U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee leaders are pushing lawmakers for tweaks to legislation that would regulate college sports by adding guarantees that schools will spend the same percentage on Olympic programs in the future as they do now.
USOPC CEO Sarah Hirshland told The Associated Press on Monday that a letter she and chair Gene Sykes sent to members of Congress last week was intended to restart a conversation about the SCORE Act, which currently calls for schools to sponsor at least 16 teams.
That’s a number that conforms with current NCAA rules for Power Four schools, and one that Hirshland worries would give schools no incentive to fund non-revenue sports that power the Olympic pipeline.
“You look and you say, ‘Is that effectively going to thwart the issue of allocating too many resources to football and not enough to other things?’ And my assessment is, no, it’s not going to do that,” Hirshland said.
The USOPC says all but three of the 67 Power Four schools sponsor more than 16 sports and the average school in that group has more than 21.
At last year’s Paris Olympics, 75% of U.S. Olympians and 53% of Paralympians had a connection with U.S. college sports.
The SCORE Act recently passed a House subcommittee and is set for markup this week, a process in which lawmakers amend certain facets of the bill. Hirshland said USOPC leadership has long been in discussions about adding provisions that would compel schools to spend at least the same percentage on Olympic sports as they do now.
“The bill, as it’s written, would make it too easy for a school to starve 15 programs and invest in one,” Hirshland said. “It’s important schools have the latitude to make decisions that are most effective for the school, but while also creating an environment that says ‘You don’t just need to be a football school.'”
She said she was encouraged that lawmakers were including provisions for protecting Olympic sports in a bill that would regulate the shifting college landscape.
The SCORE Act proposes to provide limited antitrust protection for the NCAA and would place the college sports’ name, image, likeness system under one federal law instead of a mishmash of state regulations.
Starting this month, schools are allowed to pay up to $20.5 million to athletes in NIL deals. Most of that money will be funneled to football and basketball players, whose sports generate the bulk of college athletics revenue. It has left many to wonder about the future of the Olympic programs.
The act also includes a section that purports to protect Olympic sports with the 16-team minimum, but in the letter to House leaders, Sykes and Hirshland were skeptical of that.
“The USOPC is committed to being a partner in this process and would welcome the opportunity to share further insights, data, and recommendations,” they wrote.
It also mandates that athletes not be turned into employees of their schools, a sticking point for some Democrats that figures to keep the bill from moving along in the Senate, where it would need 60 votes to pass.
Hirshland said the USOPC hasn’t taken a “strong position” on the employment issue, and is mostly concerned that any legislation includes strong protection for Olympic sports.
She says the USOPC-backed idea of keeping spending at certain percentages isn’t the only answer to the issue, but might be the simplest and best.
“We don’t want schools to starve Olympic sports by cutting them or starving them,” she said. “We want them to continue to provide investment in the growth of these sports.”
