The Aftermath of the CSC’s Statement

In the ever-changing world that is the current college sports landscape, the College Sports Commission has just drawn a line in the sand. Those who step across it will commit to a new era of college sports, with stricter guidelines, less money, and a system that shares a remarkable resemblance to professional leagues. Those who refuse to cross this line will dig in for a final stand against the greater regulation of college sports, hoping to retain to retain the Gatsby-Esque feel of the last five years, in which collectives, drunk on the remarkably potent elixir of NIL deals, did whatever they desired to the world of college sports¹.  

This line in the sand was no other than a July 10^th decree from the College Sports Commission (CSC) declaring that collectives—that is, donors or benefactors loosely connected to a collegiate athletics sports program—do not “meet a valid business purpose,” and as such will have increasingly limited influence regarding a school’s ability to create NIL deals². It’s a decision that should, at least in theory, create a more clearly defined—and thus easier to regulate—salary cap.  

For several schools, the CSC’s message is an answered prayer, and they have been all too happy to oblige. Even giants like Georgia and Ohio State have been willing to bend the knee, closing or minimizing their collectives³. Although collectives and the schools they serve essentially serve the same aim—to win as much as possible—it’s a highly strained relationship. For administrators, collectives and boosters have wielded an undue influence over the inside workings of college rosters; collectives control the money, and as such they control who is brought to the school via an NIL deal. During the dawn of NIL, universities had no choice but to accept the presence of collectives, and they formed unhappy but necessary unions. But the CSC’s statement, and the House Settlement in general, have given universities the tools they need to potentially extract themselves from their parasitic relationship with collectives. If collectives can be brought to their knees—and it certainly seems like the CSC intends to do just that—schools may be able to regain some semblance of control⁴. 

Unsurprisingly, it doesn’t appear that collectives, which have become used to a high degree of influence in administrative actions, are willingly to quickly relinquish their control. Collectives argue that the extra money they offer—which doesn’t count against the $20.5 million salary cap—allows smaller-profile athletes, who are not expected to command a particularly large portion of their school’s salary cap, to still receive decent compensation⁵. In fact, some estimates suggest that for power conference schools, approximately seventy-five percent of this $20.5 million⁶ will be directed towards football programs, an indication that other athletes may not reap the same rewards from the new House Settlement. It’s a fact that collectives can attack, arguing that without them and their vast coffers, student-athletes who play more niche sports won’t receive the equal payment they’re entitled to. 

Both sides are currently prepping for a legal war, but there is still a chance that cooler heads will prevail. After the plaintiffs of the House Settlement threatened legal action in the form of a magistrate, the CSC has backed down, and is expected to release a clarifying statement that should return a good deal of bargaining power back to the collectives⁷ . Still, it’s hard to imagine such a hotly contested issue being fully resolved so quickly—and so peacefully. 

1. Stewart Mandel, The Fight to Stamp out Pay-for-play in College Sports: ‘The Lawsuits will Start Flying’, The Athletic (July 17, 2025)  ↩︎
2. Eddie Pells, The New College Sports Agency is Rejecting Some Athlete NIL Deals with Donor-backed Collectives, AP News (July 11, 2025, 02:34 PM EDT) ↩︎
3. Mandel, supra note 1. ↩︎
4. Id. ↩︎
5. Id. ↩︎
6. Shehan Jeyarajah, How College Athletes will be Paid After House v. NCAA Settlement: NIL Changes, Enforcement, Contracts and More, CBS Sports (June 6, 2025, 09:58 PM ET) ↩︎
7. Ralph D. Russo, College Sports Commission, House Attorneys End Standoff Over Policing Collectives: Sources, The Athletic (July 22, 2025) ↩︎

Henry Bartholomew is a guest author who periodically contributes to the UB Law Sports & Entertainment Forum.  The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the guest author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the University at Buffalo School of Law or the UB Center for the Advancement of Sport.