. They want to be protected from legal challenges so they can enforce their rules over things such as transfers, roster limits, booster pay — many of which have been deemed illegal by courts. Trump clearly disagrees with these court rulings, as he notes in the preamble. The order directs the attorney general and the chairman of the Federal Trade Commission to create policies to protect the 'long-term availability of college athletic scholarship and opportunities' when such is 'unreasonably challenged under antitrust' law. The attorney general and the FTC have 60 days to create such a plan, the order says. What are the immediate impacts of the executive order? The answer here is potentially … nothing. Trump's cabinet members — many of whom are quite busy with other more pressing matters — will need to make policy around these subjects. The specifics of that policy will dictate exactly how pivotal, if at all, this order is. What is a certainty is that whatever policies are created are not law and will likely be subject to legal scrutiny. Congressional action and court rulings are law in this country — not executive orders, legal experts tell Yahoo Sports. Baker even suggested this during his talk Thursday morning. 'You can't fix this stuff from executive order,' he said. 'Our focus for now really needs to be trying to get stuff dealt with through the legislative process.' As it turns out, Wednesday was a historic day for college sports with regard to congressional legislation. An all-encompassing federal college sports bill made its way out of committee for the first time since the NCAA's lobbying efforts began nearly six years ago. The SCORE Act, bipartisan but pro-Republican and NCAA-friendly legislation that many Democrats are against, received the necessary votes to advance out of committees and is eligible for debate on the House floor when members return in September from their traditional summer break. In many ways, the SCORE Act grants the NCAA and conferences similar protections as Trump's order. Above anything, Trump's executive order may get Congress to more urgently and swiftly push the bill across the goal line. However, if it does advance out of the House, the SCORE Act faces stiff pushback in a divided U.S. Senate, where at least seven Democrats are needed to overcome the filibuster and reach the 60-vote margin for any bill passage. The Senate, though, has been working toward the introduction of its own legislation, led by Sen. Ted Cruz, who, much like Trump, has made college sports regulation a priority. He's been in negotiations now for months with several Democrats, most notably Chris Coons, Richard Blumenthal and Cory Booker. No agreement has been reached despite more than a year of intense talks. Will Trump's executive order change that? It's one of many questions on the topic that remains a mystery.
