The world of college sports finds itself in the eye of another political and cultural storm after President Donald Trump signed a sweeping executive order intended to roll back the explosion of athlete endorsement deals across the NCAA.

The move is already reshaping the landscape, sparking fierce debate among coaches, players, and administrators about what the future of college athletics should look like.

For Nick Saban, one of the most respected figures in the history of college football, the answer is clear.

The former Alabama coach, who retired this spring after a career that produced seven national championships, has become one of the most vocal advocates for returning college sports to what he calls its “education-based roots.”

“We sort of need to make a decision here,” Saban said on Fox News, emphasizing his concern that NIL, or Name, Image, and Likeness rights, have veered too far from the intent of college athletics.

“Do we want an education-based model, which I think the President took a big step towards doing that, or do we want to have universities sponsor professional teams? I think most people would choose the former.”

A seismic shift for NCAA athletes and coaches

The executive order, titled “Saving College Sports,” introduces strict new rules that cap the amount athletes can earn through personal endorsements, and sets out new guidelines for schools and sponsors.

The White House has framed the order as necessary to maintain competitive balance and ensure that athletes do not lose sight of the academic missions of their universities.

Trump’s action comes after several years of rapid growth in athlete compensation, with NIL deals turning star college football and basketball players into millionaires before they set foot in the pros.

Supporters see this as long overdue, arguing that athletes have powered multi-billion-dollar television contracts and deserve a piece of the action.

Critics, however, worry that the new era of “pay for play” is undermining the traditional spirit of amateur competition.

Saban has not shied away from those concerns, repeating his view that college sports is “at a crossroads.”

“I think President Trump’s Executive Order takes a huge step in providing the educational model that has always been what we’ve tried to promote to create opportunities for players,” Saban said, framing the new rules as a way to restore balance to the system.

But not everyone is convinced. While the order reins in player compensation, it does not address the enormous sums universities and coaches earn from television contracts, bowl games, and apparel deals.

That has fueled skepticism among athletes, some administrators, and player advocates, who say the system is still stacked against the young men and women who risk injury every week for their schools.

The future of amateurism in a billion-dollar industry

The tension at the heart of the debate is not new. College sports has always lived in a gray area between amateur ideals and commercial realities.

The difference now, observers note, is that the money has never been bigger-and the stakes have never been higher.

As coaches and athletic directors adjust to the new NIL restrictions, some worry that the best talent may simply choose to play professionally elsewhere, or even bypass the NCAA altogether.

Others believe the policy could help preserve what makes college sports unique, putting the focus back on the student-athlete experience. As the dust settles, the only certainty is that the battle over athlete compensation is far from over.

With new rules in place and old debates reignited, college sports faces a pivotal test: Can it reconcile tradition with transformation, and keep its core values intact in the modern era? Only time will tell.

There were two major developments on the NIL news front this week and how it impacts the state of college athletics today — something many have become disillusioned with.

Several months back, there were reports of President Donald Trump considering passing an executive order and/or forming a commission on college sports to address the growing problems within the NIL system and the pay-for-play chaos it has created in the areas of talent acquisition.

RELATED: As new Alabama-driven NIL bill gains traction, Congress moves to rein in ‘Wild West’ of college sports

On Thursday, Trump officially passed the executive order with a goal of preserving “student-athletes and collegiate athletic scholarships and opportunities including in Olympic and non-revenue programs, and the unique American institution of college sports.”

According to a release from the White House, the order does the following:

The Order requires the preservation and, where possible, expansion of opportunities for scholarships and collegiate athletic competition in women’s and non-revenue sports.

The Order prohibits third-party, pay-for-play payments to collegiate athletes. This does not apply to legitimate, fair-market-value compensation that a third party provides to an athlete, such as for a brand endorsement.

The Order provides that any revenue-sharing permitted between universities and collegiate athletes should be implemented in a manner that protects women’s and non-revenue sports.

The Order directs the Secretary of Labor and the National Labor Relations Board to clarify the status of student-athletes in order to preserve non-revenue sports and the irreplaceable educational and developmental opportunities that college sports provide.

The Order directs the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission to take appropriate actions to protect student-athletes’ rights and safeguard the long-term stability of college athletics from endless, debilitating antitrust and other legal challenges.

The Order directs the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy and the Director of the White House Office of Public Liaison to consult with the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Teams and other organizations to protect the role of college athletics in developing world-class American athletes.

The goal here of course is to prevent the dissolving of sports which do not necessarily create revenue, something which has been seen as an underrated consequence of the NIL era down the line.

Players have been moving towards an increasingly unionized model in which they are employees rather than students, and this certainly takes a step in the opposite direction.

On the same day Trump passed the order, Congress advanced the bipartisan SCORE Act through the U.S. House committee and looks to be on the fast track towards passing.

RELATED: Shomari Figures making bipartisan play to address NIL with support from GOP leaders, Alabama AD Greg Byrne

“The current college sports environment has drastically changed in the NIL era, and this bill provides a framework to where students can not only be compensated but also have access to resources like health care and financial literacy courses, to ensure they have a solid foundation for their lives after college and we can get back to just playing ball,” Rep. Shomari Figures, D-Mobile — one of the main sponsors of the bill — said last week.

University of Alabama Athletics Director was one of many to express public support for the SCORE Act.

“We sincerely thank Congressman Figures for leading a bipartisan solution for intercollegiate athletics that recognizes the importance of creating a long-term sustainable model that provides the best opportunity to preserve broad athletic opportunities for student-athletes for generations to come,” Byrne said last week.

With things moving quickly on this front, it remains to be seen if these efforts can produce actual results on the field, but it certainly seems like government officials are for the first time taking action on the topic rather than simply discussing taking action.

“President Donald J. Trump Saves College Sports.” If only it were that simple.

The 176th executive order President Donald Trump signed in the past seven months was announced Thursday with an audaciously headlined statement from the White House.

We don’t know how this will play out long term. But these are the key facts surrounding the executive order and the questions that need to be answered.

Advertisement

What’s happened in college sports that brought it to the federal government?

The NCAA has been under attack on numerous legal fronts for more than a decade, particularly when it comes to paying athletes. Its policy for decades was strict amateurism — any compensation athletes received beyond their scholarships would render them ineligible.

The model began cracking through a series of antitrust cases brought by former athletes, most notably Alston vs. NCAA in 2021. The Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that schools must be allowed to provide additional academic awards. By then, states began passing legislation allowing athletes to earn money from their name, image and likeness — i.e., endorsement deals — in direct opposition to the NCAA’s longstanding ban.

On July 1, 2021, the NCAA relented and began allowing NIL payments, which touched off another antitrust case, House v. NCAA. A class of former athletes sued for back pay for missing out on NIL opportunities. The defendants agreed to a $2.8 billion settlement, part of which allows schools to pay athletes directly for the first time, up to $20.5 million. A judge approved the settlement on June 6, 2025.

But the lack of an organized NIL system has led to chaos, with boosters exploiting the lack of enforcement. And with other legal challenges forcing the NCAA to eliminate its longstanding rules about transfers, athletes now routinely hop from one school to another in search of their next payday.

Desperate for regulation, college sports leaders have been lobbying Congress for help in the form of a federal law for years, but not until recently has there been any significant movement on a bill.

What are the key takeaways of the executive order?

The order essentially makes recommendations for how college athletic departments should operate and directs several government agencies to weigh in on issues that will shape the future of college sports. It also delivers the NCAA and conferences much of what it has been lobbying for on Capitol Hill.

Advertisement

However, the order’s ability to turn ideas into action is questionable.

The order:

Gives a nod to protecting women ’s and Olympic sports by setting benchmarks for scholarships and opportunities based on the amount of money an athletic department makes.

Bans “pay-for-play” to athletes by schools, a bedrock principle of the NCAA and college sports that leaders are still clinging to. The order does try to carve out exceptions for endorsement and sponsorship deals with third-party businesses.

Calls on the Secretary of Labor and the National Labor Relations Board to clarify the employment status of student-athletes. Under a Republican administration, that likely decreases the chances athletes would have the right to organize.

Directs the Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission to find ways to hand rule-making power back to the NCAA, conferences and other college sports governing bodies and away from courts and state legislatures.

Who benefits from this?

Considering how much it falls in line with what college sports leaders have been asking for, it would be difficult to call it athlete-friendly.

Yes, it tries to protect non-revenue programs and force schools to fund a wide range of teams for athletes to participate in college sports, but limiting compensation by regulating NIL compensation and banning pay-for-play has been at the root of problems for decades.

“Looks like an NCAA press release,” said Marc Edelman, professor of sports law at Baruch College and antitrust expert who has been a critic of NCAA policies.

Several ideas for student-athlete compensation have emerged over the years to help regulate the market, from collective bargaining agreements to defining student-athletes as university employees. Though how much athletes actually want those things is hard to say; with more than 190,000 athletes competing in Division I sports, gauging consensus is tricky.

Will this actually change anything?

In the short term: no.

In the long term: maybe.

The biggest possible downside of the executive order is that it could create more uncertainty for college sports through policies that may or may not hold.

“It very much depends on how this gets enforced moving forward, and whether it gets enforced moving forward,” said Sam Ehrlich, assistant professor at Boise State’s College of Business and Economics. “Maybe this could just end up being just a statement that goes absolutely nowhere.”

What can the executive order do?

It’s not so much what an executive order can do as what it can’t. It can’t make a law, it can’t provide an antitrust exemption and it can’t override state laws. Congress can do that. And that’s what college sports need.

Advertisement

Any policies that come from an executive order can be challenged in court and reversed by the next administration, which means college sports continues to operate under a blanket of uncertainty when it comes to defining the relationship between schools and athletes.

That’s exactly what college sports leaders are trying to stop.

What power does the government have in these situations?

The executive branch does not have the authority to provide straightforward solutions to college sports’ problems, most importantly some form of antitrust exemption. That has to come from Congress, and will require bipartisan support.

The president’s involvement could prioritize the issues in a way that motivates lawmakers to build on recent momentum in the Republican-controlled House, where a college sports bill made it out of committee for the first time earlier this week. Or maybe pervasive political divisiveness makes Democrats recoil from the idea of giving the president a symbolic victory.

While the complicated problems facing college sports now are not quite a matter of life and death, it remains to be seen if presidential involvement makes finding solutions easier or harder.

What is The SCORE Act?

The SCORE Act is a House bill that would provide the NCAA and conferences some antitrust protection, preempt state laws related to NIL compensation and bolster the terms of the House settlement.

The SCORE Act made it through two Republican-led House committees on partisan lines earlier this week. No college sports bill has ever gotten so far. When Congress returns for the fall session, the bill could go to the House floor for a vote and it will probably pass. That’s meaningful and a positive sign for many in college sports after years of inaction by lawmakers.

The bill has little support from Democrats in the House and stands very little chance of making it through the Senate, where seven Democrats would have to vote with Republicans to get the 60 votes necessary to pass.

Advertisement

What divides Republicans and Democrats?

The debate over college sports legislation on Capitol Hill is akin to a labor dispute.

Republicans, who currently control both chambers and the White House, are focused on ways to shield the NCAA and college sports conferences from litigation and state laws that make it impossible for them to effectively govern national competition.

Democrats are demanding greater protections for the workers (the athletes) and are hesitant to provide the antitrust protections college sports leaders have been lobbying for.

The NCAA and conferences want a law that would prevent college athletes from being deemed employees. Democrats want that option left open, along with athletes’ rights to organize and maybe even join unions.

Senator Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) released a statement Friday that read: “The many challenges facing college sports are important and complex. The Executive Order recognizes the importance of preserving Olympic sports, women’s sports, and maintaining competitiveness for big and small schools alike. I’m disappointed that the President abandoned his earlier plan for a commission to examine all the issues facing college sports. We need a sustainable future for college sports, not a future dominated by the biggest and wealthiest schools who can write their own rules without accountability.”

What precedents are there involving federal legislation and higher education in sports?

The president’s EO is the most significant and direct entry by the executive branch into college athletics since President Theodore Roosevelt’s calls for safety reforms in football led to the creation of the NCAA in 1906.

President Lyndon B. Johnson’s executive order, signed in 1967, led to the passage of the federal Title IX gender discrimination law, which has been credited with paving the way for an explosion of opportunities for women in college sports.

Advertisement

What does this mean for the NCAA?

The NCAA as a governing body is ceding power to conferences and the newly formed College Sports Commission. However, it played a pivotal role in lobbying for federal legislation and has been much better received by lawmakers since former Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker took over as NCAA president two years ago.

The NCAA’s future will ultimately be determined by college sports stakeholders, not politicians.

Why is the president getting involved?

The White House’s announcement hailed Trump’s long-held interest in college athletics, including preserving Olympic and women’s sports amid the changing landscape. Until now, Trump’s engagement with higher education has been adversarial, threatening federal funding and litigation against schools for Title IX violations or allegations of antisemitism and discrimination through the promotion of diversity at universities.

Trump came away from a meeting with former Alabama football coach Nick Saban in May motivated to get involved. The formation of a presidential commission led by Saban and billionaire oil businessman Cody Campbell, a former Texas Tech football player and current board chair, was considered then put on hold as lawmakers worked on legislative solutions.

— Stewart Mandel and Justin Williams contributed reporting.

(Photo: Brendan Smialowski / AFP via Getty Images)

College football has reached a crossroads. With athletes demanding compensation and universities struggling to maintain competitive balance, legendary coach Nick Saban sees President Trump’s latest executive order as more than policy. It’s a lifeline for the sport he spent five decades building.

How Does Donald Trump’s Executive Order Address College Sports’ Employment Crisis?

Former Alabama Head Coach Nick Saban praised President Donald Trump’s July 24, 2025, executive order as a “huge step” toward preserving college sports’ educational model, offering a clear alternative to professionalization.

Speaking on “Fox & Friends,” Saban became an ambassador of the order’s aim to clarify athletes’ employment status, curb pay-for-play, and protect non-revenue sports. The order directly confronts the chaos surrounding athlete compensation that has plagued college athletics since NIL deals began.

Saban praised the executive order, stating, “The executive order provides a huge step in providing the educational model that has always been what we’ve sort of tried to promote to create opportunities for players, male and female alike, revenue and non-revenue, so that they can have development as people, students and develop careers and develop professionally if that’s what they choose to do.”

The order from Trump asserts clear boundaries, stating, “It is common sense that college sports are not, and should not be, professional sports.” This mandate requires the U.S. Secretary of Labor and National Labor Relations Board to devise a plan within 30 days to prevent athletes from being classified as professionals.

What Alternative Does Saban Propose for College Athletics?

Based on the executive order, Saban presented an alternative approach saying, “I think we sort of need to make a decision here relative to do we want to have an education-based model… or do we want to have universities sponsor professional teams? And I think most people would choose the former.”

This alternative model emphasizes maintaining college sports’ educational foundation while creating legitimate opportunities for student-athletes. Saban’s approach focuses on development rather than pure compensation, preserving what made college athletics unique.

The executive order reinforces this vision by warning against the consequences of professionalization. Trump’s directive emphasizes protecting the educational mission that has defined college sports for generations.

Protecting Non-Revenue Sports

Trump’s order warns of dire consequences for smaller programs, stating, “A balanced use of resources across collegiate athletic programs that preserves their educational and developmental benefits, many college sports will soon cease to exist.”

The order emphasizes comprehensive protection, noting, “Any revenue-sharing permitted between universities and collegiate athletes should be implemented in a manner that protects women’s and non-revenue sports.”

Saban shared these concerns about non-revenue sports, explaining his perspective: “I’m for keeping all the sports that we have as many as we can have, but there are financial concerns relative to how many sports can you promote that don’t create revenue.”

This protection becomes crucial as universities face mounting pressure to fund revenue-sharing with football and basketball players. Without proper safeguards, smaller programs could disappear entirely, eliminating opportunities for thousands of student-athletes.

Reforming NIL and Collectives

Saban addressed the NIL landscape directly, advocating for a clearinghouse system to authenticate legitimate deals. He explained the concept: “I think the clearinghouse is there to authenticate name, image and likeness. In other words, is your marketing value relative to what you’re getting paid to do a marketing opportunity? When you cross that line, that’s when it becomes pay for play.”

The veteran coach criticized current collective operations, stating, “So you have collectives that raise money that pay players, and they really don’t do a relative marketing job to earn that money, and that’s where this whole thing has kind of gotten sideways. I think this whole clearinghouse is there to sort of protect the collective, affecting competitive balance in college sports.”

Trump’s order supports this approach by prohibiting third-party pay-for-play arrangements, reinforcing Saban’s push for regulated NIL to prevent competitive imbalances. The clearinghouse system would distinguish between legitimate marketing opportunities and disguised recruiting payments.

This reform addresses one of college sports’ biggest problems: wealthy boosters using collectives to essentially purchase players for their favorite teams. By requiring authentic marketing value, the system would restore some competitive balance while preserving legitimate NIL opportunities.

The executive order acknowledges the implementation of the House settlement on July 1, 2025, which introduced revenue-sharing between universities and athletes. However, Saban’s support, rooted in his 50-year coaching career, frames the order as a critical first step toward maintaining college sports’ educational mission.

As college sports navigate unprecedented legal and financial turbulence, Saban’s vision, amplified by Trump’s executive order, seeks to preserve opportunities for all athletes while restoring the competitive balance that made college athletics compelling. The question remains whether this approach can satisfy all stakeholders in an increasingly complex landscape.

On Thursday, President Trump exercised his writing hand and signed an executive order titled “Saving College Sports,” mandating federal authorities like the Department of Education to have more involvement with universities, especially those public colleges that receive federal funds, to ensure that athletic scholarships and NIL deals remain above board.

The order demands that larger universities with massive athletic departments maintain a certain number of scholarships for less lucrative sports. The hope is that this executive order will help quell the massive influx of money for schools to attract big names under the recently created name, image, and likeness deals — known as NIL.

“The future of college sports is under unprecedented threat,” the order says, NPR reports. “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, that comprise the backbone of intercollegiate athletics, drive American superiority at the Olympics and other international competitions, and catalyze hundreds of thousands of student-athletes to fuel American success in myriad ways.”

Here’s the problem: An executive order is not the law. Think of it as a sternly worded email from the CEO of a company. Yes, it means something, but what really? There is no guarantee that the order will be made a law, but many legal experts believe that it does shine a light on the president’s growing interest in sticking his nose in matters that don’t concern him.

“This may not be a binding legal framework — but it’s absolutely a signal: that the federal government, and now presidential politics, are increasingly willing to intervene in the future of college sports,” Noah Henderson, a professor of sports management at Loyola University Chicago, told NPR.

Trump’s order comes just one month after a class action settlement called House v. NCAA allowed Division I college athletic departments to pay players directly.

“Absent guardrails to stop the madness and ensure a reasonable, balanced use of resources across collegiate athletic programs that preserves their educational and developmental benefits, many college sports will soon cease to exist,” the order reads.

Many believed that the president was planning on creating a college sports commission to sort through some of the more difficult issues facing college sports, (like is all of the player money coming from the universities?) But Trump’s order chose to try and add “guardrails” to “an out-of-control, rudderless system in which competing university donors engage in bidding wars for the best players, who can change teams each season,” the order reads.

From AP News:

There has been a dramatic increase in money flowing into and around college athletics, and a sense of chaos. Key court victories won by athletes angry that they were barred for decades from earning income based on their celebrity and from sharing in the billions of revenue they helped generate have gutted the amateurism model long at the heart of college sports.

Facing a growing number of state laws undercutting its authority, the NCAA in July 2021 cleared the way for athletes to cash in with NIL deals with brands and sponsors — deals now worth millions. That came mere days after a 9-0 decision from the Supreme Court that found the NCAA cannot impose caps on education-related benefits schools provide to their athletes because such limits violate antitrust law.

The NCAA’s embrace of NIL deals set the stage for another massive change that took effect July 1: The ability of schools to begin paying millions of dollars to their own athletes, up to $20.5 million per school over the next year. The $2.8 billion House settlement shifts even more power to athletes, who have also won the ability to transfer from school to school without waiting to play.

“We’ve gotten to the point where government is involved,” Purdue coach Barry Odom said when asked about the Trump order, AP reports. “Obviously, there’s belief it needs to be involved. We’ll get it all worked out. The game’s been around for a hundred years and it’s going to be around 100 more.”

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.