[House Hearing, 119 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
MOVING THE GOALPOSTS: HOW NIL IS
RESHAPING COLLEGE ATHLETICS
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, MANUFACTURING,
AND TRADE
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MARCH 4, 2025
__________
Serial No. 119-8
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Published for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce
govinfo.gov/committee/house-energy
energycommerce.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
59-901 PDF WASHINGTON : 2026
=======================================================================
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky
Chairman
ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia Ranking Member
GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado
RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia DORIS O. MATSUI, California
GARY J. PALMER, Alabama KATHY CASTOR, Florida
NEAL P. DUNN, Florida PAUL TONKO, New York
DAN CRENSHAW, Texas YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York
JOHN JOYCE, Pennsylvania, Vice RAUL RUIZ, California
Chairman SCOTT H. PETERS, California
RANDY K. WEBER, Sr., Texas DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan
RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia MARC A. VEASEY, Texas
TROY BALDERSON, Ohio ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
RUSS FULCHER, Idaho NANETTE DIAZ BARRAGAN, California
AUGUST PFLUGER, Texas DARREN SOTO, Florida
DIANA HARSHBARGER, Tennessee KIM SCHRIER, Washington
MARIANNETTE MILLER-MEEKS, Iowa LORI TRAHAN, Massachusetts
KAT CAMMACK, Florida LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas
JAY OBERNOLTE, California ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, New York
JOHN JAMES, Michigan JAKE AUCHINCLOSS, Massachusetts
CLIFF BENTZ, Oregon TROY A. CARTER, Louisiana
ERIN HOUCHIN, Indiana ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey
RUSSELL FRY, South Carolina KEVIN MULLIN, California
LAUREL M. LEE, Florida GREG LANDSMAN, Ohio
NICHOLAS A. LANGWORTHY, New York JENNIFER L. McCLELLAN, Virginia
THOMAS H. KEAN, Jr., New Jersey
MICHAEL A. RULLI, Ohio
GABE EVANS, Colorado
CRAIG A. GOLDMAN, Texas
JULIE FEDORCHAK, North Dakota
------
Professional Staff
MEGAN JACKSON, Staff Director
SOPHIE KHANAHMADI, Deputy Staff Director
TIFFANY GUARASCIO, Minority Staff Director
Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade
GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida
Chairman
RUSS FULCHER, Idaho, Vice Chairman JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
DIANA HARSHBARGER, Tennessee Ranking Member
KAT CAMMACK, Florida KATHY CASTOR, Florida
JAY OBERNOLTE, California DARREN SOTO, Florida
JOHN JAMES, Michigan LORI TRAHAN, Massachusetts
CLIFF BENTZ, Oregon KEVIN MULLIN, California
ERIN HOUCHIN, Indiana YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York
RUSSELL FRY, South Carolina DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan
LAUREL M. LEE, Florida MARC A. VEASEY, Texas
THOMAS H. KEAN, Jr., New Jersey ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
GABE EVANS, Colorado KIM SCHRIER, Washington
CRAIG A. GOLDMAN, Texas FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey (ex
BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky (ex officio)
officio)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hon. Gus M. Bilirakis, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Florida, opening statement............................ 2
Prepared statement........................................... 4
Hon. Jan Schakowsky, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Illinois, opening statement................................. 6
Prepared statement........................................... 7
Hon. Robin L. Kelly, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Illinois, prepared statement................................ 11
Hon. Brett Guthrie, a Representative in Congress from the
Commonwealth of Kentucky, opening statement.................... 13
Prepared statement........................................... 15
Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the
State of New Jersey, opening statement......................... 17
Prepared statement........................................... 18
Hon. Lori Trahan, a Representative in Congress from the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts, prepared statement.............. 20
Hon. Debbie Dingell, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Michigan, prepared statement................................ 22
Witnesses
Emily Cole, All-American Track Athlete, Duke University.......... 24
Prepared statement........................................... 27
Submitted questions for the record \1\....................... 129
Justin Falcinelli, Vice President, College Football Players
Association.................................................... 30
Prepared statement........................................... 32
Answers to submitted questions............................... 131
Anthony Egbo, Jr., Director, Wildcat Club, Abilene Christian
University..................................................... 40
Prepared statement........................................... 42
Answers to submitted questions............................... 132
Josh Whitman, Director of Athletics, University of Illinois...... 47
Prepared statement........................................... 49
Answers to submitted questions............................... 134
Shane Beamer, Head Football Coach, University of South Carolina.. 59
Prepared statement........................................... 61
Answers to submitted questions............................... 137
Submitted Material
Inclusion of the following was approved by unanimous consent.
List of documents submitted for the record....................... 107
Letter of February 28, 2025, from Ksenia Maiorova, Esq., and Amy
Maldonado, Esq., to Mr. Bilirakis and Subcommittee on Commerce,
Manufacturing, and Trade members............................... 108
Letter of March 3, 2025, from Stephanie Kempe, Director of
Athletics, University of Nevada, to Mr. Bilirakis.............. 113
Article of December 29, 2024, ``The Peach Bowl is more than just
a football game,'' by Percy Vaughn, Atlanta Journal and
Constitution................................................... 115
----------
\1\ Ms. Cole did not answer submitted questions for the record by the
time of publication. Replies received after publication will be
retained in committee files and made available at https://
docs.house.gov/Committee/Calendar/ByEvent.aspx?EventID=117989.
Letter of January 31, 2025, from Donette Leighton, Chief
Executive Officer, Women's Sports Foundation, et al., to Hon.
Claudia Wilken, U.S. District Court, Northern District of
California..................................................... 116
Letter of January 29, 2025, from Charlotte North to Hon. Claudia
Wilken, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California
1A\2\
Objection to Settlement Agreement in Re: College Athlete NIL
Litigation, U.S. District Court, Northern District of
California, Oakland Division, January 31, 2025 1A\2\
Letter of March 3, 2025, from Tina Tan, President, Infectious
Diseases Society of America, to Mr. Guthrie and Mr. Pallone.... 120
Objection to Settlement Agreement in Re: Collegiate Athlete NIL
Litigation, U.S. District Court, Northern District of
California, Oakland Division, August 9, 2024 \2\
Report, ``NCAA External Gender Equity Review, Phase I: Basketball
Championships,'' by Kaplan Hecker & Fink, LLP, August 2, 2021
1A\2\
Report, ``NCAA External Gender Equity Review, Phase II,'' by
Kaplan Hecker & Fink, LLP, October 25, 2022 1A\2\
Expert Report of Barbara Osborne in Re: College Athlete NIL
Litigation, U.S. District Court, Northern District of
California, Oakland Division, April 28, 2023 1A\2\
Article of March 3, 2025, ``Hiring freezes, fewer grad students:
Funding uncertainty hits colleges,'' by Susan Syrluga,
Washington Post................................................ 124
Letter of January 28, 2025, from Michele Roberts, et al., to Hon.
Claudia Wilken, U.S. District Court, Northern District of
California 1A\2\
Post on X by Robert Griffin III, February 17, 2025............... 128
----------
\2\ The information has been retained in committee files and is
included in the Documents for the Record at https://docs.house.gov/
meetings/IF/IF17/20250304/117989/HHRG-119-IF17-20250304-SD003.pdf.
MOVING THE GOALPOSTS: HOW NIL IS RESHAPING COLLEGE ATHLETICS
----------
TUESDAY, MARCH 4, 2025
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade,
Committee on Energy and Commerce,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:18 a.m., in
the John D. Dingell Room 2123, Rayburn House Office Building,
Hon. Gus Bilirakis (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Members present: Representatives Bilirakis, Fulcher,
Harshbarger, Obernolte, Bentz, Houchin, Fry, Lee, Kean, Evans,
Goldman, Guthrie (ex officio), Schakowsky (subcommittee ranking
member), Castor, Soto, Trahan, Clarke, Dingell, Veasey, Kelly,
Schrier, and Pallone (ex officio).
Also present: Representatives Carter of Georgia, Joyce, and
Pfluger.
Staff present: Ansley Boylan, Director of Operations;
Jessica Donlon, General Counsel; Kristin Fritsch, Professional
Staff Member, Health; Sydney Greene, Director of Finance and
Logistics; Natalie Hellman, Professional Staff Member,
Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade; Megan Jackson, Staff
Director; Daniel Kelly, Press Secretary; Sophie Khanahmadi,
Deputy Staff Director; Alex Khlopin, Clerk, Commerce,
Manufacturing, and Trade; Joel Miller, Chief Counsel; Brannon
Rains, Professional Staff Member, Commerce, Manufacturing, and
Trade; Evangelos Razis, Profesional Staff Member, Commerce,
Manufacturing, and Trade; Chris Sarley, Member Services/
Stakeholder Director; Emma Schultheis, Clerk, Health; Kaley
Stidham, Press Assistant; Matt VanHyfte, Communications
Director; Hannah Anton, Minority Policy Analyst; Shana Beavin,
Minority Professional Staff Member; Keegan Cardman, Minority
Staff Assistant; Waverly Gordon, Minority Deputy Staff Director
and General Counsel; Tiffany Guarascio, Minority Staff
Director; Lisa Hone, Minority Chief Counsel, Commerce,
Manufacturing, and Trade; Mackenzie Kuhl, Minority Digital
Manager; Phoebe Rouge, Minority FTC Detailee; and Hannah
Treger, Minority Intern.
Mr. Bilirakis. The committee will come to order. The
chairman recognizes himself for a 5-minute opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GUS M. BILIRAKIS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA
Good morning, everyone, and thank you to our witnesses for
being here. We really do appreciate it very much.
I am really excited to hold this hearing today on the
evolving landscape of name, image, and likeness, commonly known
as NIL, and its impact on college athletics.
In just a few years, college athletics has fundamentally
reshaped the lives of student-athletes who can now benefit from
their NIL.
Before 2021, athletes were barred from profiting off of
their own NIL, but in response to legal challenges and a
Supreme Court decision, the NCAA ended those restrictions,
finally giving our student-athletes their much-deserved ability
to earn compensation for their brand and their God-given
talent.
However, the absence of a preemptive uniform standard has
led to the Wild West--most would agree with that--a Wild West
environment where, sadly, our student-athletes are put in
vulnerable positions where they can easily be exploited by
those who do not have their best interests in mind.
I have heard awful stories of student-athletes signing
deals without having been given full explanations for how their
deal would impact their long-term finances and livelihood.
This lack of structure has also allowed NIL collectives,
who are often affiliated with universities but operating
independently, to turn NIL into a pay-for-play system. Instead
of being used for legitimate business purposes, NIL deals are
frequently given out as recruiting inducements with little
transparency or oversight. We have to fix that, folks.
I am also concerned about the transfer portal. All of us
want to make sure student-athletes have the freedom to make the
best collegiate and educational decisions--after all, that is
why we go to college, to get a good education--but educational
decisions for themselves and for their future.
But this current system is not workable, as athletes are
entering the portal at an unprecedented rate, sometimes
multiple times in their careers, with a hope, but not a
guarantee, for something better.
I am sure we have all heard the stories of student-athletes
being encouraged to transfer schools based on promises of NIL
money that never materializes. Others transfer expecting better
playing time only to find themselves in a worse situation.
This revolving-door system has created instability for both
athletes and the programs they leave behind, with many student-
athletes ending up without a clear academic or athletic path.
We often focus on NIL and the business side of college
athletics, but we must remember that these are still student-
athletes, young men and women who are supposed to be receiving
an education that prepares them for a life beyond sports.
Yet too many are making life-altering financial and
academic decisions without the proper guidance. Some are
signing NIL deals without understanding tax and legal
implications.
And you can't blame them. Most of these--while they are 18-
year-olds in some cases, but some are even younger, so they are
going to need some guidance, folks.
Others are transferring from school to school without
receiving the academic support they need to graduate.
If we are serious about protecting student-athletes--and I
hope we are--we need to ensure that they have the resources and
education necessary to navigate this new era successfully. That
is why I am so glad to have Emily and Anthony with us here
today.
Thank you for sharing your stories as student-athletes and
how you were able to traverse this complex environment. We
really appreciate it. It gives all student-athletes the chance
to learn and better themselves.
That brings me to a point I really want to drive home. We
are working on this issue not to put one school over another--
although I am a Florida Gator, and I would like to see another
national championship sometime soon--but again, not one school
over another. We have got to protect the small schools as well.
We have Division I, but we have to look out for the medium-size
and small schools as well.
So, no, we are doing this for the student-athletes, and
that is what we are doing it for. We must protect these
student-athletes, folks. We have a responsibility to do so.
Unfortunately, they haven't been protected in the past, so
Congress has to intervene with preemption, in my opinion.
So I will say it again: We are doing this for the student-
athletes, for the young men and women who advance to college,
so they can continue playing the sport they love and use that
experience to help them succeed throughout their lives. It
could be a wonderful experience.
So it is crucial we establish a preemptive standard, as I
said, that protects student-athletes but also doesn't endanger
the many sports programs that we don't see on ESPN or that
bring in millions of dollars.
I know I am over, aren't I? Yes. Well, let me just finish
here. And I will give you the opportunity, Ranking Member, to
go over if you would like.
Again, folks, we must protect the student-athletes and we
must protect the Olympic sports and the nonrevenue sports as
well.
So this is too important of an issue to get wrong. I think
you know that. So I look forward to a thoughtful discussion and
working towards solutions that support both student-athletes
and the long-term future of college sports.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Bilirakis follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Bilirakis. With that, I yield back, and I will
recognize the ranking member, the ranking member of the
subcommittee, my good friend Ms. Schakowsky, for 5 minutes for
her opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAN SCHAKOWSKY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I certainly agree that we want to make sure that the health
and safety of our athletes is always protected. That has been
my view and action ever since we have been talking about
student-athletes. And that is important. And so I want to work
with you on that.
But I want to say there is actually a bigger issue right
now. We find that there are other items, which include the fact
that the Trump administration has cut the research funding for
our universities, for our places that have to conduct the
things for the athletes.
And that is even more important, because if there is not
money for the institutions to have, then there is not going to
be able to be student-athletes. And that is why this is not
enough. We have to do much more.
And with that, I want to call on Congresswoman Robin Kelly
to talk further about this larger problem that we are facing.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Schakowsky follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Ms. Schakowsky. And I yield to Robin Kelly.
Ms. Kelly. Thank you, Chair Bilirakis and Ranking Member
Schakowsky, and thanks to all the witnesses for their
participation.
One thing I hope we can all agree on is that college
athletes deserve a system that protects their well-being and
interests.
However, while the rapid evolution of college athletes
benefiting from their name, image, and likeness rights may feel
chaotic to the NCAA, the conferences, and the universities, it
has provided enormous benefits to college athletes.
By contrast, universities are now navigating a truly
unpredictable environment when it comes to funding for vital
academic and research programs. I am deeply concerned about the
potential impact of proposed cuts to funding for the NIH. That
is one of the real crises that this committee should be focused
on.
Last month, the Trump administration issued an Executive
order that would drastically lower the agency's funding for
major research institutions across the country. The policy,
currently blocked by a Federal court, would limit NIH research
funding for indirect costs to 15 percent, which is far below
what most universities receive and what they need to support
their programs across the entire country, including
historically Black colleges, minority-serving institutions, as
well as Hispanic-serving institutions, small universities, and
large Division I schools.
The misconception that NIH funds only benefit top-tier
universities overlooks the critical support these funds provide
to a wide range of institutions in both Republican and
Democratic districts. For example, HBCUs, MSIs, and HSIs
received hundreds of millions of dollars in 2024 to support
vital medical research.
These funds are essential for maintaining research
buildings and labs, covering administrative costs, purchasing
supplies and equipment, and paying support staff.
NIH grants are a lifeline for many universities, ensuring
that research and education can thrive in institutions of all
sizes and backgrounds. The reduction in NIH funding is a
financial earthquake and would directly affect college athletes
as well.
Research in sports medicine, head injury prevention, and
athletic performance relies on Federal funding, much of which
comes from the NIH. If this funding is reduced or eliminated,
it will only create more challenges for college athletes and
hinder the development of critical programs that protect their
health and safety.
Of course, the impact extends far beyond athletic injuries.
NIH funding of clinical trials and other medical research is
vital in ensuring that all populations are represented in our
Nation's biomedical research.
For medical breakthroughs to occur and be truly effective,
they must include diverse participants reflecting a range of
racial, ethnic, and gender identities. Therefore, the need for
inclusive research is not only a matter of fairness but of
public health.
We simply cannot afford to have the well-being of our
students--whether in the classroom, in a research lab, or on
the field--be compromised by unnecessary funding cuts by the
Trump administration. We must continue to support our
universities, including their research initiatives, to ensure
that they remain centers of excellence for all students.
I have an article from The Washington Post that I would ask
unanimous consent to enter into the record titled ``Hiring
freezes, fewer grads: Funding uncertainty hits colleges.''
I urge my colleagues to remain mindful of the larger
funding issues that could jeopardize the future of both
education and research in this country.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Kelly follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Ms. Kelly. Thank you, and I yield back to Ranking Member
Schakowsky.
Ms. Schakowsky. I yield back.
Mr. Bilirakis. OK. Thank you very much. And I look forward
to working on some of these healthcare issues in the healthcare
subcommittee and the full committee as well.
Now I recognize Chairman Guthrie for 5 minutes for his
opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BRETT GUTHRIE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY
Mr. Guthrie. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thanks for yielding. I
appreciate it.
It is nice sitting next to my loyal Gamecock here, and he
is proud to have his team represented here at this hearing
today.
I really appreciate you being here and bringing the
opportunity to be here. I know it can be a long trip and can
sometimes be intimidating sitting at the witness stand. It
means a lot that you are here to represent your sports.
Today, college athletics is a multibillion-dollar industry
fueled by the dedication and talent of student-athletes. Some
of you here today know how hard you worked to get where you
are.
For decades, student-athletes were prohibited from earning
money from their own name, image, and likeness, even though
sports brought significant revenue to universities,
conferences, and the NCAA.
That changed in 2021 as the NCAA, undergoing mounting
pressure from State laws, lawsuits, and Supreme Court ruling,
lifted its restrictions. As a result, student-athletes could
finally profit from their own name, image, and likeness, and
rightfully so.
This is a long overdue step finally allowing student-
athletes the opportunity to benefit financially from their
talent, hard work, and public personas.
But the rapid rollout of NIL has introduced new
complexities and challenges. The absence of a uniform national
framework has allowed a patchwork of State laws and
institutional policies to grow, creating disparities and
confusion among student-athletes and universities alike.
So far, 33 States and the District of Columbia have passed
NIL laws, oftentimes focusing on creating a competitive
advantage for their States and State universities instead of
prioritizing good policy.
As this subcommittee knows well, a patchwork of State laws
leads to uncertainty, inconsistency, and confusion.
One of the more concerning developments is the rise of what
we have now, the pay-for-play system. Third-party groups have
blurred and in some cases fully wiped away the lines between
legitimate NIL opportunities and outright recruiting
inducements.
Without clear rules or transparent practices, some student-
athletes are being misled by bad actors and are pressured into
signing unfair contracts that may not serve their best
interests.
Adding to this transformation, the preliminary NCAA
settlement could permanently alter a financial model of college
athletics. It finalized a $2.8 billion deal in back damages
that will be distributed to current and former student-athletes
while institutions, beginning in the next school year, will be
allowed to share revenue directly with student-athletes, a move
that will fundamentally change the way college sports operate.
While the NCAA settlement could bring much-needed structure
and stability to the current landscape, it may not be
sufficient to address the opportunities and challenges posed by
NIL.
As we examine this issue, our goal is to consider the
implications of the NCAA settlement, assess the current state
of NIL policies, and explore legislative solutions that serve
student-athletes, educational institutions, and conferences
they compete in.
Like many of you, my family and I have cherished memories
of cheering our favorite teams on campus. Go, Hilltoppers! We
watch young athletes grow into leaders both on and off the
field.
I know my colleagues agree with me that we must preserve
the spirit and virtue of collegiate athletics and ensure
nonrevenue-generating programs are protected.
I am grateful that our witnesses are willing to be here
today--I know you volunteered to be here today--to help us
better understand the opportunities and the challenges that NIL
presents. I look forward to an informative discussion on how
our committee can help shape a sustainable and transparent NIL
system.
I appreciate you all being here.
And I will just say I talked with my friend end of last
year. The way you guys were playing at the end of the year, if
you all had gotten in the playoffs, you might have gone a long
way. You really put that team together in an impressive way.
And those of us who are from other SEC schools, fans, it is
always good to have everybody successful, so along with my good
friend here.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Guthrie follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Guthrie. So I will yield back.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much. The chairman yields
back.
And now I will recognize the ranking member of the full
committee, Mr. Pallone, for his 5 minutes.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK PALLONE, Jr., A REPRESENTATIVE
IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Mr. Pallone. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Last Congress at two hearings on college athletics we heard
widespread agreement from witnesses that finally allowing
college athletes to profit from their name, image, and likeness
is a good thing and represents a long-overdue change in college
sports.
But today if we want to focus on the real crisis impacting
our colleges and universities, we should be focusing on the
financial disaster that they are facing at the hand of
President Trump and his complicit Republican Congress.
Trump has cut funding from the National Institutes of
Health to our colleges and universitie and froze their ability
to access current grant funding and apply for future funding.
Colleges and universities are now scrambling to figure out
how they are going to proceed with their research programs, and
the cuts threaten their ability to conduct critical clinical
trials for cancer, heart disease, children's health, and a lot
more.
And this is a major crisis, yet Republicans are ignoring it
and would rather talk about college sports. And talk about
misplaced priorities.
I would now like to yield 2 minutes each to 2 of our
Democratic Representatives.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Pallone follows:]
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Pallone. First, 2 minutes to Representative Trahan.
Mrs. Trahan. I thank the ranking member for yielding.
As a former DI college volleyball player, the topic of
today's hearing hits home.
But I want to begin by echoing the ranking member's
concerns about the biggest threats facing colleges and
universities today. After all, I wasn't just an athlete at
Georgetown, I was a student.
I was the first in my family to graduate from college, and
I saw the transformative impact of higher ed, and I am deeply
troubled that the actions by the Trump administration will
jeopardize higher education and strip future generations of the
opportunity we as athletes were afforded.
As this committee has heard in previous hearings, athletes
must be centered in any debates that will affect the future of
college sports. Since I came to Congress, my work in this area
has been guided by that simple principle: putting athletes
first.
However, I am concerned that the majority will put forward
legislation that will roll back progress and restrict athletes,
limiting their financial opportunity, denying them health and
safety benefits, and failing to close the rampant Title IX
loopholes robbing thousands of women across the country from
athletic opportunities.
Instead, I implore my Republican colleagues to work with me
on the legislative proposals I have put forward.
When I wrote the Fair Play for Women Act, I did so with the
knowledge that schools were systemically taking advantage of
Title IX loopholes that deprive women athletes of roster spots.
When I introduced the College Athletic Economic Freedom Act
to establish a Federal right for athletes to pursue NIL
opportunities, I had in mind countless stories of athletes
unable to fly their parents in to watch them play or going to
bed hungry, all because they couldn't make money off their own
name and their schedules were too demanding to get a second
job.
As this committee and our colleagues in the Senate look to
pass Federal standards on NIL, revenue sharing, or athletes'
employment rights, we must meet this moment and prioritize the
athletes as opposed to enshrining the power structures that
have limited their opportunities for decades. Otherwise, we
risk jeopardizing the tremendous gains in recent years with
one-sided proposals that provide much less than our Nation's
athletes deserve.
[The prepared statement of Mrs. Trahan follows:]
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mrs. Trahan. Thank you, Ranking Member. I yield back.
Mr. Pallone. Thank you.
And I yield now to the biggest champion for the University
of Michigan, Mrs. Dingell.
Mrs. Dingell. Go, Blue!
Thank you, Ranking Member Pallone.
Before I dive in, I want to echo the ranking member's
earlier comments.
National Institutes of Health funding is vital. I have
heard from countless researchers in my district who are
terrified about what this means for the future of biomedical
research in the United States.
This action by the Trump administration threatens to undo
the progress our Nation's premier research universities have
made and will stump future scientific breakthroughs.
I am hopeful my colleagues will join us to fight for
colleges and universities to receive adequate funding from NIH
to support their vital research missions.
But since this hearing is on the NIL, I want to turn to
college sports.
College sports are the lifeblood of so many communities
across the country. As someone who represents a significant
college athletic population at schools big and small, I am
committed to crafting Federal legislation that ensures all
college athletes are heard, protected, and prioritized.
I am lucky to have both the University of Michigan and
Eastern Michigan University, two very different schools we have
got to protect for their phenomenal college athletic programs
and their expertise.
I want to thank the chair for holding this hearing. With
everything happening in college sports since the last time we
convened on this topic, I think it is important to start these
conversations early this Congress.
I look forward to working with Chair Bilirakis, Ranking
Member Schakowsky, my colleague Mrs. Trahan, and other members
of this committee on Federal legislation that both protects and
empowers college athletes.
This isn't just about the top athletes on the top 40
football and basketball teams. We need to get this right for
more than 500,000 college athletes nationwide.
[The prepared statement of Mrs. Dingell follows:]
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mrs. Dingell. And with that, I yield back.
Mr. Bilirakis. Gentlelady yields back.
And now I am going to introduce our witnesses.
I really appreciate you all being here. I know that it
could be intimidating, and sometimes you give your views in
public and become a little controversial. You are here
representing yourselves more than your university. But I get a
lot of opinions from athletes and coaches, but they don't want
to come and testify. So I just give you so much credit for
doing this.
So hopefully we will learn. We need to hear from you.
Rather than us talking, we need to hear from you so we get a
good bill. We need a good bill, and we have to work in a
bipartisan fashion to get a good bill.
So without further ado, I introduce the witnesses.
Ms. Emily Cole, All-American track athlete, Duke
University, class of 2024.
Thank you for being here. We appreciate you so much.
Mr. Justin Falcinelli. He is a former college athlete,
Clemson University--so you are representing the ACC--and vice
president of the College Football Players Association.
Welcome.
Mr. Anthony Egbo, a football athlete, Abilene Christian
University, class of 2024.
Thanks for being here, Anthony.
And then we have Mr. Josh Whitman, who is an athletic
director at the University of Illinois. Go, Illini! And we have
got an Illinois Member of Congress here, our ranking member, so
she will be happy about that.
And then we want to introduce--I am going to yield to
Representative Fry on this introduction--but a great coach and
an outstanding individual and comes from a great family.
So I really appreciate you being here, sir, representing
yourself, but you are also representing to a certain extent the
SEC.
So thank you very much.
I am going to yield to Representative Fry to introduce our
guest.
Mr. Fry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I am honored to introduce the head football coach of the
South Carolina Gamecocks, Shane Beamer.
Good to see you, sir.
Since taking over as head coach of the University of South
Carolina in December of 2020, Coach Beamer has led the program
to historic success, securing the most wins through four
seasons of any coach in the Carolina football history.
This past season, Coach Beamer was his most successful yet,
guiding the Gamecocks to nine wins, including a win over
Clemson University--I am sorry, sir--and earning the SEC Coach
of the Year honors from both the Associated Press and the USA
Today.
You know I had to do this, right?
As the son of legendary coach Frank Beamer, Shane has been
immersed in college athletics his entire life--which I think is
really important to guide us in this discussion today--bringing
a deep understanding of the game and the evolving landscape of
college sports.
This fall he will open up the 2025 season against Virginia
Tech, his alma mater and the program that his father built,
where I fully expect that he will put on full display the SEC
dominance in this nonconference matchup.
Coach Beamer is uniquely positioned to navigate the
challenges of NIL and the ever-changing world of college
athletics, ensuring that his players are prepared for success
both on and off the field.
And I will say because all coaches seem to be players'
coaches, Coach Beamer has made it a hallmark of his coaching
career to be really focused on the players. And so I think that
vantage point is really important today.
I want to thank him for his time today and look forward to
his testimony.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you. Gentleman yields back.
Now I will recognize Ms. Cole.
You are recognized for 5 minutes for your testimony. Again,
thank you for being here.
STATEMENTS OF EMILY COLE, ALL-AMERICAN TRACK ATHLETE, DUKE
UNIVERSITY 2024; JUSTIN FALCINELLI, VICE PRESIDENT, COLLEGE
FOOTBALL PLAYERS ASSOCIATION; ANTHONY EGBO, Jr., DIRECTOR,
WILDCAST CLUB, ABILENE CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY; JOSH WHITMAN,
DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS, UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS; AND SHANE
BEAMER, HEAD FOOTBALL COACH, UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA
STATEMENT OF EMILY COLE
Ms. Cole. Perfect. Thank you so much. I am honored to be
here.
Chairman Guthrie, Ranking Member Pallone, Chairman
Bilirakis, Ranking Member Schakowsky, and distinguished members
of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade,
thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today on
the important topic of how name, image, and likeness, NIL, is
reshaping college athletics. And happy Mardi Gras.
Some of you might know me as the Duke runner who went viral
for documenting my weeklong journey getting a knot out of my
hair after running in the rain. While this moment may have been
lighthearted, it highlights the immense reach of college
athletics, reach that was once largely limited to sports like
men's football and basketball but is now extended to female and
nonrevenue sports, thanks largely to the power of social media.
When I arrived at Duke in 2019, I was eager to pursue both
my academic and athletic goals. But just as my journey was
beginning, the world came to a standstill. During my freshman
year, the pandemic hit.
After spending months at home, unsure if we would have a
cross country season or even return to campus, I decided to
take a gap semester to pursue a 2-year-long project.
That fall I began writing my first book, ``The Players
Plate: An Unorthodox Guide to Sports Nutrition,'' which was
inspired by my experience falling into a 2-day coma at 17 years
old due to overhydration and a lack of sodium.
Conveniently, its publication aligned with the new NIL
laws, officially making me the first NCAA athlete to write and
profit from a book using my NIL.
At the same time, my athletic career was taking off. I
qualified for the NCAA championships for the first time, earned
All-American honors, and qualified to compete in the U.S. Track
and Field Championships, where I had the opportunity to race
against my idols.
These experiences allowed me to build a personal brand
rooted in my passions and positioned me at the forefront of how
Olympic and female athletes could benefit from the new NIL
policies.
While much of the NIL conversation centered around football
and basketball, my journey demonstrated how athletes in sports
without large TV advertising contracts who had long been
overlooked in these discussions could also leverage their brand
in impactful ways.
Today I have over 700,000 followers across platforms, and I
strive to use my position to inspire young athletes to fuel
their bodies well, chase their dreams, and build the confidence
they need to pursue their goals in sport, education, and life.
While I initially negotiated all my brand deals on my own,
I quickly realized this was not sustainable amid my academic
and sport responsibilities. That is when I connected with an
agency who already had experience with college athletes, and I
have worked with them ever since.
I am incredibly grateful for the many ways they have helped
me navigate this evolving industry. With their support, I have
secured multiple five-figure deals with brands such as
Therabody, Dick's Sporting Goods, Marriott Hotels, Gatorade,
and H&R Block.
Ensuring that future athletes are protected in these
partnerships is essential to guaranteeing that they have the
same positive experience that I did.
I was also fortunate to be a part of the inaugural NCAA x
Meta NIL Empower Program, which provides education and
resources to female athletes on how to build a brand and
maximize their NIL opportunities.
Since then, I have continued to serve as a mentor for the
program, helping ensure the next generation of female athletes
is equipped with the knowledge and support they need to
confidently navigate this new era.
The value of NIL is undeniable, and its impact on college
athletics his only begun to be understood. Thoughtful
implementation is key to ensuring that all athletes are
protected, have equal access to opportunities, and continue to
receive the education that will serve them long after their
playing careers.
It is essential to establish uniform rules for all student-
athletes as opposed to the current patchwork of State laws. At
the same time, we must protect Olympic and nonrevenue sports
from unintended consequences that could threaten their future.
While NIL has created incredible opportunities, classifying
college athletes as employees is not the right path forward.
Doing so could put nonrevenue sports, women's sports, and small
universities at risk due to financial constraints.
Instead, we must find solutions that allow athletes to
benefit from their NIL while preserving the integrity and
accessibility of college athletics.
Furthermore, the minimum number of sports required for
Division I status must remain unchanged. Reducing this
requirement would lead to widespread cuts in nonrevenue sports,
eliminating countless scholarships and stripping athletes like
myself of the opportunity to pursue a college education through
their sport.
In May 2024, I graduated from Duke with a degree in
computer science and a minor in economics. Since then, I have
continued my brand partnerships while also taking on a part-
time role as an associate at a venture capital firm where I
combine my expertise in brand building, health tech, and
women's sports to drive innovation and investment in these
spaces.
I will forever be grateful for all that the new NIL laws
have made possible for me, and I am excited to see how they
continue to evolve with the help of Congress.
Thank you again for allowing me to share my story with you
all today.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Cole follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much.
Now I will recognize Mr. Falcinelli for your 5 minutes of
testimony.
STATEMENT OF JUSTIN FALCINELLI
Mr. Falcinelli. Thank you, Chairman Bilirakis, Ranking
Member Schakowsky, and members of the Subcommittee on Commerce,
Manufacturing, and Trade. I appreciate the opportunity to
testify here today on behalf of the College Football Players
Association, or CFBPA.
My name is Justin Falcinelli, and I am the institution's
vice president. I joined the CFBPA in the fall of 2021 as its
first alumni member, and I have spent the past 4 years working
to build an independent, voluntary, nonpartisan, member-driven
players association that brings together past, present, and
future college football players from all levels of play.
I played college football at Clemson University from 2014
to 2018. I was a 2-year starter, first-team All-ACC center,
two-time College Football Playoff national champion, and
recipient of Clemson's top male scholar-athlete award.
Additionally, I completed my Master's of Business
Administration in 2018 in the middle of my final season and
never lost to South Carolina.
We are, of course, going to talk about many important
topics today: NIL, the House Settlement, of which I am a class
member, revenue sharing, the possibility of athlete employment,
collectives, collective bargaining, the transfer portal, and
much, much more.
As a former athlete who competed at the highest level
athletically and academically and who has spent the past 4
years speaking with current college football players and
helping to educate them on these very topics, I am prepared to
answer all questions you may have about these important issues.
In general, at the CFBPA our position is that the problems
of college football are not so large that they cannot be solved
by those within the industry--namely, administrators, coaches,
and players--collectively through players associations.
A collectively bargained model for college athletics would
be protected from legal challenges and create the sustainable
solution needed by all within the industry.
Most importantly, collective bargaining and enforcement of
a collective bargaining agreement by the CFBPA would allow us
to solve the festering health and safety problems which
continue to plague the sport of college football.
I am going to focus on two such issues for the remainder of
my testimony, and I hope the subcommittee will give these
important issues the weight they deserve in the question-and-
answer portion of our hearing.
Issues of compensation and player free agency are
important, but I would submit that they are not more important
than the health and safety and welfare of college athletes.
The NCAA was created over a hundred years ago with the
primary focus of protecting the health, safety, and welfare of
college football players after a season in which over 30
college football players died playing the game. Such a problem,
among others, in the health and safety realm still exists
today.
Despite the NFL only experiencing one player death this
century, roughly two NCAA football players have died per year
this century. All but one of these deaths occurred in off-
season practices. Research shows how simple practice reforms
would end such deaths in the future.
The NCAA has largely ignored this issue, and where it has
put in place safety guidelines, it has abdicated the
enforcement of those same guidelines. As such, only a truly
independent players association could bring about real
enforcement to make players safer in practice.
Another area I hope we can focus on today is the need for
independent medical care for college football players
nationwide.
Almost every college athlete at almost every institution
knows somebody or has experienced themselves inadequate medical
care. Many athletes have been pushed to return to play before
their body or mind has fully healed by compromised medical
providers within their athletic departments.
A 2019 report by the National Athletic Trainers Association
indicated that 36 percent of athletic trainers reported that
coaches influenced the hiring and firing process for sports
medicine staff in their athletic department.
This is done so a coach can secure a medical staff which
will yield to their decisions regarding medical care. This
often means rushing guys back to play or downplaying the
severity of injuries to players.
We saw a tangible example of this recently in the court
case of our adviser, Dr. Scott Lynch. A Pennsylvania jury
awarded Dr. Lynch $5 million after finding that he had been
fired as head team doctor for Penn State football in
retaliation for complaining about head football coach James
Franklin interfering with medical treatment and return-to-play
decisions.
To this day, the NCAA and Big Ten have remained silent on
the jury verdict and damages against their member institution
Penn State. You do not often hear these stories, as players do
not want to risk their playing time, their scholarships, their
pro careers, or their future coaching careers by speaking out
against their institutions.
For the vast majority of college athletes, these are the
truly pressing issues that affect our ability to compete and
shape the quality of our lives after competition has ended.
Given that the NCAA seems uninterested in policing its
member institutions, it is necessary for new organizations to
step into the void, negotiate collectively bargained rules, and
then enforce those rules.
For coaches and athletic directors who want to do the right
thing, we want to work with you to empower and protect your
athletes and negotiate a more equitable and sustainable future
for college athletics.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Falcinelli follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you. Just in time. Appreciate it very
much.
Mr. Egbo, you are recognized for 5 minutes. Welcome.
STATEMENT OF ANTHONY EGBO, Jr.
Mr. Egbo. Good morning, Chairman, Ranking Member, and
distinguished subcommittee members. My name is Anthony Egbo,
Jr. I am a former football student-athlete at Abilene Christian
University.
I came through the front doors of ACU's football facility
on my own accord as a 5-7, 145-pound defensive back walk-on
hopeful. Half a decade later, my life has completely changed. I
am still short, but that hope eventually turned into a full-
ride scholarship, becoming a 2-year starter, team captain, FCS
Defensive Scholar of the Year, two degrees, including my MBA,
multiple job offers, and a robust network portfolio.
During my time as a student-athlete, I had the opportunity
to immerse myself in student-athlete advocacy, serving as an
officer, vice president, president of my institution's student-
athlete advisory committee, eventually serving as a Division I
representative for the Western Athletic Conference, all of
which culminated in me being voted by my peers as the vice
chair of the NCAA Division I National Student-Athlete Advisory
Committee.
My story is one of opportunity, the kind that defines
college athletics for hundreds of thousands of student-athletes
like me.
I know this hearing is about NIL, so I would like to
briefly share how I benefited from my name, image, and
likeness.
I have had multiple NIL agreements with businesses in and
around my community. One of my favorites was actually a deal
with a local bakery who made the Egbo Sandwich. It was a
sandwich named after me. And yes, it had egg in it. It was
marketed throughout my senior year and in all my games.
My biggest deal, though, was with First Financial Bank. I
became their national brand ambassador, appearing in
commercials, photo shoots, even appearing in stakeholder
meetings.
The professional development and compensation I earned from
those deals embodies everything NIL is supposed to be about.
NIL is a beautiful tool. But, unfortunately, the reality
right now is that NIL is the Wild West. With more than 30 State
NIL laws in litigation, different States and schools within
those States are operating on different playing fields. To put
it simply, everyone is not playing by the same rule book.
As the vice chair of Division I SAAC, I have had the
opportunity to talk to a wide range of student-athletes from
different Division I schools across the country.
If I could sum up two main priorities I heard over and over
again in my conversations, it would be this.
First, student-athletes want uniform NIL rules and clarity.
Without a clear and consistent set of rules, a lot of student-
athletes are fending for themselves. I have heard of student-
athletes getting taken advantage of due to large gray areas
from the lack of clear and enforceable rules.
Uniform rules and clarity are needed to ensure that NIL
fulfills its intended purposes and it is not harmful to the
ones it was created to benefit.
Secondly, student-athletes want to remain student-athletes,
not employees. Employment has a serious potential to evaporate
opportunity and access to college sports outside of the top 5
percent of programs.
In my conversations, I have not talked to a student-athlete
who is anti getting paid, but they overwhelmingly say they do
not want to be employees of their schools.
I am not here to testify because I was an All-American,
big-time SEC football player. I am here because I am the
opposite. I am here before you today to represent guys like me,
the women who compete at schools like mine, those who play in
nonrevenue-generating sports, those who compete at historically
Black colleges and universities, those who play Olympic sports,
and those who are at places that are offering athletics at a
deficit to the university. This is the majority. This is really
what most Division I sports programs are made up of.
I am hopeful that we can work together to ensure college
sports are fair and continue to open the door to opportunities
for countless young people like me.
I am hopeful and actively working on the ways that we can
enhance the student-athlete voice and decision-making influence
inside the structure that we are familiar with. I am hopeful
that opportunities continue to flourish for the student-
athletes of the future.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify. I am
incredibly appreciative of your commitment to shaping policies
that will positively impact the next generation of student-
athletes, and I look forward to the future with optimism.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Egbo follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Bilirakis. Let me just say this. Very well done. And we
really appreciate your contribution. And I would like to meet
with you maybe some other time so we can expand on these
issues. So we really appreciate your input. Thank you.
All right. Next we have the athletic director from the
University of Illinois.
You are recognized for 5 minutes, sir.
STATEMENT OF JOSH WHITMAN
Mr. Whitman. Good morning, Chairman Bilirakis, Ranking
Member Schakowsky, other distinguished members of the
committee. Thank you very much for the opportunity to be with
you today.
My name is Josh Whitman. I recently began my tenth year as
the director of athletics at my alma mater, the University of
Illinois, which is a founding member of both the Big Ten
Conference and the NCAA.
At Illinois, I am responsible for all facets of an
athletics program that supports nearly 500 student-athletes
competing in 21 varsity sports.
As an undergraduate business student at Illinois, I was an
academic All-American football player, and played four seasons
in the NFL.
After attending law school, I clerked on the United States
Court of Appeals and worked briefly here as an attorney in
Washington, DC.
Before returning to Illinois, I spent almost 6 years as the
athletics director at two Division III institutions.
For the last 20 years, I have dedicated my career to
working at the intersection of school and sport. For thousands
of student-athletes, sports opened doors to a life-changing
experience in education. I am a proud product of this system,
and I am driven to continue making these same experiences
available to today's student-athletes.
Today, college sports is experiencing a period of intense
change that is unlike anything in its history. Efforts underway
to reform and modernize college athletics are in many ways
overdue, as the NCAA has not always moved with needed urgency.
Nonetheless, progress made in the last 20 years is
indisputable. Division I schools now administer the Student-
Athlete Opportunity Fund, which provides millions of dollars in
direct support to student-athletes and their families. In
addition, schools can now grant nearly $6,000 annually to
student-athletes as incentives for academic progress and
graduation.
And in 2021, NCAA rules changed to allow student-athletes
to monetize use of their own name, image, and likeness, with
hundreds of millions of dollars now flowing through the system
and into the hands of our student-athletes.
For almost a decade, Autonomy 4 institutions have offered
additional protections for student-athletes, protections that
recently became mandated across all of Division I. Schools
cannot reduce or cancel scholarships based on injury or
performance, and institutions must fund athletics-related
medical care for at least 2 years following conclusion of a
student-athlete's collegiate career.
But the biggest changes are yet to come. In April, we are
hoping for final judicial approval of what would be a historic
settlement: three class-action lawsuits, commonly referred to
as the House Settlement.
Under its terms, schools will have the option to distribute
more than $20 million annually to student-athletes, resulting
in tens of billions of dollars flowing directly to student-
athletes over the next decade.
The challenge we face today is the environment in which
these changes are occurring, highlighted by increasingly active
State legislatures and outside entities advancing their own
agendas. We now have an expanding patchwork of State laws that
are frequently being adopted to create competitive advantage
for their hometown institutions.
At the same time, the efforts to recast student-athletes as
institutional employees would be catastrophic for the vast
majority of the NCAA's membership, likely resulting in lost
opportunities for thousands of student-athletes.
To preserve the American collegiate sports model that has
benefited millions of students, families, and communities for
generations, we need help from Congress to pass comprehensive
bipartisan legislation (1) that codifies various benefits and
protections for student-athletes; (2) that establishes a
national NIL and revenue-sharing framework largely in line with
what is contemplated by the House Settlement; (3) that preempts
State laws that have increasingly become weaponized to provide
competitive advantages to hometown institutions; (4) that
provides a limited antitrust safe harbor that will allow us
needed flexibility to create a reasonable and enforceable
regulatory framework governing such things that are as basic as
eligibility rules; and (5) that clarifies that the relationship
between student-athletes and their institutions is not that of
an employer and an employee.
When meeting in the past, Congress has helped advance the
interests of the college athletics enterprise, an institution
that is uniquely and proudly American. We again need your help
to provide us the tools needed to modernize our ecosystem while
at the same time protecting our student-athletes and the
pillars that are central to our model.
I am eager to continue working with you to achieve these
noble objectives.
Thank you. Look forward to answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Whitman follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much. Excellent testimony. I
appreciate it very much.
And now I will recognize Coach Beamer.
Congratulations on a great season, Coach, and thanks for
being here. Appreciate it.
Mr. Beamer. Thank you very much.
Mr. Bilirakis. You are recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF SHANE BEAMER
Mr. Beamer. Appreciate you saying that.
Good morning. My name is Shane Beamer, and I am the head
football coach at the University of South Carolina. It is a
privilege and absolute honor to be here with you this morning
to speak to you about the future of college sports.
I am going into my 26th year in coaching, and outside of my
family, developing college football student-athletes has been
my life's work.
As Mr. Fry alluded to, my father was the head football
coach at Virginia Tech for 29 years. I myself played high
school football and baseball and went on to play football at
the collegiate level, competing for a football national
championship alongside my father.
The experiences that I have had as both a student-athlete
and a coach have fundamentally shaped me into the man that I am
today.
We are at a critical crossroads in college athletics, and
quite simply, we need your help. The system is long overdue
change. The current situation is unsustainable. A national
bipartisan Federal law will provide equal opportunity for all
student-athletes to benefit from NIL and create a uniform
standard to ensure we are all playing by the same rules.
I believe we can all agree that the college student-athlete
experience is worth preserving. A college education is
invaluable, especially given the reality that less than 2
percent of college student-athletes advance to professional
sports careers.
A Federal law codifying the settlement will maintain an
education-based model for college sports while ensuring the
opportunity for student-athletes to earn a degree and the tools
necessary to be successful in life after sports.
Action by this Congress will also provide much-needed
stability essential to college sports and expand current
benefits enjoyed by many student-athletes: free tuition, room
and board, educational grants, academic support and tutoring,
medical and mental health support, nutritional support, life
skills development, superior coaching and training, and
extended medical coverage.
If you don't act, college sports will be destroyed by
never-ending litigation and conflicting State laws. And
designating student-athletes as employees is not the right
path, because an employment model will drastically reduce the
number of sports a school is able to offer.
In contrast, a Federal law will guarantee the future of
Olympic sports that help develop future Olympians for our
country.
In sum, college sports is at an impasse, and we need your
help. The stakes are high, and the future of our Nation's
student-athletes will be decided in the near future.
Thank you for your time and your consideration of a topic
that is personally so important to me and hundreds of thousands
of student-athletes.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Beamer follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much, Coach. I appreciate it
very much. I think we are going to get some consensus this
year. I really do. And I know that time is of the essence. So I
appreciate that very much.
I will recognize myself for 5 minutes of questioning.
Coach Beamer, the transfer portal has drastically affected
college athletics, especially football, as you know, of course.
In your experience, how has the transfer portal impacted
your team from a planning and competitive standpoint, but also
your student-athletes' ability to get a robust education? And
how do you see the new revenue-sharing model changing the
current transfer portal dynamics?
Mr. Beamer. Thank you.
We have certainly benefited from the transfer portal. I
won't sit here today and say that we haven't. Now, have we lost
players in the portal that we did not want to lose? Absolutely.
But we have benefited from the portal, without a doubt. So it
has been a benefit for us in so many ways.
There are areas of the portal that certainly can be
improved. I don't necessarily like what it maybe teaches young
men and women at this stage of their lives, and I don't like
some of the impacts that the transfer portal has on their
academic progress.
Frankly, so many male and female student-athletes when they
transfer to another college, they lose academic credits
potentially going from school to school, which will impact
their ability to graduate, and ultimately, this is about
education.
And since I have been the head football coach since spring
of 2021, we have 80 young men that have graduated from our
football program since I became the head coach in December of
'20 from the spring semester on. So it is still about
education. There are so many great things about the transfer
portal, but not if it affects their opportunity to graduate and
get an education.
And in regards to the new revenue-sharing model, I think it
is a fantastic thing, because (1) it will provide opportunities
for all student-athletes; as well, it will level the playing
field, if you will, in a lot of ways; and it will allow all
student-athletes to capitalize on their name, image, and
likeness through revenue sharing and adding a piece of what
they deserve because of what they bring to our universities.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
Ms. Cole, you are a prime example of how an athlete at a
nonrevenue-generating sport can successfully take advantage of
NIL opportunities.
When the rules changed in 2021, what challenges did you
approach when you navigated the NIL landscape? And I know if
you can elaborate a little bit, because I think you covered it
to a certain extent in your testimony.
Ms. Cole. Yes. Absolutely. Thank you so much, Chairman
Bilirakis.
So whenever I, like, first started having to navigate the
new world, the timing, as I mentioned, landed really well with
my book having just published. And so I did a lot of initial
negotiations on my own and kind of had my parents look over
contracts and make sure that there weren't any terms in there
that I didn't want to have happen.
But after my platforms grew for over the next year, I ended
up working with this agency, and they really helped me navigate
the space, because it was--I mean, everyone that I interacted
with, whether they were at a huge corporation or with
universities, a lot of times they were asking me questions
about the NIL space, because it was all so new and everyone was
just trying to figure it out as we went.
So I think that was probably the biggest challenge, was
just that it was so ill defined that we were all kind of trying
to figure it out as we went.
Mr. Bilirakis. You said that an agency, you contacted an
agency. Was that a collective?
Ms. Cole. No. So I have an agent that represents me in all
of my NIL deals, and I got connected to them, and they already
had experience working with other college athletes.
So I had a conversation with them and, like, really felt
that I could trust them and then had a lot of conversations
with athletes they had represented in the past and felt very
comfortable working with them to represent me in all of the
negotiations with companies from my NIL deals.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much. Appreciate it.
Mr. Whitman, I know I don't have a lot of time, but I want
to ask this question.
Mr. Whitman, the last thing we want is for nonrevenue-
generating sports to be affected by the ever-evolving NIL
landscape.
How is the University of Illinois anticipating the changes,
like roster limits and revenue sharing, to ensure these
programs are protected? So we want to protect the Olympic
sports, the gymnastics, the wrestling, what have you.
Please.
Mr. Whitman. Thank you, Chairman.
At Illinois we have no plans to eliminate any of our
varsity sport programs. As I mentioned, we sponsor 21 sports,
roughly 500 student-athletes.
In fact, we intend to invest more heavily into the
experience of our student-athletes. Every one of our sports
will see increased scholarship opportunities. That is one of
the byproducts of the new House Settlement, is the chance to
provide additional scholarships above and beyond what NCAA
rules currently permit. We intend to take full advantage of
that chance in each of the 21 sports that we sponsor.
We also intend to see more widespread use of NIL throughout
our program, while student-athletes in more sports are
receiving more NIL opportunities in the new paradigm than they
do under the current NIL regime.
It is important at the University of Illinois that we
continue to advance the interests of all of our sport programs.
We have a very proud history across the board with our student-
athletes.
Last Olympics we were really proud to see six former Illini
competing on the Olympic stage, brought home two medals. And
certainly that is a tradition that is unique to American
college athletics and one that we want to continue to champion
in Champaign-Urbana.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
And now I will yield to the ranking member of the
subcommittee, Ms. Schakowsky, a fellow Illinoian--not me but
the AD. My chief of staff is from Illinois as well.
But anyway, I yield back. I yield the time to the ranking
member.
You are recognized.
Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you.
I wanted to ask a question of Mr. Falcinelli.
Is that kind of right?
Mr. Falcinelli. Yes.
Ms. Schakowsky. OK. The way I said it.
And very proud to be an alum of the University of Illinois
as well.
I wanted to ask you, we are talking about what sports needs
and how we can make it safer and better. But I wanted to follow
up on what I asked in the beginning and Congresswoman Kelly
mentioned as well, the fact that there are cuts in the amount
of money that is going to universities.
And I am wondering if you have thought about that and how
that will impact what we are thinking about today, making sure
that there is----
Mr. Falcinelli. Yes. So I know my alma mater, Clemson,
would be looking at a pretty large hit. Clemson is a pretty
renowned research university. So they had $25 million in
funding in 2024 from NIH. So that would be a pretty impactful
hit to their wallet at the same time that they are dealing with
the outcomes of the House Settlement.
And even for little old Clemson, which has $150 million a
year in athletics revenue, they are trying to reconcile a lot
right now. And for schools without the good fortune to have
that sizeable athletics budget, we believe for all levels of
play that collective bargaining is the answer for them to find
the solution that is going to best fit their fiscal realities.
The House Settlement clearly lays out that any collective
bargaining agreement negotiated with the athletes can ignore
the rules set forth by the settlement. So to any institutions
out there that are concerned with all of the NIH cuts as well
as the impacts of the House Settlement, we ask you to negotiate
with your athletes and work out the situation that best fits
you.
Ms. Schakowsky. Are you concerned, though, that there is
going to be enough money to really have robust student-athletes
if money is really taken off of the universities?
Mr. Falcinelli. Oh, absolutely. And potentially the
universities could look into using athletic revenues to help
compensate for some of these losses in research funding. And
that is something you would be able to negotiate through
collective bargaining.
Athletes understand and often take part in majors that are
doing this research. It would be important to them to be able
to continue to do so, and I am sure we would love to see that
on the negotiating table.
Ms. Schakowsky. What do you think is the most important
thing that is important for student-athletes in terms of
reform?
Mr. Falcinelli. Yes, as I said in my testimony, something
near and dear to me is health and safety. Athletes are often
afraid to speak out on the issue because they are beholden to
the will of their coaches, their university, and can risk their
playing time, their pro careers, their scholarships, their
medical care, their potential future in the sport if they want
to go on to coach. Your most likely avenue to do so is at the
institution you played at.
And so in these issues, where trainers are pushing players
back to play too soon or being dishonest about the severity of
your injury, you have no one to turn to to advocate for you to
help push the team doctor to get you the MRI that you need to
diagnose your injury. Players are without representation.
And this is why we so strongly believe in the need for
independent players associations where players can have a rep
who is not subject to the extreme pressures of college
athletics, who is there solely for their best interest, that
can represent them and enforce the rules that are negotiated in
a CBA and hold institutions accountable.
Ms. Schakowsky. Well, I think it is very important.
Are you present on campus in your work?
Mr. Falcinelli. We are present at institutions around the
country and are actively doing on-the-ground organizing.
Ms. Schakowsky. OK. Thank you very much. And I yield back.
Mr. Bilirakis. The gentlelady yields back.
I now recognize the chairman of the full committee, Mr.
Guthrie. And I appreciate you making this a priority.
Mr. Guthrie. Well, thank you. We need to make it a priority
because we have got a lot of work to do.
Mr. Bilirakis. Yes, absolutely.
Mr. Guthrie. And I appreciate it.
I guess, getting to my colleague's previous question that
said will cuts to NIH and overhead going to universities. And I
think you quoted a number coming from Clemson. I think you all
prepared for this meeting being an NIH meeting instead of NIL.
But will that hurt athletics?
I think that if we are sending money to NIH and the
overhead is going to universities and somehow getting to
athletics, if that is what the nature of that question was,
then we absolutely should be taking a look at this.
Now, Harvard has a $50 billion endowment, gets 70 percent
facilities and administration of some of the grants. I mean, we
should want grants to go to saving childhood cancer,
childhood--all these other things that are moving forward. And
hopefully some of the overhead is not going--I hope you didn't
intend that to say this is going to our athletes in sports,
because that absolutely shouldn't be.
So, Mr. Beamer, the answer to the question just before,
Coach, players being put into precarious positions when they
are injured. Do you--or do you know of any of your colleagues
that have ever--I know you love your players--have you ever
looked at a player--I think you probably sometimes try to
prevent players from going into the field. Do you know of any
instance where a coach knowingly puts a player in a bad
position?
Mr. Beamer. First of all, thank you for you comments
earlier as well. And before my dad was the head football coach
at Virginia Tech, he was a Murray State Racer. So you say ``Go,
Hilltoppers,'' and I say ``Go, Racers.''
Mr. Guthrie. I know. We love the Racers too.
Mr. Beamer. Right back at you.
No, sir, I do not. I can't speak for other programs that I
haven't been a part of. But I can say as the head football
coach at the University of South Carolina, I truly love and
care for the players that I coach, to the point where I haven't
let guys go back and play when they have been cleared by a
trainer in some instances.
I have never once directed our trainer to put a player out
there before he is ready to play. When the trainers say he is
cleared and ready, we put him back out there. And again, I
can't speak for the schools, but not to my knowledge.
Mr. Guthrie. Well, thanks.
So being fans of all conferences, Kentucky has ACC and SEC
schools and others, as we just mentioned, in the great
traditions of college football.
Coach, how do we find the balance between preserving what
we know college football to be, but also allowing our athletes
to have the opportunity to earn money with their name, image,
and likeness?
Mr. Beamer. Absolutely. I think everyone in here can agree
that sports bring both sides together and unites both sides as
well. And I believe that we are all passionate about that as
well.
And certainly every player on our team would tell you that
I am an advocate for them being able to maximize and capitalize
on every opportunity they have as student-athletes at the
University of South Carolina.
We are in the capital city of South Carolina, where we are
the only show in town in the city of Columbia. So we have a
great following that presents so many opportunities for all of
our student-athletes, not just football, but women's basketball
with Dawn Staley and on and on and on.
So there are fantastic opportunities for our student-
athletes to be able to capitalize on their name, image, and
likeness. But at the same time, education has still got to be
at the forefront, without a doubt, where all of our student-
athletes leave the University of South Carolina with a degree.
I mentioned in my opening statement the number of student-
athletes that go on to play pro sports. And that is critical
for us going forward.
I will use the example of LaNorris Sellers. He is our
starting quarterback. He will be a Heisman Trophy candidate
next season. He will have an opportunity to play in the NFL. He
is currently compensated very well from a name, image, and
likeness standpoint.
But on his own, he has already reached out to companies in
the city of Columbia about doing a summer internship with them,
unbeknownst to me. But here is a young man that understands
that football is not going to last forever and wants to do
everything in his power to take advantage of the educational
experience in Columbia also.
Mr. Guthrie. OK. Thank you. Thanks, Coach.
So, Mr. Egbo, my cousin went to Abilene Christian.
So what are your thoughts? I know now it is going to be
revenue shares. Schools are going to help create the
collective. We are probably going to have to have some
exemption if they are not going to be employees to say that,
because obviously if you are getting paid from the gate.
So what is your view of the employee relationship with the
university versus being a student at the university?
Mr. Egbo. Thank you for that question.
I think it is a question that is really at the heart of a
lot of student-athletes' minds right now. Being at an
institution and an FCS football institution like my own--how do
I say this? It is hard to fathom how that would look at an
institution like ours.
Speaking specifically to the coach-player relationship, an
employer-employee relationship, those that play ball know that
inherently a coach is a role model, they are a mentor, they are
somebody that invests. That is not inherently what an employer
is.
An employer is more focused on performance. A coach
inherently is somebody that you look up to, somebody that can
pour into you, somebody that can help you become the best 35-
year-old version of yourself.
And so at the core of it, that is what sports is also
doing, it is molding young men and women to be future leaders,
to be the best fathers, husbands, wives, future leaders in this
country. And I think that is in principle what has an
opportunity to be shaken, is that foundation, with an employer-
employee relationship.
Besides that, it is just not sustainable from a university
standpoint. And I have done a lot of work as far as engaging in
conversation about this specifically. I have had a multitude of
conversations with my president and different university
administration on, hey, what would this look like for
institutions like ours? And it is just not sustainable besides
the principle.
Mr. Guthrie. My time is up. I have gone over my time. So I
appreciate that. I appreciate your answer.
I yield back.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much. The gentleman yields
back.
I will now recognize my friend from the great State of
Florida, a fellow Floridian, but we didn't go to the same
school.
Sorry you didn't go to Florida, Kathy.
Kathy Castor, you are recognized.
Ms. Castor. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
There is nothing like college sports. It is beloved in
America. It builds cohesion among the community and alumni and
students and great pride in your institution. You admire the
skill of all the student-athletes and then the care and concern
of the coaches and support staff.
But it is also big business. I think right now college
sports generates over $18 billion all told. But it wasn't until
that 2021 U.S. Supreme Court case where they granted student-
athletes the rights to their own name, image, and likeness.
So this is still new, and the courts, universities,
athletes, and Congress are really trying to figure out how to
navigate the landscape.
So this hearing comes as we await another court decision on
the multibillion-dollar settlement between the NCAA, the Power
5 conferences, and the student-athletes. And that settlement is
going to resolve multiple lawsuits and better set the rules of
the game going forward.
And, Chair Bilirakis, I know that you care, and you have
been talking to me and other Members about trying to bring some
guardrails. And I am interested in working with you on that.
But I just do not think we can ignore the bigger picture
right now of what is happening in higher education with the
illegal shutdown of Federal funds, grant moneys that flow to
students and educators, the wrench thrown into research at
higher ed institutions by Elon Musk at the direction of the
President.
I fear for the fallout for all students and at the
University of Florida and at the University of South Florida
and at FSU and at UCF, research funding, and then the slashing
of student aid, of student financial aid.
I think we are going to be in a quandary here. And I just
couldn't let this moment pass without speaking up about this.
NIL is very important, but there is a bigger picture here,
and it goes right to the heart of the economic security of all
students and all of our institutions of higher learning.
That said, Ms. Cole, I am so impressed with your pathway in
life. You were a student at one of the Nation's top research
universities. And yes, they are crying out about the NIH and
scientific funding quandary.
But let's put this in context. Can you discuss your
research experience and that of you and your classmates that
you were able to have at the collegiate level and what that has
done for your professional growth?
Ms. Cole. Yes, absolutely. Thank you so much for the
question, Congresswoman.
Honestly, I did do some research with the more lower-level
education communities in North Carolina hoping to provide more
culturally relevant curriculum within computer science. So I
know how important it is, I have witnessed how important it is.
But I am prepared here to speak on the future of NIL in
college athletics, so----
Ms. Castor. OK. Then let me ask you more about that.
But let me say, the folks in the Research Triangle in North
Carolina and at all the research institutions and at colleges
large and small, are crying out for help.
And, fortunately, the courts have weighed in on these
illegal shutdowns of Federal funding, and we brace ourselves
for the Republican budget that is going to come and really take
a hatchet to student financial aid and Pell grants.
But back on this topic.
I am very concerned with Title IX and what NIL is doing to
build inequities. We have worked so hard over the years to
ensure there is equity between female and male athletes.
You said that you really see this as an opportunity for
students when it comes to the nonrevenue sports, small
colleges, Olympic sports. But what is the solution when it
comes to parity between men and women?
Ms. Cole. I mean, obviously, parity between men's and
women's sports is paramount. And seeing the exponential growth
that has happened, especially in the past year--I mean, having
the national women's basketball game have more viewership than
the men's, and then finally achieving gender parity in the
Olympics. I think it is extremely important. But I am not able
to speak on the actual implementation of the laws of how that
has happened.
Ms. Castor. OK. So that is up to us, Mr. Chairman, to
ensure that NIL doesn't warp all of the hard work that we have
made to build opportunities for men and women alike in sports.
I yield back. Thank you very much.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you so very much.
And now I will recognize the vice chairman of the full
committee.
And you are uniquely qualified to ask these questions being
from Boise State. You are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Fulcher. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I
appreciate the tie Mr. Whitman has on. It is Boise State Bronco
colors. We are glad to see that. But also Florida colors, if I
have got that right, and probably Illinois is in there
somewhere, I am guessing.
Mr. Whitman. Probably.
Mr. Fulcher. Yes. OK.
Question for Mr. Egbo. As mentioned, I am a Boise State
University alum. They are in my district, as well as the
University of Idaho, Idaho State University. But they in the
football and basketball arena have been very competitive, but
they are not of the same size and scope of the large schools.
And so I would like to get your take on this.
Under the House case, the revenue sharing cap is up to
$20.5 million. Well, that is more than the entire budget for
Boise State or University of Idaho or Idaho State or, I am
assuming, Abilene Christian University.
And so just in terms of scope, how is this going to work?
Is this going to be--can this be fairly applied? Can the
smaller schools maintain their competitiveness with the larger
schools under this revenue share cap system?
Mr. Egbo. If I could get this answer right, I will probably
get a raise from my AD.
But I think the first thing is having clear rules. I think
the first step is leveling the playing field as far as what is
permissible, what is not, what is the standard, everybody being
on the same page, so that schools like the schools you
mentioned and our school can sit down and say, ``OK, this is
the standard across the board, and this is what we can kind of
build and strategize for how we can compete in this new age.''
But I think with the gray areas that are implemented right
now, it is very hard to start that strategic process.
Mr. Fulcher. Thank you, Mr. Egbo.
And, Mr. Beamer, I would like to go to you. If you have a
comment on that, I would ask for your comment on that same
question.
But I would also like to follow up. I am going to give you
a two-part here and let you run.
Realizing that the objective of NIL is to recognize rewards
from the student-athletes for their contributions, do you see
unintended consequences? And if so, what bothers you the most
about possible unintended consequences of what we are trying to
do?
Mr. Beamer. Thank you for the question.
I think NIL, as it was initially implemented in 2021, the
way it is meant to be, I think, is very good. I think in a lot
of ways what name, image, and likeness has turned into in so
many situations is pay-for-play, and that is very much because
of the fact that it is not as regulated, in my mind, as it
should be.
There is an issue of agents in the NIL world. That is
another issue in regards to how it is regulated and is
everything on the up-and-up. That is an unintended consequence
that I think has come certainly from NIL, without a doubt.
Mr. Fulcher. Thank you for that.
I would like to go to Mr. Whitman. I have just got about a
little over a minute left.
But I would like to talk with you and get your feedback on
Federal preemptive standards. I have heard from the Idaho
schools the concerns over enforcement burdens when it comes to
the patchwork of some of the State and DC NIL laws and the need
for Federal preemption.
Without Federal preemptive standards, I could see a
situation arising where State law conflicts with the terms of
the settlement, which is still pending approval. But how would
an institution have to adjust its strategy if this was the
case?
Mr. Whitman. Thank you for the question.
I think you are thinking about it exactly right. There is
that possibility, where States will pass legislation that
conflicts with the terms of the settlement in an effort to
create competitive advantage.
And again, that is what we have started to see with more
frequency across the country, is a race for States to find ways
to give their hometown schools an edge.
We have seen that in States like Missouri and Arkansas,
where they now allow NIL payments to high school athletes who
have signed letters of intent to compete at in-State
institutions.
We have seen it at States where they have offered State tax
breaks for student-athlete NIL income.
We have seen it in certain States where they have provided
caps on how much money agents can make from student-athletes,
which then disincentivizes the best agents from working in
those States.
And ultimately what we are here to discuss is the role that
Congress can play in trying to create that level playing field
and avoid putting schools in situations where they have to
choose between complying with a Federal court order and
ultimately with State law.
And we understand that in this environment that conflict
can arise, and ultimately only one body has the power and the
authority to solve that for us, and that is Congress.
Mr. Fulcher. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do have some
followup questions. I will do that in writing.
Thank you for the time. I yield back.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Very
good.
Mr. Soto, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Soto. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Coming from Florida, college football is about as popular
as sunshine and low taxes, right? At the risk of alienating you
a little bit, Mr. Chairman, I am going to start out with an FSU
story.
Mr. Bilirakis. So you recognize that Florida is the Free
State. Is that correct?
Mr. Soto. Absolutely.
So when I was in the State senate, FSU was heading towards
a college championship, and a shocking story had happened.
Jameis Winston, who was on his way to become a Heisman Trophy
winner and lead his team to the championship, was accused and
arrested of a small theft. And people thought: How could this
possibly be happening?
When you look further into it, you see this huge gap that
happened back in the day between some of these star athletes
versus the schools and the boosters and even a lot of the
students.
And that is one thing that name, image, and likeness has
helped balance out a little bit. We don't see some of these
student-athletes living in poverty while they are helping
entertain millions of people. Of course, that is not uniform
throughout, and we know that.
I am proud to represent Central Florida. Go, Knights. Space
U. We are going to work on the football program a little more,
Mr. Chairman, much like UF. We are all working on that stuff.
But we see big programs getting bigger right now and
smaller programs struggling, and that is a concern. More
popular sports like football, men's and women's basketball are
surging in national popularity and in resources. But other,
lesser-known sports are suffering, and we need to recognize
that.
We are also home to EA Sports, which every college football
player in the Nation signed up and got a compensation for being
able to lend their likeness. So that is something that we are
really proud of in our area.
But as was mentioned, we need rules of the road. We have
had many hearings, but no bill passed into law just yet. And so
we have work to do--financial literacy, making sure that our
student-athletes have representation, safeguarding all NCAA
sports, and potentially an independent players association.
Mr. Falcinelli, where do you think we need to go next on
it? Is it a player vote? Is it an NCAA vote? Do we need a law
on this? Where do you hope to go with this next?
Mr. Falcinelli. Yes. The future we see for college
athletics and for college football is a world in which we are
not reliant upon a court ruling or legislation to really set
what is going to happen next, but a world in which the athletes
themselves are empowered to negotiate to shape their own
futures.
We firmly believe that that can be done through collective
bargaining. And whether they are employees or not, we believe
it is collective bargaining that is what matters. If athletes
were made employees tomorrow, they would still face many of the
same issues they are facing now and many more.
And not until they are organized and represented by
independent players associations will they be able to actually
enact the health and safety regulations they need or engage in
further revenue sharing and getting good deals on revenue
sharing.
I would like to point out the EA deal for the NCAA video
game is one of the only group licensing deals in sports to ever
be signed where the athletes had no revenue share on the
royalties from it and were just given a $600 fee for one time
for their appearance in the game or every year they re-up, but
their name, image, and likeness is already guaranteed to be
used whether they re-up or not for the rest of their
eligibility.
And that game has gone on to probably cross over $700
million in revenue this year. It was the top-selling sports
video game of all time. And athletes have not been able to
share in any of that revenue share.
Mr. Soto. Well, we certainly believe in collective
bargaining.
I also want to turn to NIH briefly--we have been talking
about NIL--the National Institutes of Health.
Student health is paramount. We have seen in Florida the
chairman's own university created Gatorade because it is super-
hot to practice in Florida.
We actually make Gatorade in the district, Mr. Chairman. I
am sure you are happy about that.
But we have seen student-athletes pass away after
conditioning, including, unfortunately, at our home university
at UCF back in 2008. A lot of progress has been made since
then, both there and in many other areas.
And one of the NIH grants that UCF has is looking at
digestive and kidney research. One of the biggest issues we see
is dehydration. And then, even if it doesn't happen at the time
of a student-athlete, that dehydration can affect them going
forward as they get older.
Mr. Falcinelli, how important is it for us to continue to
look at hydration for student-athletes and have these NIH
grants that are so important?
Mr. Falcinelli. Oh, it is absolutely important. As Ms. Cole
testified to today, there can be traumatic effects with stuff
that surrounds that.
And as a former football player, hydration, brain damage,
thousands of subconcussive blows every year for 5 years
straight, the research being done into health and safety and
the issues that we are still trying to understand, like CTE, is
incredibly important.
And these are things that we as athletes are going to carry
forward for the rest of our lives. So whether or not we have
the time to enroll on a STEM major and help be part of doing
this research, we are going to be feeling the impacts of this
loss for a long time.
As many of us can attest to--who are former athletes--after
your career is done, your injuries are still there. You still
wake up with pains--your knees, your back, your joints, your
shoulders--that stay with you for life. So continuing to do
important medical research is something that impacts all
athletes.
Mr. Soto. And we will be fighting this Trump administration
freeze and unlawful restrictions to make sure we can continue
to prioritize athlete health.
And I yield back.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much.
Speaking of Gatorade, Dr. Cade invented Gatorade in the
late '60s at the University of Florida. And my mother, Evelyn
Bilirakis, was a TA for Dr. Cade.
So I am sorry, Yes, I just thought that that had to be
said.
We have Representative Harshbarger from the great State of
Tennessee, a Tennessee Vol. And she represents--she knows I am
going to say this--she represents the hometown----
Mrs. Harshbarger. I am just saying.
Mr. Bilirakis [continuing]. Of my favorite all-time coach,
Steve Spurrier.
Mrs. Harshbarger. Yes.
Mr. Bilirakis. So you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mrs. Harshbarger. He is a traitor, just so you know.
Anyway, thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member.
Thank you to the witnesses for being here today.
I have got a lot of worries about this NIL. And I have two
grandsons coming up. They love football, basketball, the whole
9 yards.
I worry about the number of times they can go through the
portal. I worry about the agents and the collectives.
Is there a standardization? Do they need to have some type
of accreditation? And I worry about no limit on outside money.
But I guess my first question, we are going to talk to Mr.
Egbo, because you are a Wildcat. And I went to high school, I
was a Wildcat. And once a Wildcat, always a Wildcat. Just so
you know.
In your opinion, how many times can a student-athlete
transfer without expecting shortfalls to their educational
attainment? Would it be once, twice, five times, eight times,
in your opinion?
Mr. Egbo. Yes. I don't know if I have that answer. Actually
I do know that I don't have that answer.
But I do think thatevery student-athlete is different at
the stage that they enter into the portal. Some are grad
students that have earned their degree already and are looking
for a new opportunity. And others are 18-, 19-year-old kids
that are for whatever case entering the portal.
So I just do think that there are different situations and
circumstances. But I don't know the answer to that.
Mrs. Harshbarger. I know. We are trying to figure that out.
I guess my followup to you is, Does transferring during the
semester affect a student-athlete's academic success?
Mr. Egbo. I mean, without question, in my opinion. I don't
think that it is hard to see that a midsemester transfer is
very disruptive to the educational principles that Coach Beamer
mentioned before.
At the end of the day, education is at the forefront and at
the foundation of what we are trying to do.
Mrs. Harshbarger. Absolutely.
Mr. Egbo. So protecting that is important.
Mrs. Harshbarger. I agree.
This goes to Coach Beamer.
If other schools follow the dynamic approach to NIL that
schools in the SEC have, where do you think college football
will be in 5 years?
Mr. Beamer. Well, if there is a national standard in
regards to the legislation, but also with revenue sharing
coming in with the optimism of the settlement next month, to me
it will level the playing field for programs across the country
if we are all playing by the same rules, if we have the
legislation and enforcement to back that.
Mrs. Harshbarger. Thank you.
Mr. Whitman, this will go to you and Coach Beamer. Should
university revenue sharing include performance-based bonuses?
Like, say, in Mr. Beamer's case you have got a quarterback that
throws 3,000 yards and you beat Clemson. Should he get a bonus?
You start, Mr. Whitman, and then we will go back to Coach
Beamer.
Mr. Whitman. It is an interesting question.
I think it is important to remember under the terms of the
settlement the payments to our student-athletes will come in
the form of NIL licenses. And so the idea of being in the
performance bonus context--that the better a student-athlete
performs, then the more valuable their NIL license becomes for
the use by the institution or by the athletics program.
And so we certainly are contemplating a system that would
permit performance bonuses. I think a different question is how
those are ultimately accounted for in terms of the cap
structure that is being developed. But ultimately, we think
performance bonuses have a place. Whether institutions
ultimately choose to use them or not is a different question.
I think one of the intentions of this process is to allow
each school a lot of autonomy to determine for itself how best
to structure its contracts and its relationships with its
student-athletes to make their institution as appealing as
possible to potential student-athletes.
Mrs. Harshbarger. Great.
Mr. Beamer. Which I would agree with Mr. Whitman. In fact,
that is a conversation that I literally just had yesterday
morning with Dawn Staley, our women's basketball coach at South
Carolina, in regards to bonuses. And yes, ma'am, if a player
for us plays his tail off against Clemson and allows us to win,
yes, absolutely.
Mrs. Harshbarger. Sorry, young man. I knew he was going to
say that.
Mr. Beamer. He got the first dig in.
Mrs. Harshbarger. Yes, exactly. All right.
This goes to Coach Beamer and Mr. Whitman.
How should student-athletes' fair market value be
generated? I know you are speechless.
Mr. Whitman. It is a really important question. And
certainly we are champions of our student-athletes' NIL rights.
It is important that we look for ways to separate through
market-based, arm's-length transactions that support our
student-athletes in their legitimate NIL interests from the
synthetic, artificial, competitive-based NIL opportunities that
have been created over the last handful of years.
And so we certainly don't have an interest in micromanaging
those opportunities for our student-athletes. In fact, we want
to continue to try and help facilitate and create those in the
ways that are permitted under the most recent changes to NCAA
rules.
But it is important that we do try and create some system
to monitor that to create some level of transparency. Our
student-athletes want that transparency. Those working within
our system want that transparency.
And ultimately, we also know that this isn't going to be a
perfect system at the outset, and we will continue to evaluate
it and improve upon it. But we feel confident that here at the
beginning, as we develop a clearinghouse with a partner like
Deloitte, a very reputable firm, that we will be in a strong
position to make those assessments.
Mr. Beamer. And I would agree the fair market value of
range of compensation, there is no cap on that. I want to be
clear that we are all for our student-athletes being able to
make as much as they possibly can in legitimate NIL outside
income. But what we need is transparency and a clearinghouse,
like we are saying, that will give us the teeth in that.
Mrs. Harshbarger. OK, very good.
Mr. Bilirakis. And we want to take into consideration that
some of the players, such as the offensive linemen--we have a
Senator--I mean, we have maybe a future Senator--but a center
right here--that they also be compensated as well fairly, even
though they don't get the recognition they deserve.
Mrs. Harshbarger. Yes, really. I love the offensive line,
just FYI. All right.
Mr. Bilirakis. They spell relief.
Mrs. Harshbarger. I yield back.
Mr. Bilirakis. OK, I--Representative Trahan.
Mrs. Trahan. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you for our witnesses here today, especially our
players.
The state of college athletics, while imperfect, is better
today than it was 4 years ago. Now, it may not be better for
the people who have historically benefited from the guise of
amateurism, but it is certainly better for athletes, and those
are the folks who have always created the value in this
industry.
But while I celebrate the progress, I remain concerned
about the inequities that persist in college athletics. And
with respect to NIL, I worry that universities' plan to finally
share revenue directly with athletes could again shortchange
women at a time when women's sports are seeing a massive surge
in popularity.
Mr. Whitman, are you aware of the tentative agreement in
the House v. NCAA lawsuit that will require the NCAA to pay out
nearly $2.8 billion in damages to current and former athletes
dating back to 2016, with 75 percent going to football players,
15 percent for men's basketball players, 5 percent for women
basketball players, and 5 percent for all other athletes?
Mr. Whitman. I am aware, yes.
Mrs. Trahan. I figured. And great. I wouldn't expect any
other answer.
You must also be familiar with the filing in that case by
Barbara Osborne, an independent Title IX specialist with
extensive experience auditing collegiate institutions, who
studied the House Settlement terms.
If the lopsided terms of the House Settlement were used in
an institution, Ms. Osborne claimed she would have advised the
institution that they were violating Title IX.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to enter Ms.
Osborne's report on the gender inequities present in the House
Settlement revenue model into the record.
Mr. Bilirakis. Without objection.
[The information appears at the conclusion of the
hearing.\1\]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The report has been retained in committee files and is included
in the Documents for the Record at https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/
IF17/20250304/117989/HHRG-119-IF17-20250304-SD003.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mrs. Trahan. Thank you.
Mr. Whitman, you advocate that Congress codify a revenue-
sharing framework that is--and I am quoting here from your
testimony--``largely in line with what is contemplated by the
House Settlement.''
Your testimony comes amid reports that Power 5 schools,
like the University of Georgia, are already planning to use
those same thresholds in their future revenue-sharing model
scheduled to take effect later this year.
Mr. Whitman, can you understand why many current and former
women athletes, like myself, are alarmed that NCAA institutions
and leaders are adopting a revenue-sharing model that only
gives women at most 10 percent?
Mr. Whitman. Thank you for the question, Congresswoman.
This is an issue that has weighed heavily on our campuses
as we have tried to evaluate how to apply an old--50-year-old
law to a new set of facts that weren't contemplated when that
law was passed.
And we have worked very earnestly to consult with a variety
of different counsel to gain some clarity on that issue. And
all that we have learned through those conversations is there
seems to be some lack of consensus around exactly how that law
will apply to these new opportunities that we can make
available to our student-athletes.
What we know is that we are seeing an explosion in
popularity in women's sports. We know that people who work in
college athletics remain very strong champions of advancement
amongst our women's teams. But we also see that we are faced
with some really challenging balancing of equities in a case
like this one.
If we were to apply Title IX in the sense of the
traditional financial aid balancing proportionality, we would
potentially be diverting money away from the athletes who
generate that revenue, many of whom are student-athletes of
color, many of whom come from underprivileged backgrounds.
On the flip side, we understand that if we were to maintain
those revenues with the student-athletes who generate it, we
wouldn't be potentially passing as much of it along to our
female student-athletes.
And so it creates a really challenging dynamic for us to
navigate on campus. What we know----
Mrs. Trahan. Which is why I asked that question, because as
you are aware in your role as director of athletics, Title IX
requires that if a school awards financial assistance to
athletes, they must, quote, ``provide reasonable opportunities
for such awards for members of each sex in proportion to the
number of students of each sex participating in interscholastic
or intercollegiate athletics,'' end quote.
Surely the model that Georgia and other schools plan to use
cannot comply with Title IX.
Mr. Whitman. We don't think that has been identified or
established. We think there is a lack of clarity around how
Title IX will apply to these new payments.
We currently comply with Title IX. We are required to
comply with Title IX. We have every intentions of continuing to
comply with Title IX.
Mrs. Trahan. Well, at a time when women haven't seen their
fair market value because they have never had the benefit of
promotion or boosting, at a time when women's fandom of college
sports is surging, I would hope that we would not base forward-
looking and forward-looking frameworks for how we are going to
distribute those revenues based on a model where women were
shortchanged.
So I thank you for the extra time, Mr. Chairman, and I
yield back.
Mr. Bilirakis. The gentlelady yields back.
Mr. Whitman. If I could just for one final statement to
that: It is important to note that at the University of
Illinois our women student-athletes will receive far more
benefits in the new paradigm than they have in the previous,
and that includes scholarships, that includes NIL payments, it
includes a number of different benefits that will now be made
available by virtue of the settlement. And so that--it is an
important note to make.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you. Thank you. The gentlelady yields
back.
Now I will recognize Mr. Obernolte for your 5 minutes of
questioning.
Mr. Obernolte. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you to our witnesses.
This hearing is on a topic that is very important and
deeply personal to me. A little-known fact: I was a student-
athlete many years ago. When I was in college I played on the
Cal Tech football team--go, Beavers--when there was a Cal Tech
football team. And given the high quality and caliber of
student-athletes at our witness table, you would probably argue
that doesn't count, and maybe it doesn't.
But then later in my life I got into video game
development. And my company did the development of NCAA college
football for EA Sports for a couple of years in 1998 and 1999.
And I remember vividly having the argument of, like, why can't
we use the student-athletes' names in the game? They told us
that we could use your number, we could use your stats, we
would make a player that looked vaguely like you but not too
much like you.
And I remember vividly saying this is completely stupid
because everybody loses. The student-athletes lose because they
are not allowed to get compensated. We as game designers lose
because we are not allowed to design a game around the
athletes, as we wanted to. The players of the game lose because
they are not allowed to see the players that they love and
recognize in the games that they bought.
So we have an opportunity here to create a system where
everybody wins, where student-athletes are allowed to play the
game and the sports that they love, where colleges are allowed
to benefit from having these sports, where millions of fans
around the country are allowed to participate in these sports
and root their teams on.
So I guess my message is let's not mess it up, because we
need to create a system here where everybody wins. And if we
create a system where someone loses, then we are not doing our
jobs right.
So one of the kind of recurring themes that has been in
today's testimony has been around this question of whether or
not student-athletes are employees. And I think it is really
interesting because it fits into a larger debate that we are
having here in Congress about whether or not when someone says,
``Look, I don't want to be an employee,'' and an entity says,
``I don't want to be an employer,'' does the Federal Government
have the right to step in and say, ``You both lose, you are
going to be employee and employer''?
And I think it is particularly compelling that I have heard
our student-athletes say loud and clear today that they don't
want to be treated as employees.
So, Ms. Cole, I know in your testimony you said that
classifying athletes as employees is not the right answer. Can
you talk a little bit about why you feel that way?
Ms. Cole. Yes, absolutely. Thank you so much for your
question, Congressman.
I mainly, as I touched on in my testimony, am just focused
on continuing to promote and grow the equity with Olympic and
women's sports as well, and I do believe that the employment
model could make that extremely difficult.
Mr. Obernolte. Mr. Whitman, you had said in your testimony
that one of the things that you would like Congress to do is to
clarify that the relationship between school and students is
not that of employer and employee. Why do you think that that
is not the right model?
Mr. Whitman. I think it is not the right model on a number
of different levels.
First and foremost, from the perspective of the student-
athletes, I think it creates very real questions around the
taxability of some of the benefits that they are already
receiving as part of our system.
I think it ultimately could result in less freedom for them
in terms of the mobility to move from one school to the next.
I think it ultimately could create less protections, I
think, in terms of their status on the team, the opportunity to
be cut or fired if they are not performing at a certain level.
And ultimately, as we have heard from several witnesses
today, the opportunity to lose roster spots across all of
college athletics as a result of forcing schools to support
this compensation.
And importantly, they don't want to be employees. I have
had the privilege in the last 15 years of my career to work
every day with student-athletes. I take a lot of pride in
having a great relationship with them, of having an
understanding of their experience on our campus and what we can
do to improve upon it.
Not once have I had a student-athlete come to me and say,
``Mr. Whitman, I would really like to be an employee of this
institution.''
I think we are developing a model through the House
Settlement that allows us to address many of their concerns. We
are putting us in a position to provide them with additional
compensation.
We are in a position now to offer them more scholarships.
We are doing things at the University of Illinois like
providing continuing education after they have broken time with
the university, if they want to come back and complete their
degrees.
We offer enhanced medical care where our student-athletes
are actually the beneficiaries of what I would call concierge
medical service. They receive 24/7 care from independent
medical authorities who provide care to our student-athletes
independent of any oversight or supervision from coaches or
administrators.
And ultimately, they want a greater voice. And I think that
we are looking for ways to develop that through SAAC, through
some of the opportunities that we have given student-athletes
to provide feedback on our campus, whether that is in the form
of exit surveys, end-of-the-season interviews, and more
informal conversations with administrators who are embedded
with their programs.
Ultimately, our student-athletes are the beneficiaries of a
very robust system and opportunity. That system continues to
need tweaking. But ultimately, designating them as employees is
not that answer.
Mr. Obernolte. Thank you, everyone, for your testimony.
And I just in conclusion want to reinforce I think that
there is a win-win-win here. And I am hoping that Congress can
work together with the NCAA and the schools and the athletes to
make that happen.
I yield back.
Mr. Bilirakis. I agree. Thank you. The gentleman yields
back.
Now we have Ms. Clarke from the great State of New York.
You are recognized for your 5 minutes of questioning.
Ms. Clarke. Thank you. And good afternoon, Chairman
Bilirakis, Ranking Member Schakowsky. And thank you to our
panel of witnesses for joining us today.
The NCAA's decision in 2021 to finally allow college
athletes to capitalize on the value of their name, image, and
likeness in the open market was undoubtedly correct and also
long overdue.
For years, the NCAA was content to rake in profits from the
multibillion-dollar business of college sports while hiding
behind the inherently flawed and totally made-up concept of
amateurism as justification for maintaining an unpaid labor
force primarily comprised of Black and Brown student-athletes.
Now that the college athletes have the ability to pursue
their true worth on the open market as a result of public
pressure, court decisions, and State-level action which forced
the NCAA's hand, we are expected to believe that college sports
is in a crisis and on the verge of collapse simply because the
jobs of highly paid coaches and administrators have become
slightly more difficult. I don't buy it.
Ending the legalized exploitation of an unpaid labor force
is an inherent good and one we should not seek to put
unnecessary restraints on.
If we want to talk about protecting college athletes, let's
do that. Let's talk about meeting the long-term healthcare
needs of former college athletes who have suffered grievous
injuries on the fields of play. Let's talk about guaranteed
scholarships for 4 years.
Let's talk about the quality of education these young
people receive when the sport they participate in requires time
commitments tantamount to full-time jobs and requires more
travel than almost any other job.
Let's talk about the revenue sharing or the multibillion-
dollar contracts that the NCAA and Power 4 conferences earn on
the backs of these young people who are overwhelmingly students
of color in the revenue-generating sports.
We could even talk about the role of agents and their
brokers in the new NIL landscape or the attempts to
artificially cap the amount a student-athlete can earn in
revenue sharing and NIL deals.
But let's not pretend that a young person's ability to be
compensated for the use of their own name, image, and likeness
is some kind of crisis in need of an urgent congressional
action when there are far more pressing issues this committee
could take up.
In fact, if we really want to dive into the core issues
facing college sports, in addition to hearing from today's
panelists we need to hear directly from the power players
involved in the business of college sports: the NCAA; the
College Football Playoff and the commissioners of the Power 4
conferences, particularly the Southeastern Conference, the Big
Ten Conference; the college athletes who have sued the NCAA for
violating their rights and failing to protect their health and
welfare; the collectives that are helping to funnel money to
students and universities; the agents who claim to represent
the best interest of the college athletes but too often fail to
do so; and the accountants who think they can figure out the
fair market value of an NIL deal, despite the fact that
corporations large and small are willing to pay ever more money
for endorsements from superstars like former LSU basketball
player Angel Reese.
While I appreciate the desire to examine the issues related
to college athletics and the well-being of our student-
athletes, the lack of participation from the powers that be and
all participants in the diverse and complicated ecosystem,
likely in part due to the beginning of March Madness, means
that we are not ready to address these issues in a very serious
way.
So I look forward to the opportunity to do so in the
future.
Having said that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of
my time.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you, Ms. Clarke.
The Chair recognizes Rep. Houchin for 5 minutes, please.
Mrs. Houchin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to Ranking
Member Schakowsky for holding this hearing.
Thanks to the witnesses for your testimony. We really
appreciate your time and your insight.
This issue is especially important for my home State of
Indiana, as we have nearly 60 colleges and universities across
the State, including Curt Cignetti's Indiana University Hoosier
football team in my district.
In fact, in 2014 IU was the first university in the Nation
to establish a student-athlete bill of rights, which enshrined
protections and commitments for IU student-athletes. And they
were also one of the first universities to implement an NIL
policy.
Mr. Whitman, you are a fellow Hoosier from West Lafayette.
I appreciated your testimony and that of Coach Beamer and, Mr.
Egbo, your emphasis on the impossible patchwork of State laws.
As a member of the Indiana General Assembly and the State
senate, I was hoping to tackle a data privacy issue for our
State. I sent the proposed text of legislation to some
stakeholders, and they promptly replied: Please do not file
this bill. We don't want to have abide by 50 different State
laws.
And that is exactly what the States are currently doing
with NIL. I may be the only State legislator in history to kill
her own bill, but I did at that point because I understood the
assignment.
So with that experience, I certainly appreciate the need
for a national standard and framework. I would like to hear,
though, from Director Whitman and Coach Beamer, How is the lack
of a national standard impacting competition and recruiting
between universities and States with different or no NIL laws?
Director Whitman, if you would like to go first.
Mr. Whitman. Thank you, Congresswoman.
The lack of clarity and the lack of transparency has become
very challenging in the recruiting space in terms of the
competitive field. At the end of the day, we are trying to
create national competition with absence of a national
framework, and that is a really difficult place for us to be.
The idea here is not to figure out who can build the best
cars, it is to figure out who drives the car the best. And
ultimately, the rules that are being passed State by State are
standing in the way of really determining who puts together the
best program, who builds the right things culturally from a
leadership perspective, from a strategy perspective.
Coach Beamer and his colleagues work really hard to go out
and compete on the most level playing field we can create. But
the result of these State laws is that the State laws are
ultimately influencing what that playing field looks like, and
I don't believe that is an appropriate place for our State
legislatures to be.
Mrs. Houchin. Coach Beamer?
Mr. Beamer. Yes, I would agree.
And also, I know Ms. Clarke had to step out, but she and I
are on the exact same page in what we are trying to get done.
She alluded to rogue agents that aren't certified. I
completely agree. We need to protect our student-athletes from
these uncertified rogue agents.
She talked about healthcare. I agree. I think we should
expand healthcare after their careers are over as we look at
that, as well. But it is a challenge to do that because she
mentioned the NCAA is constantly getting sued of anything they
try to enforce.
To answer your question, it is a challenge. We are all
extremely competitive, whether it is Mr. Fry's Gamecocks or
your Hoosiers or Mr. Fulcher's Boise State Broncos or the
Florida State Seminoles, and everyone is trying to find a
competitive advantage.
And no one is here today saying that they are against the
portal, they are against NIL, they are against expanding
resources for our players. We are all just trying to get a
uniform standard that benefits all of us, the schools, the
administrations, and the student-athletes.
Mrs. Houchin. Thank you.
We have a saying in my office as we are trying to
anticipate unintended consequences. We say the mouse will find
the cheese. It seems like the States are getting very creative
in how to give their teams a competitive advantage through
their NIL State laws.
I want to touch just briefly on the current lawsuit and
impending settlement. Could either of you speak to the lack of
Title IX protection and clarification within the settlement and
why Congress might need to weigh in on how the NIL dollars are
allocated? Whichever one thinks they can best answer that.
Mr. Whitman. I am happy to do that.
My understanding is that the Title IX question has not been
put directly in front of the judge and that she has declined to
opine on that particular issue because it is not germaine to
the conflict that is being evaluated.
And my understanding is, when it comes it the distribution
of the back-payment damages, those are decisions that are being
led by plaintiff's counsel, not by the judge, not by the
defendants, certainly. And so how they have chosen to build
that algorithm and allocate those dollars is really a decision
that has been left to those attorneys.
Mrs. Houchin. Thank you.
And, in closing, I just would like to take a quote from Mr.
Egbo's testimony, because I think it perfectly encapsulates
what we need to do on this issue of NIL.
He says, ``I'm asking you to help student-athletes by
creating uniformity and stability with NIL, protecting us from
employment status classification, and ensuring consistent rules
can be made and enforced.''
I hope we can achieve that through our work in this
committee.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Fulcher [presiding]. Thank you, Mrs. Houchin.
The Chair now recognizes Representative Dingell for 5
minutes.
Mrs. Dingell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member
Schakowsky.
As those of you know--and I am from Michigan. College
sports are a big deal. I am committed to ensuring all athletes
are treated fairly, female athletes are protected and
supported, and the integrity of college sports is maintained.
As we figure this out, it is well known that women's sports
often do not receive the same support, promotion, recognition,
or attention as men's sports programs at schools, in the media,
and elsewhere. So we have to address this as we are doing all
this. We have to strengthen Title IX, improve gender equity in
NIL, and ensure collective schools and conferences distribute
resources more equitably.
In April 2024, the GAO reported that 93 percent of
institutions with athletic programs failed to meet Title IX
participation standards. And data shows female athletes are
shortchanged over a billion dollars annually in scholarships.
Schools continue to invest more in promoting men's sports,
and the success of revenue programs has enhanced male athletes'
NIL and recruiting value. Schools are indicating that they will
be giving men's basketball and football players 90 percent of
the new revenue-sharing payments, up to $20 million a year for
the next decade, and publicly saying these payments don't count
against Title IX.
Mr. Whitman, how can thoughtful NIL policy promote women's
sports programs and bridge these disparities in treatment?
Mr. Whitman. Thank you, Congresswoman.
Title IX has been absolutely instrumental in the
advancement of college athletics. You would be hard-pressed to
find any law that has had bigger impacts on the opportunities
for students across this country over the last five decades
than Title IX.
And, as I mentioned earlier, we are thrilled by the
explosion in interest in women's sports. We have seen a
volleyball match that was played in front of 90,000 people at
the University of Nebraska. We have seen women's basketball
played in a football stadium at Iowa. We saw a women's
basketball national championship game that outdrew the men's
counterpart on national television.
We have seen the NCAA now for the first time begin to
reward women's basketball performance, with the adoption of the
Women's Basketball Performance Fund--a hugely important change
that was recently adopted by the national organization.
We have seen some of these changes happening on our own
campus at the University of Illinois. We have attendance and
revenue records happening in women's basketball, volleyball. We
have made real investments recently in our soccer program,
track and field.
Ultimately, as I mentioned earlier, we have an obligation
and are complying with Title IX. And we have every intention of
continuing to comply with Title IX as we move forward.
There do continue to be some questions around how Title IX
will apply to these new payments. It has been a question that
has needed clarity for some time. We continue to seek that
clarity. I expect that will reveal itself in the months and
years ahead.
Every person who sits in my chair understands our Federal
obligations and will adapt our policy and our strategy to be in
line with whatever clarification we ultimately receive.
Mrs. Dingell. Thank you. We really do have to work on this.
And I always have Hutch who is trying to help me figure it out.
In February 2025, the Trump administration rescinded
guidance that required NIL payments in college athletics to be
proportionally available to male and female athletes under
Title IX.
Ms. Cole, do you think this decision undermines Title IX's
goal of ensuring equal opportunity for women in sports?
Ms. Cole. I am not familiar with this topic and not able to
speak on the question.
Mrs. Dingell. OK. Thank you. I may ask you to familiarize
yourself and get you to answer for the record.
Traditionally, all sponsorship, gate receipts, donations,
and TV revenue go into one pot that supports all sports without
discriminating on the basis of sex. This commitment has made
the United States a world power in Olympics and a global
powerhouse.
Mr. Whitman--I am coming to you again--can you tell us what
an overhaul of this precedent would mean for the athletes?
Mr. Whitman. I am sorry, Congresswoman. Can you clarify
what--overhaul of which precedent?
Mrs. Dingell. That all the sponsorship, gate receipts,
donations, and TV revenue go into one pot that supports all
sports without discriminating on the basis of sex. That has
made the Olympics a success.
Mr. Whitman. I don't see that changing. And certainly at
the University of Illinois, our intent is for our resources to
continue to support all of our student-athletes.
And we do believe, under the House Settlement, we will be
in a position to offer additional benefits to every student-
athlete in our program, whether those benefits take the form of
additional scholarships, potential NIL payments, or some of the
additional benefits that are now made available by virtue of
the House Settlement.
Our intention is to continue to invest heavily in the
experience of every student-athlete who wears the orange and
blue, and we think the House Settlement provides us an even
greater tool set to approach that opportunity.
Mr. Fulcher. Thank you.
The gentlelady's time has expired.
The Chair recognizes Representative Fry for 5 minutes,
please.
Mr. Fry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I think it has been a
great hearing.
And I appreciate the witnesses for being here, for your
expertise, your professionalism. It is a really important
issue, I think, that touches a lot of aspects in our country.
People like college sports. They want to see it succeed.
And it is great to have two of South Carolina's finest
higher institutions present from our football programs, but
there is only one university--South Carolina, sir. Go,
Gamecocks.
And for the Californians in the room, ``USC'' stands for
``South Carolina'' and not ``Southern California.'' We were an
institution before you were a State.
That being said, the NCAA--I think the prior scheme, you
had a very restrictive, not player-focused scheme that, you
know, you went to school, you got a scholarship, there wasn't
many other benefits that were afforded to you, maybe not the
correct legal protections.
And, of course, we have seen that go the opposite way,
right? And I think, in some ways, people welcome that, that
players that are adults--they are 18 years old--are going and
capitalizing on their talent, on their NIL, their name, image,
and likeness. But there are some real concerns, right? And we
have heard that.
Last year, I filed the Protect the BALL Act, right, which
was a shield, if you will, for institutions. And the idea was
that you wanted to give the breathing room between the NCAA,
the colleges, the conferences, and the players to figure out
the framework.
But we have, as has been alluded to--I think Mrs. Houchin
talked about it--a patchwork of State laws. You have States
that are--Coach Beamer talked about competition, but you have
State legislators that are invested in preserving and enhancing
their State institutions. And so there are some dangers on the
horizon on where we go from this when States are doing their
own thing.
And I think the big thing that we have talked about here
seems to be a level of preemption that is needed, right, that
you cannot have a patchwork of 50 State laws, that you have to
have one standard, the framework maybe being provided by
Congress, but most of that effort being provided by the
institutions themselves, the players, the families that are
affected, the conferences, and, of course, the NCAA.
That seems to be, I think, where we need to go, right, that
this is a collaboration between those who are engaged in the
space. It isn't a mandated, top-down, heavy mandate from
Congress, but there are some frameworks that should be
available to allow college sports to thrive, that focuses on
the players, that focuses on the college athlete experience.
And with that being said, Coach Beamer, obviously, with
that backdrop, how has NIL changed just recruiting in general?
Football, but you have, I am sure, heard stories from, you
know, Dawn Staley or whomever. How has that changed the
recruiting aspect of college athletics?
Mr. Beamer. Thank you for the question. And thanks for all
you do for the great State of South Carolina, Mr. Fry. And
great to see you again as well. As you know, this is my third
time to Washington, DC, in the last couple years on this issue.
So appreciate everyone being here today to listen to us as
well.
It has certainly changed things, in regards to when you are
recruiting a student-athlete, finding out what is important to
them. And, certainly, name, image, and likeness is another
aspect of that, without a doubt.
But we are really well situated at the University of South
Carolina because of the things that we have to offer beyond
NIL. As I mentioned, we are in the capital city, and there are
so many opportunities for our student-athletes at the
University of South Carolina.
And schools across the country should have advantages, from
a recruiting standpoint, because they have great academics--
which we do--they have great coaches--which in all of our
sports we do--great development, and not necessarily who pays
the most.
And that is what has happened in so many instances as well.
It is still about the educational experience, on and off the
field, with everyone.
Mr. Fry. For sure.
Coach, do you think that a Federal standard--and I think
you testified to this earlier, but do you think a Federal
standard would level the playing field in college athletics?
Mr. Beamer. Yes.
Mr. Fry. OK.
And, obviously, you said that college sports should be less
about money. It is about the education, and it is about the
experience.
What guidance or structure do you believe would help ensure
that NIL remains a tool for empowerment rather than a
distraction?
Mr. Beamer. Obviously, with the settlement next month, with
revenue sharing, that is going to help things. We will have a
real enforcement arm behind that, is the way it is trending
right now, which would be very beneficial for all coaches, all
sports. And then, as Mr. Whitman mentioned, a clearinghouse for
any outside income beyond revenue share, which we are all for.
And our student-athletes at South Carolina--as you know,
A'ja Wilson, a former women's basketball player, has a statue
outside our basketball arena. So there are fantastic
opportunities for all of our student-athletes with national
legislation.
Mr. Fry. Coach, finally--and I will go over here just
briefly, but--you know, I think, collectively, we have talked
about maybe some of the Olympic-style sports, we have talked
about some of the smaller schools and how they might be
impacted.
How do you see NIL affecting those Olympic-type sports? And
can Congress help to protect those types of sports for college
athletes?
Mr. Fulcher. Very quickly, please.
Mr. Beamer. Yes, sir.
No, I would say this. With the terms of the settlement--and
I am not a legal expert. I will defer to someone that is. But
the way I understand it, Mr. Fry, with the terms of the
settlement, all of our Olympic sports, there is an unintended
consequence. There are going to be some roster spots that are
cut. But all members of the Olympic sports, nonrevenue sports,
going forward will be on scholarship. So, in so many ways, that
has bettered their situation.
Mr. Fulcher. Thank you, Mr. Beamer.
Mr. Fry. Thank you.
Mr. Fulcher. The Chair recognizes Representative Veasey for
5 minutes.
Mr. Veasey. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First of all, I want to say thanks to each and every one of
you for coming to testify.
I want to, for Mr. Egbo, wanted to give a special shout-out
to him. My uncle, back in the 1960s, before the now-defunct
Southwest Conference started accepting Black athletes, he had
an opportunity and graduated from Abilene Christian University.
And so I have--my late uncle. So we have Abilene Christian
University, a shared value there.
So welcome.
Mr. Beamer, we are here to talk about NIL, and I will tell
you that I think that one thing that the Southeast Conference
is facing--and I talked a little bit--touched on that earlier
when I mentioned the Southwest Conference and integration. I
think that the SEC, particularly, with all of the Governors and
wokeness and DEI that they are bringing to these college
campuses, I think you all are going to run a lot of the
brothers off, honestly. I will be straight-up with you. You all
need to figure out how you are going to make your campus
comfortable for the Black athletes that are playing there, with
all of this rhetoric around some of these topics.
Mr. Whitman, I wanted to also point out, you talked about
the grades, and I think that you are right-on to mention that.
What worries me--and everybody knows it, it is not anything
new--that, in order for players to stay eligible and in order
for players to be able to participate, that there are certain
degrees that are off limits, certain degrees that make it
really tough for them to be able to major in if they don't want
to be moved down the depth chart and if they want to be able to
stay on the team.
And so it is great to talk about that education is still
one of the priorities, but everybody knows that that game has
gone on for a long time, that there were players that had all
these credits and the credits absolutely led to nothing, or
they get a degree in something like general education to where
there is not really a lot that they can do with it and no one
really knows what those degrees are for.
And so I am glad that you are talking about the education,
but that brings me to my first question. I want to talk about--
and I know that you are not from UCLA, but I want to just
mention this. They are going to travel over 22,000 miles this
season, going from the West Coast all the way over to the East
Coast. And Stanford, USC, Washington, other schools are going
to face those same demanding itineraries. And this is going to
be disruptive to their academics.
And so, with knowing that you are going to have that
increased physical and mental fatigue that is going to be
taking place, how is that good for the student-athletes? I
really don't understand that. These increased travel schedules,
I am just curious, how have athletes been able to work around
that, and how has it impacted them academically?
Mr. Whitman. Thank you for the question, Congressman.
We have had the chance now at the University of Illinois to
participate in the expanded Big Ten since the beginning of the
fall, and so I have some firsthand experience watching a number
of our teams make those trips.
The thing that I would remind you is that we continue to
try and champion our student-athletes both in their academic
and their athletic pursuits. And in the expanded Big Ten
footprint, just as an example, for schools that compete at the
level that we do, we are used to traveling nationally. Our
student-athletes in all of our sports travel extensively,
across the country, to participate in their nonconference
competition.
And so, for Illinois, we have now replaced some of those
nonconference competitions maybe in California or Texas or
Florida with now conference competitions. And so the chance for
them is not that much different than what it was before.
Mr. Veasey. Yes.
Mr. Whitman. And we are also able to provide them with
robust academic support. We have tutors and academic advisers
who travel with our student-athletes to help them study when
they are traveling----
Mr. Veasey. And I am sorry to cut you off, but I might run
out of time. I wanted to ask Mr. Falcinelli about that too.
Could you touch on that?
Mr. Falcinelli. Yes. We had a number of games, and
traveling across the country is incredibly taxing.
And especially to the point of--I really want to get on the
point of your practice schedule far outweighs your academic
schedule, to where the majority of your time as a college
athlete is spent on your sport and your workouts and your team
meetings and your practices, traveling for games, to where I
have had a number of times where you are getting off that bus,
returning from a game at 7 in the morning, and the sun is
coming up, and you are thinking, great, on the way to meetings,
and then back to bed, and hopefully I will be awake for class
on Monday.
Those long-distance games are very tough and oftentimes
lead to lack of sleep, to lack of--all these issues that are
part of it. And athletes do enjoy the pace, athletes are all
about the grind on it, but it is incredibly difficult and
taxing to manage having a final later in the week when you are
not sleeping for part of that week.
Mr. Veasey. Yes. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Bilirakis [presiding]. Appreciate it.
The gentleman yields back.
I now recognize Mr. Goldman for 5 minutes for your
questioning.
Mr. Goldman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you all to the panelists for being here. And, yes, I
too am a huge fan of women's sports, especially the number 1
Lady Longhorns right now.
I will be very brief.
Mr. Whitman, can you just tell us, in your world, what is
the number 1 producing revenue sport?
Mr. Whitman. Football, Congressman.
Mr. Goldman. Do any of the others make money?
Mr. Whitman. Men's basketball.
Mr. Goldman. So just men's football and men's basketball
are revenue-producing. None of the others are?
Mr. Whitman. We have two other sports that produce revenue.
They don't earn profit. And so we also make money through
women's basketball and volleyball as well.
Mr. Goldman. So they make revenue--you know, I mean, you
put it perfectly. They make revenue but not profit.
Mr. Whitman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Goldman. So how do you all divide what goes everywhere
else?
Mr. Whitman. I am sorry?
Mr. Goldman. How do you divide what goes everywhere else?
Mr. Whitman. We generate our resources through football,
men's basketball, women's basketball, volleyball, and then we
redistribute that money out to fund the experience and the
opportunities for the remainder of our student-athletes.
Mr. Goldman. So, again, like, what programs do you decide
you have or not have based on the revenue that you have coming
in?
Mr. Whitman. Ultimately, they are strategic decisions left
to the discretion of each institution to determine for
themselves what programs we wish to sponsor and at what level
of resource we are able to provide them.
Mr. Goldman. So what is your, let's say--what is your--OK.
You have football, men's basketball. What is--do you have a
third? What is number three?
Mr. Whitman. We have an incredibly competitive men's golf
program.
Mr. Goldman. OK. So men's golf, perfect example. What do
those kids get paid, NIL?
Mr. Whitman. They do receive NIL contracts. They probably
don't at many institutions, but at the University of Illinois,
because of the profile that our golf program enjoys, they are
the beneficiaries of NIL arrangements.
Mr. Goldman. So the golfers make money, but the program
does not.
Mr. Whitman. Correct.
Mr. Goldman. Thank you.
Coach Beamer, thank you very much for being here.
Can you take us through a normal--and I know SEC now. So
when a recruit comes in--you go to a home or a recruit comes
in, what is the first topic of discussion these days?
Mr. Beamer. We start recruiting them really early, so maybe
when they are a young player in high school, it is about the
uniforms and things like that.
And then, certainly, as they get older and closer to making
a decision, they want to talk about opportunities in our town,
they want to talk about academics, they want to talk about
playing time. We talk about the fan base and the resources and
the development that our program provides.
And, certainly, NIL is a topic that comes up, but is it
typically at the forefront? Not necessarily.
Mr. Goldman. Define ``not necessarily.'' I mean, let's say
five-star, four-star recruits, is that not the number 1 topic
of discussion?
Mr. Beamer. I wouldn't necessarily say it is the number 1.
I think, honestly, it really depends on the young man. There
have been those type of players that have been in my office
that it is one of the first things that comes up, and there are
other players that have come in my office and it hasn't come up
at all.
Now, I am not naive, to say that outside of my office with
other people they may be having those conversations. But in
regards to me, that is the experience that I have with players.
Mr. Goldman. And what about for the players in the portal?
Is that----
Mr. Beamer. Players in the portal, I would say the NIL
conversation is a little bit more prevalent, because so many of
those young men in the portal, they have done something at the
other school in a lot of situations as well.
Being from the State of Texas, you are familiar with your
rival, Oklahoma, and Spencer Rattler. Spencer Rattler
transferred to the University of South Carolina. Spencer had
accomplished a lot at the University of Oklahoma. Him coming to
the University of South Carolina, he had proven a lot.
So, certainly, in situations like that, going forward there
are NIL conversations that are a little bit more prevalent with
transfers that have been in college.
Mr. Goldman. And that is kind of where I am going, right?
I mean, the whole student body experience, in my opinion,
is to get an education first. We all know the reality of this
is, with NIL, with the money in sports now, with the golfers at
Illinois getting paid more than the program generates, we have
a major problem in this country. And we have to fix it, and I
believe now it is up to us to fix it. Because there is no
equality anymore.
Mr. Beamer. Right.
Mr. Goldman. It is who gets paid the most----
Mr. Beamer. Uh-huh.
Mr. Goldman [continuing]. And where those players go. And
if they are unhappy, they transfer. And they can easily
transfer. And do they go to another academic institution
because of the programs that they have in education, or
possibly what they are going to get paid?
These are 18-, 19-, 20-year-old kids that are out for a
paycheck rather than an education. And I think it is up to us
to change that moving forward.
Thank you all very much for being here today.
Mr. Bilirakis. The gentleman yields back.
I now recognize Ms. Kelly for her 5 minutes of questioning.
Ms. Kelly. Thank you, Chair Bilirakis and Ranking Member
Schakowsky.
As we continue with today's hearing, I look forward to
discussing how we can protect college athletes' ability to
benefit from NIL and NIH funding for crucial biomedical
research done at our Nation's colleges and universities.
As I said in my opening remarks, indirect costs are the
infrastructure that makes research possible. They are the
oversight, buildings, utilities, safety protocols, training,
and regulatory compliance that is a necessary part of medical
research and particularly critical to clinical studies.
If these costs are not supported, institutions across the
Nation, like Lurie Children's Hospital, which is affiliated
with Northwestern University's Feinberg School of Medicine,
will lose the ability to continue discovering and delivering
cutting-edge treatments, and cures and therapies will be
essentially undermined. In fact, Lurie Children's expects that
by 2030 we will need to subsidize their infrastructure costs by
an additional $30 million per year.
College athletes, particularly those in contact sports like
football, face significant risk when it comes to long-term
health, especially concerning head injuries that may not be
immediately diagnosed.
Studies have shown that around 10 percent of college
football players sustain concussions each season, with many
going undiagnosed and untreated at the time. These injuries,
particularly repeated concussions, can lead to long-term
neurological conditions such as CTE, which may not manifest
symptoms until later years.
Mr. Whitman, welcome. Given the growing body of research on
the long-term effects of brain injuries, what steps are
athletic directors and universities taking to ensure that
college athletes have access to comprehensive healthcare,
including ongoing monitoring for head injuries even after they
have left the field?
Mr. Whitman. Our student-athletes are the beneficiaries of
world-class healthcare, concierge healthcare, 24/7 healthcare
that is managed by independent medical advisors, doctors,
physicians.
They are encouraged to receive as many second opinions and
expert opinions from any medical facility in the country when
they present with injuries that require that level of
attention.
Relative to the head-injury question, we have invested
heavily as an institution into better safeguards for our
students-athletes competing in contact sports, particularly in
football. We now outfit every student-athlete with custom-
fitted helmets that are built specifically for their head and
only their head.
It is one of many changes that have come to college
athletics here in the last number of years. As technology has
improved, we have been able to outfit our student-athletes with
ever-improving equipment that we think can help prevent those
kinds of long-term injuries.
We do, as mentioned earlier, provide ongoing healthcare for
our student-athletes for a number of years after their
collegiate careers are over. And, again, I think that is now a
protection that is provided not just at the University of
Illinois, but it is mandated all across Division I, which is a
tremendous step in the right direction.
Ms. Kelly. Thank you. And that is great to hear.
Mr. Falcinelli, Clemson, which has an enrollment of 76.5
percent of White students, received over 25 million in 2024
from NIH to do research. Why is preserving this research
important to college athletes, especially given the health
risks they face on the field?
Mr. Falcinelli. Yes. And as you mentioned with your
references to CTE, there is so much that can go on there, that
it is something that is incredibly personal to me as an
offensive lineman. The average life span of an NFL offensive
lineman is 55 years old. That is 20 years less than the
national average.
And so, while I did not play in the NFL, I sure played a
lot of snaps, so that is something I think about every day. And
the research into CTE is something that will be critically
important to my life and to those many like me.
And I just want to say, I appreciate Mr. Whitman and the
way he is running his program there and his emphasis on second
opinions and independent medical care. And that is the model
that we as an institution want to see bargained for for all
institutions everywhere. That is how a college football program
should be run, and that is the kind of medical treatment that
all players across the country should be able to have.
Ms. Kelly. Thank you so much. And I am very proud to hear
that, since part of his school is in my district.
So thank you both, and thank you to the witnesses.
And I yield back.
Mr. Bilirakis. The gentlelady yields back.
I now recognize my fellow Florida Gator, Ms. Lee, for her 5
minutes of questioning.
Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Go, Gators.
And thank you to all of our witnesses for being with us
here today.
I would like to go back to you, Mr. Whitman, for some
followup questions.
In your testimony, you advocate for Congress to establish a
uniform name, image, likeness and revenue-sharing framework in
line with the House Settlement. How do you see the dynamic
between the collectives and schools changing if we are to
codify the basic provisions of the settlement?
Mr. Whitman. Thank you, Congresswoman.
The question around the relationship between institutions
and their respective collectives is one that I think is best
left to those organizations.
I think there is no question that, in the new environment
that will be created by the settlement, we expect those
relationships to evolve.
I would imagine they would go one of three different
directions. In one instance, you could see some collectives
wind down and cease operations. Secondly, you could see some
collectives that come, quote/unquote, ``in house'' to the
athletic program and begin to operate internally under the
umbrella of the athletics department. Or, third, you could see
some collectives continue to exist separate and apart from the
athletic program but repurpose their focus and begin to develop
true market-based NIL opportunities for student-athletes.
Ms. Lee. And I would also like to discuss the application
of antitrust laws to collegiate sports and the NCAA.
In your testimony, you distinguish between a blanket
exemption and a safe harbor. Why do you believe that a safe
harbor is appropriate? And why is that important for collegiate
sports?
Mr. Whitman. It is important today to understand that we
have leadership across college athletics that recognizes the
need for college athletics to evolve and change, to modernize
the structure that has existed for decades around college
sports. The challenge that we face is that, every time we try
and implement new rules, new procedures, we get pulled into
court under the auspices of the antitrust laws.
And so we are not looking for Congress to, quote/unquote,
``fix'' college sports. We are looking for Congress to create a
legally defensible space where we can fix college sports.
And, right now, because of the overarching concerns around
antitrust and the need for us to create a national environment,
that lends itself naturally to some challenges in the antitrust
space. And that is where we would appreciate some protection so
that we could function more openly and create that national
playing field that we think everybody wants in college
athletics.
Ms. Lee. And, Mr. Egbo, I would like to go back to you. As
a student-athlete, you bring a very important perspective to
the conversation that we are having here today. And we are
nearing the end of our hearing, so I wanted to come back to you
and ask this question: Is there anything that you believe is an
important perspective that you have not had the opportunity to
share with us today or haven't been asked about yet today?
Mr. Egbo. Yes, I would like to take the time to just
reemphasize some of the things that I have said in my opening
statement.
You know, student-athletes, we value this experience
greatly. Like, this collegiate experience is something that
creates opportunities. Like I mentioned, my life has changed
from my opportunity to play college sports, and it will
continue to change because of those connections I have.
So I want to reemphasize that student-athletes, again, when
talking about employment, want to preserve those opportunities.
And we believe that the opportunities that we do have come from
being student-athletes first. So a lot of what we are desiring
and asking Congress to help with is to protect those
opportunities, like I said, for student-athletes like me that
are in these situations at institutions, like myself.
But I just want to say thank you again for the opportunity
to hear us, because we know that you guys care about these
issues.
Ms. Lee. And, Ms. Cole, the same question for you: Is there
anything you were hoping to share with us today or want to
emphasize for our benefit?
Ms. Cole. I really think I just would like to emphasize how
grateful I am to have had a positive experience with the new
NIL regulations. And I am so grateful to all of you all for
taking the time to put effort in to continue to help athletes
have a similar experience as I had.
Ms. Lee. All right.
Mr. Whitman, coming back to you, how are you anticipating,
what are you doing now to prepare for challenges? The
settlement is approved and implemented. How will that affect
the resources and the programs that you currently provide?
Mr. Whitman. It will allow us to begin generating
additional resources, we think, through a number of different
avenues. It will allow us to begin providing direct
compensation to our student-athletes in the form of NIL
licenses. It will allow us to control that environment more to
provide greater accountability to our student-athletes.
Our student-athletes trust us. They trust our athletics
program. They understand that we are actively working in their
best interests. And we look forward to, under the settlement,
being able to lock arms with them and create a stronger
partnership that ultimately enhances their opportunity to be a
student-athlete at our university.
Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Bilirakis. The gentlelady yields back.
And now I will recognize Ms. Schrier for her 5 minutes of
questioning. Thank you.
Ms. Schrier. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Madam
Ranking Member. And thank you to all of our witnesses. I have
enjoyed listening to your testimony.
I really appreciate this discussion about compensating
young athletes for their performance, especially as a mom of a
16-year-old basketball player and a pediatrician who has taken
care of a lot of the athletes that play for you.
I also want to make sure that these athletes continue to
grow and thrive, and so I just want to really drive home the
point that athletes need to have universities to play for.
The United States is the gold standard in scientific
research for a reason. It has always been a bipartisan priority
for us in this committee and in the Congress to fund the
National Institutes of Health in order to support brilliant
scientists and researchers across the country who are doing
cutting-edge research, who live and work in both Democratic and
Republican districts. This research benefits the entire world,
and our Nation takes such pride in their accomplishments.
I am a pediatrician, as I mentioned, and I have seen
firsthand the kids who I have taken care of who have cancer.
And most children--people don't know this--most children who
are being treated for cancer are participating in clinical
trials that are funded by the National Institutes of Health.
And that is how they get access to groundbreaking new
treatments that can help them do better and give them the best
chance for survival. And when this administration takes away
NIH funding, we are putting those kids' lives at risk.
In Washington State, we are blessed with amazing research
institutions: University of Washington, Washington State
University, we have Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, and we have
Seattle Children's Hospital. Fred Hutchinson that researches
cancer cures would lose an estimated $125 million annually if
the Trump administration's 15 percent indirect cost caps go
into effect.
And this phrase ``indirect costs'' is so misleading. The
reality is that ``indirect funding'' just means anything other
than funding for the scientists' salaries, the materials, and
the equipment that are specific for that study. So if you have
shared equipment, like labs or infusion centers, an MRI
machine, refrigerators, computers, grant writers, all of that
is considered indirect. And so it is really indispensable for
the research that your universities do.
This is not insignificant. For some of the research
institutions in my State, we are talking about 50 percent
indirect costs. So, for every dollar that goes specifically to
the project, another 50 cents goes to all of the support
equipment. So this isn't cutting fat when they go from 50
percent to 15. This is knee-capping research. And it will shut
down our greatest research institutions and our medical
schools.
And I am hearing from people in the middle of trials right
now, scheduled to get their next dose of trial chemotherapy,
and they can't get it because it is delayed. That messes up, of
course, not just their health, putting it at risk, but it
messes up the study, because now a dose has been given late,
and how do you evaluate those results? This is already
happening.
So I just want to emphasize that it is threatening the
universities where you play and you coach. It makes our
brightest young scientists think about not pursuing research,
even though they could. And it makes our bright young scientist
athletes reconsider whether they want to go into sports
medicine research or sports medicine.
So I have no specific questions for all of you. I do have
gratitude to all of you. And I just want to ask that, as we
consider these programs to benefit our student-athletes, that
we also consider the well-being of the universities that they
play for. And restoring that National Institutes of Health
funding keeps our universities strong and keeps us all at the
cutting edge.
Thank you, and I yield back.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you.
I recognize now the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Kean,
for his 5 minutes of questioning.
Mr. Kean. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you to all of our witnesses for being here today.
As the landscape of college athletics continues to evolve,
NIL has created new opportunities for student-athletes while
also raising concerns about fairness, recruitment, and the role
of higher education in sports.
As we consider Federal legislation, it is critical that we
strike the right balance, ensuring that athletes can benefit
from their name, image, and likeness, preserving the integrity
of college athletics, and keeping competition fair for all
schools, including those in New Jersey.
Mr. Whitman, thank you for your testimony. And one of my
concerns is how reclassifying students as employees would
drastically harm smaller universities, where we already have
seen many eliminate specific sports teams or their entire
sports program in its entirety.
I know that you are the athletic director for a larger
school, but what are the consequences of shifting students to
become employees? Are there alternative ways in which we can
bring about some of the protection for student-athletes without
naming them employees and potentially eliminating their chance
to continue playing the sports they love?
Mr. Whitman. Thank you, Congressman.
I do have some firsthand experience with this. Prior to
coming to the University of Illinois, I was the athletic
director at two different Division III institutions. And so I
have an understanding of what it means to be at a smaller
institution that competes at a different level of college
athletics.
I do think that the Dartmouth men's basketball case is
instructive to the question that you have asked. And in that
case, the Regional Director of the National Labor Relations
Board found the men's basketball team at Dartmouth to be
employees based on the fact that Dartmouth exercised control
over their schedule and ultimately they compensated them in the
form of free apparel, shoes, and sweatshirts, priority
scheduling, and the opportunity to give their family free
tickets.
The problem with that is, if that is the test, then every
student-athlete in America at every Division I, Division II,
and Division III institution is also an employee, because every
school provides free sweatshirts, free shoes, free tickets for
their kids to have for their families to attend their games.
And that becomes a tremendous problem.
If schools like University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, where I
began my athletic director career, were forced to begin
compensating student-athletes, they don't have the financial
resources to support a program that is required to do that, and
ultimately they will have to make decisions that may ultimately
result in significant reduction in opportunities for student-
athletes and potentially even the closure of full programs. And
that would be catastrophic for the educational mission of
college athletics.
Mr. Kean. Thank you.
Coach Beamer, do you feel NIL opportunities have created
challenges in maintaining team chemistry? And if so, how do you
keep players focused on the team?
Mr. Beamer. It is a new challenge that all of us as coaches
are navigating for the first time.
To me, sir, it starts with bringing the right kind of
people into your program that certainly understand that they
can capitalize on their name, image, and likeness, but making
sure that is not the sole reason that they are at the
University of South Carolina, for sure, and that, you know,
they understand, all of our players--they are not, but they all
have a goal of going to professional football. And that is an
aspect of professional football as well--players getting paid.
And some guys are going to be making more on their name, image,
and likeness in college, just like the NFL players will be as
well when they are paid a salary.
Mr. Kean. OK.
And how can Federal NIL legislation create a fair playing
field for all student-athletes, including those at smaller
schools or in nonrevenue sports?
Mr. Beamer. Certainly just the national legislation that we
need that would, one, promote academics and enhance welfare for
all of our student-athletes, that allows the conferences in the
NCAA to regulate without being caught up in litigation; and
then certainly something to protect the student-athletes as
well, a national law that will help with the agents. Because,
as has been mentioned--there are some great ones out there,
don't get me wrong--but in pro sports, you have to be certified
to be an agent. So many of our student-athletes have agents
that help them with NIL that aren't really agents, and so many
young student-athletes are being taken advantage of by these.
Mr. Kean. Thank you.
I yield back.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much.
And now I recognize Mr. Evans from the great State of
Colorado.
I am not sure if you represent Neon Deion, Coach Prime, or
not. But you are recognized for your 5 minutes of questioning.
Mr. Evans. Thank you, Mr.--
Mr. Bilirakis. He would be a great witness, by the way.
Mr. Evans. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you to the ranking member and to the witnesses.
No, they are actually just outside of my district. But I am
honored to be representing the University of Northern Colorado,
where we have student-athletes who of course will be directly
impacted by the NIL reforms that we are discussing here today.
And I have had the chance to hear from this institution about
some of the needs for Federal regulation to set those basic
rules of the road for all schools and ensure that we are
setting up our student-athletes for success.
They are a Big Sky Conference member with a very--I think
they have the highest graduation rate, actually, and a very
good sports program. And so I look forward to working with them
to be able to just explore how we can get this critical work
done.
And so my first question, with that back story, is to Ms.
Cole.
Again, University of Northern Colorado, they have that
very, very crucial role of setting up their student-athletes
for success, not just in college but for the rest of their
lives. But, as we have heard, you know, we have situations
where student-athletes can get in trouble with owing back taxes
or being taken advantage of or exploited.
And so I just want to hear a little bit about your
experience in how, as a student-athlete, how you can navigate
the NIL landscape responsibly and how institutions and
conferences can play a role in making sure that students get
the appropriate guidance to navigate that situation.
Ms. Cole. Absolutely. Thank you so much for your question,
Congressman Evans.
I actually spoke on two different panels at the NIL Summit,
which started, obviously, right after the laws changed, for
Invesco and then Robinhood, to really bring up the importance
of awareness around these topics and education for student-
athletes, especially in such a new and ill-defined space.
And I think it is extremely important that we put in
programs to help make sure that these student-athletes are
educated in a way that they can go into these decisions
informed, to really set themselves up in the best position to
thrive both during and after their collegiate careers.
Mr. Evans. Thank you.
And kind of continuing on that same vein of questioning,
Mr. Egbo, you served some time on the Student-Athlete Advisory
Committee. Can you just talk a little bit about how that
exposed you to some of the decision-making processes for your
athletic department?
Mr. Egbo. Yes, I was on SAAC for my institution, president,
and then represented my conference, and then now sit on
National SAAC--which I am on the joint council with Josh--
integrated in every level of governance and decision making. At
the national level, 32 reps, 1 from each Division I conference,
we sit on every voting standing committee, on council and board
of directors and board of governors.
So just being exposed to that, and also trying to, you
know, create more avenues, like Josh mentioned earlier, to give
student-athletes more decision-making influence and voice is
very important.
But we are integrated in it, and there is a system in place
right now to have that continue to be built up.
Mr. Evans. Thank you.
And then to Mr. Whitman, you know, we have heard today
about some of the good work that institutions are doing to make
sure that they are taking care of their student-athletes, but
we also understand that there is a need for, again, just basic
rules-of-the-road legislation.
For example, one thing that I specifically heard from my
athletic director at the University of Northern Colorado--and
it seems to be a concern that you all are facing as well--is,
last week, CBS Sports obtained a draft bill from the capital in
Springfield to exempt NIL payments from State income tax, which
is modeled after some policies in other States.
And so the question is: Do you think that that patchwork,
where some States are able to exempt those payments from income
tax, gives a competitive advantage? And how do you think that
affects the recruiting landscape without general rules of the
road?
Mr. Whitman. Thank you for the question. And, yes, I
absolutely do think it is a competitive advantage. And that is
the kind of political maneuvering that we need to try and
eliminate through the use of Federal legislation.
Right now, we have this environment that makes it very
difficult to compete on a level playing field, which is the
point of college sports--is, when Coach Beamer goes out on
Saturday afternoon, to know that he has the same opportunity
for his team to be successful as those teams that he is
competing against. And, right now, some of these State laws are
creating inequity across our system that really only can be
addressed through Federal legislation.
Mr. Evans. And so, with my last 20 seconds, just very
briefly, how do you see such a piece of legislation structured
to give the institutions the flexibility they need to be able
to do the good work that many of them are doing but also to
provide that guidance?
Mr. Whitman. Ultimately, I think it is on two fronts. One
is preemption, making sure that this new piece of legislation
preempts State efforts to address some of the issues that are
active in college athletics.
And then, secondly, as I discussed with Ms. Lee earlier, I
think it is important that we create some limited antitrust
safe harbor so that we have flexibility to manage our own
house. And we have heard from you and your colleagues that
people are interested in seeing college athletics step up and
manage its own affairs.
Mr. Evans. Thank you.
Mr. Whitman. We would like to do that, but we need
additional resources on the legal side to manage.
Mr. Evans. Thank you.
I yield back.
Mr. Bilirakis. The gentleman yields back.
Now I recognize the vice chairman of the full committee,
Dr. Joyce, for your 5 minutes of questioning.
Mr. Joyce. First, I want to thank Chairman Bilirakis for
holding this important hearing and for allowing me to waive on.
I also want to thank the witnesses for appearing.
The unique nature of college athletics is something that is
firmly embedded in American sports, in our psyche and in our
culture. Millions of Americans have been able to attend college
and excel both on and off the field because of the
opportunities that the NCAA and their member institutions
offer.
In the wake of the Alston decision in 2021 and the changes
in the NIL policy, we recognize that the amateur model that had
existed at colleges across the country must evolve.
In the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, steps have already
been taken to ensure that student-athletes can navigate the
evolving NIL landscapes responsibly. Penn State has been a
leader in ensuring that NIL opportunities are both beneficial
and sustainable by offering robust financial literacy programs
and prioritizing student-athlete well-being.
This year, Penn State Athletics announced the creation of
the ROAR Solutions, a powerful and dynamic group of resources
assembled to deliver the best student-athletes endorsements and
support in the country. This collaboration between the
university and the world-class student-athletes at Penn State--
like NFL player Mike Gesicki, sports commentator Adam Breneman,
and 2025 Super Bowl champion Saquon Barkley--will help to tell
the unique stories and propel their careers forward.
Besides my alma mater of Penn State, Pennsylvania hosts 14
other DI schools. These universities range from large
universities, like the University of Pittsburgh and Temple, to
smaller colleges, like Bucknell and St. Francis University.
The experience of being a student-athlete not only prepares
great opportunity--academic opportunities, but allows young
adults to enter the world after college. In my own
congressional office, we have an outstanding example of this:
Lili Benzel, a former St. Francis University basketball
superstar and three-point specialist, who I am proud to have as
my director of operations.
As we consider NIL as legislators, we must examine this
issue and the impact that any action will not only have to big
teams like Penn State but also the ripple effects that this
might have on the St. Francis University women's basketball
team, the Shippensburg baseball team, the Juniata College
volleyball national championship team, and the thousands of
athletes who compete and go to school every day in
Pennsylvania-13.
Mr. Whitman, in 2021 Pennsylvania's NIL law went into
effect, and subsequently they have had to amend their law
several times, largely to respond to other States seeking a
competitive advantage in the recruiting of athletes.
Additionally, States are now looking to other laws, as we have
discussed, to do the same regarding tax law.
What are the dangers to this approach, when States are
creating and amending tax laws to seek competitive advantages
in college sports?
Mr. Whitman. Thank you, Congressman. I think your question
strikes at the challenge that we confront and the reason we are
all here today, is the need to identify a standardized playing
field for college athletics.
And as States have become increasingly active in passing
legislation to benefit their hometown institutions, that is a
new phenomenon. It is not something we have experienced in
college athletics in the past, and we believe it is
antithetical to the purpose of college athletics, which, again,
is to educate our student-athletes but also to provide them a
world-class competitive opportunity on the most fair and even
playing field that we can create.
And the only way, at this point in time, for us to be able
to do that is to get some support from the Federal Government
and ultimately to preempt those State efforts.
Mr. Joyce. Ms. Cole, as a student-athlete who has to deal
with the ever-evolving situation, in your opinion, what are the
greatest misconceptions that the public has about NIL?
Ms. Cole. That is a great question. And I think the main
misconception that I have seen is, you know, people really only
think of, like, football and collectives whenever this
conversation comes up, and it is really under two different
buckets. There is also the whole legitimate NIL side of
actually working with brands separately on these different
brand deals.
And so there really are, like, two different buckets, and I
think a lot of people get them confused. But a lot of my
experience and expertise is totally within the more--working
with companies to do brand partnerships, which is separate from
the collective conversation.
Mr. Joyce. Coach Beamer, with the remaining time, I wanted
to see if there was anything that we haven't discussed today
that should be brought into this conversation regarding NIL
from your perch.
Mr. Beamer. No, I think it has been very beneficial for all
of us, without a doubt, that we are all pro-student-athlete,
but making sure that we understand it is still about the
educational experience.
And it hasn't been mentioned, but there are a lot of rules
that have come up, there are a lot of laws that have been
changed and talked about. One thing that hasn't changed is,
student-athletes still have to go to school to be eligible to
compete in college athletics. And just making sure that we
don't get too far away from the educational model as it stands
right now.
Mr. Joyce. Coach Beamer, I am glad that you put that
exclamation point on the question, because the educational
model--the experience is important, but to walk away with a
class-A educational experience is what student-athletes should
want to achieve.
Mr. Chairman, again, I thank you for allowing me to waive
on, and I yield back.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you. I thank the gentleman.
Now we have Representative Carter for his 5 minutes of
questioning.
Welcome, sir.
Mr. Carter of Georgia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And I appreciate all of you being here. I know you are
tired and you are ready to go, so we will try to be succinct
and get to the point.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to waive on as
well.
You know, NIL, as we all know, has certainly changed
sports, but it is really a great opportunity. And I hope we
will recognize the opportunity that it brings for student-
athletes as well as for fans like myself, a graduate of the
University of Georgia. Go, Dawgs. So, just want to get that out
there real quick.
But, nevertheless, it is something that we in the State of
Georgia have tried to address, and the State has actually come
up with some State laws. The Governor and the State legislature
have already passed executive orders and bills to make the
State of Georgia one of the country's most competitive NIL-
participating States.
And that is one thing that concerns me, and I suspect it
concerns all of you all, is that consistency throughout the
country. Because that is very important then. And I think that
is the role--I hope that is the role, anyway--that the Federal
Government can play, is making sure we are consistent.
Another thing that I am concerned about--and I would
suspect that, Ms. Cole, you are concerned about this too, and
you have mentioned it--is how the proceeds are distributed
throughout the sports.
As a student at the University of Georgia in 19-uhh, I will
tell you that, you know, I thoroughly enjoyed all the sports
that were offered. Obviously I am a big football fan, but I
will never forget, I got to see John McEnroe play tennis at the
University of Georgia when he played--when he went to 1 year at
Stanford. And what a great experience that was. But even the
gymnastics, all the other sports are so very important.
Coach, would you agree with that? Would you elaborate just
a little bit on how important it is for us to make sure we keep
those--I am not going to refer to them as ``minority sports,''
but--those less popular sports, if you will?
Mr. Beamer. Yes, sir. And your Georgia Bulldogs come to
Columbia tonight for basketball. So go, Gamecocks----
Mr. Carter of Georgia. They do that.
Mr. Beamer [continuing]. In Columbia as well.
No, to me, it is--and I tell people this all the time, Mr.
Carter--it is what I love about my job, is being in the middle
of a college campus, where I am able to be a part of the entire
athletic fabric and support all sports and go and watch our men
and women compete.
My wife is here with me today, and our three children. They
love being a part of a college campus, where we are able to go
see the different sporting events. And I have two young
daughters that are teenagers that certainly enjoy going to
watch sports. And being able to take them and support all of
our student-athletes, not just the football program, is
something that is very special and important to me.
Mr. Carter of Georgia. What about South Carolina? Do they
have a plan on the sharing among the sports, on the different
sports? Is there--or how is that handled?
Mr. Beamer. Yes, I believe it is obviously in the works.
And our athletic director, Jeremiah Donati, has done a great
job of spearheading that and communicating to all of us coaches
at the University of South Carolina some of his initial plans
as we get ready to finalize it.
Mr. Carter of Georgia. Mr. Whitman, what about at Illinois?
How do you all handle that?
Mr. Whitman. As at South Carolina, across the country, all
of our schools are working to identify what those plans will
be, how we will handle the new opportunities that are made
available to us through the House Settlement.
But I would just reiterate a point Coach Beamer made, which
is, it has become very popular in today's world to take shots
at college athletics. There have been a lot of cynics who have
developed around the industry of the college athletics
ecosystem. And I would just encourage people to spend a day on
our campus to really interact with our student-athletes--we
have great representatives here on the panel today--but to
understand that the core of college athletics remains as true
as it has ever been.
It is about education. It is about personal growth and
development. It is about how a program like ours at Illinois
can bring people together from all walks of life. It is just an
incredibly important part of the American tradition.
Mr. Carter of Georgia. Right.
Mr. Whitman. And there is nothing that has changed from
that as college athletics has continued to evolve over time.
Mr. Carter of Georgia. Ms. Cole, let me ask you again, has
NIL changed the environment of the team sports and the
chemistry between teammates now that money is a factor there?
Ms. Cole. That is a great question. I think we all note the
majority of that change is not happening in cross country and
track, the sports that I did participate in. So I didn't
witness those types of changes yet, but I can see how it would
be a factor in other sports.
Mr. Carter of Georgia. Mr. Egbo?
Mr. Egbo. I mean, yes, I think it is different for every
team, you know, different cultures at different teams, but I
think, at the end of the day, I said earlier most of the
athletes aren't anti-getting-paid. So it is a matter of, you
know, just another factor of team culture and chemistry, but it
is not a negative factor.
Mr. Carter of Georgia. Great. I am glad to hear that, and I
hope that remains the same as well.
Again, I want to thank all of you for being here. And, you
know, we are all big sports fans, and especially college
football. I mean, if you live in the South, you are a big
college football fan. And we want to see this--we want to get
this right. We want to help you, but we don't want to hurt you.
But we do want to help you.
So please know that we are on your side, and we are--we
really appreciate you coming today and really appreciate your
participation in this.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Bilirakis. Never thought I would agree with a Georgia
Bulldog, but I do in this case. You know, we don't want to lose
the school spirit. That is for sure.
All right. I now will yield some time to the gentleman from
Texas, Mr. Pfluger. I believe he is a Red Raider.
Right? Is that right?
Mr. Pfluger. Well, Mr. Chairman--
Mr. Bilirakis. I know you represent Baylor.
Mr. Pfluger. Well, I am actually an Air Force Falcon----
Mr. Bilirakis. Oh, that is right. That is right. Right.
Mr. Pfluger [continuing]. A student-athlete, which I don't
know if we talked about a service captain is. But----
Mr. Bilirakis. Absolutely. Go ahead. I yield----
Mr. Pfluger [continuing]. That is a special----
Mr. Bilirakis [continuing]. To you for 5 minutes.
Mr. Pfluger [continuing]. Special case. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
I will get right into it. And thank you all for being here.
Five minutes is not enough to ask questions.
But, Coach, I will start with you. Do you think that the
conferences have aligned themselves as a result of no Federal
standard for NIL?
Mr. Beamer. Well, first of all, thank you for your service
to our country as well.
I believe the conferences are certainly, as a whole, trying
to align themselves for the betterment of the student-athlete
experience and college athletics, but, within that, there are
individual States within those conferences that are trying to
find a competitive advantage to better their individual States,
as we have discussed in here.
Mr. Pfluger. One thing I am worried about is just having,
you know, East Coast, West Coast--you know, you have got UCLA
and Rutgers in the same conference. And as a student-athlete, I
mean, that is a tough--especially if you are playing multiple
games, that is a very tough thing. So lack of a Federal
standard, I think, is an issue.
And then I will go a step further and get your thoughts on
the threat to the nonrevenue-generating sports, the threat to
women's sports. You know, talk to me about, is there such a
thing as too much market share for one conference or another?
And we are seeing a lot of domination, and does that then
affect how the Title IX sports and how the nonrevenue Olympic
sports are able to actually exist?
Mr. Beamer. Yes, certainly with the upcoming settlement
next month, it would better the situation for the nonrevenue
sports, because they would all be part of a roster cap that
they are all on scholarship as well.
And I am all for that, absolutely, as those sports continue
to advance. I mean, these are three fantastic athletes right
here, and I know two of them were in football, but with Emily
from track and field as well, we want those opportunities to
continue for all student-athletes.
And you have seen what the student-athlete experience can
do for people, with these three being here today. I know, as a
guy that is going to be 48 at the end of the month, I was
nervous as heck coming in here today. And to see what they have
been able to do as young people because of their experience as
student-athletes, I have so much respect for and want the
continued advancement of all student-athletes in all sports.
Mr. Pfluger. Mr. Chairman, there is a tweet by RGIII. It
says, ``The Soul of College Football is dying because of money.
Allowing the Big 10 and SEC to get 4 automatic bids into
another expanded College Football Playoff''--anyways, I want to
enter this into the record, because I think it is important.
Mr. Bilirakis. Without objection.
[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.]
Mr. Pfluger. Thank you.
And I love competition, love the fact that--Mr. Egbo, I
will go to you, because I am 90 miles south of you in my
hometown of San Angelo. So thank you for representing Abilene
Christian here. And talk to us about the pros and cons of being
a student-athlete.
Coach, I love what you said about being a student-athlete.
That is the most important thing. I was a student-athlete, if
you can call it that at an Air Force Academy. It is more of a,
you know, military school.
But talk to us about the opportunities that you have been
provided because of being a student-athlete.
Mr. Egbo. Greatest experience. I mean, you said there is
nothing like it, and it is true, and I am an embodiment of
that.
I mean, the opportunity that I got to walk on to Abilene
Christian, it eventually paid for my undergraduate and
graduate. It allowed me to work with the president of my
university. I was a presidential intern my senior year. It
allowed me to make the connections I have made. Student-Athlete
Advisory Committee at the national level.
I mean, you can point almost to every good thing that has
happened in the last 5 years to some sort of experience as
being a student-athlete. It is the greatest experience that I
think exists in this country.
Mr. Pfluger. Folks at Abilene Christian would be very proud
of you. They are very proud of you for representing so well
today.
I am sorry I don't have time to go to everybody, but I will
go to Ms. Cole, because I have three daughters, and, you know,
wanting them to have that experience. And, you know, what is,
in your--wave your magic wand, and what is the--what needs to
be fixed first, from your perspective?
Ms. Cole. Yes, absolutely. Thank you so much for the
question and also for everything you do for the great State of
Texas. I am actually from Houston, so----
Mr. Pfluger. Oh, great.
Ms. Cole. Yes. I am very grateful for everything that you
do.
But I actually--I think that there should be a big emphasis
on giving these female athletes the same platform and voice
that the male athletes have been given. And that is something
that we have been able to see happen through social media and
all of these female athletes being able to prove that they can
sell tickets and they can make money.
And, obviously, there is still a lot of work to be done,
but I really believe in the power that social media has had in
helping these female athletes have the platform and voice to
show that we can do the work and have the potential to drive
the same progress and revenue that men's sports do.
Mr. Pfluger. Fantastic.
Mr. Chairman, I have to thank you for continuing to lead on
this issue, with all the other things that we are doing.
Having these three student-athletes here, but also the
experience you get--I think you are right, Mr. Egbo, that, you
know, learning how to be on a team, learning how to compete,
that is a skill for life.
And I know Coach--by the way, ``Sandstorm,'' interesting
how that has just been a phenomenon that has taken off. That
doesn't have anything to do with NIL. But, Chairman, thank you
for--it is the song they play in advance of the games at the
South Carolina Gamecock football games. They have this European
dance song that they play.
Mr. Beamer. He has heard it as a Gator when they have come
to Columbia.
Mr. Pfluger. Anyways, Mr. Chairman, great job, and I yield
back.
Mr. Bilirakis. My pleasure. Thank you.
I just want to tell you all, you all did an outstanding
job. And I appreciate, it is a sacrifice, the time that you
have given to us today.
And I am telling you, we are going to get a good bill. We
are going to build some consensus on both sides of the aisle,
partially because of your testimony today. So we appreciate you
so very much.
I ask unanimous consent that the documents on the staff
document list be submitted for the record.
Without objection, so ordered.
[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.]
Mr. Bilirakis. I remind Members that they have 10
legislative days to submit questions for the record. And I ask
the witnesses to respond to the questions promptly. Members
should submit their questions by the close of business on March
18th.
So, without objection, the subcommittee is adjourned. Thank
you so very much. We appreciate all of you.
[Whereupon, at 1:25 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]