Trump Warns of Collapse as College Sports Face Legal and Financial Overhaul
Former President Donald Trump has issued a stark warning regarding the future of college athletics amidst a major revision of policies governing how schools compensate their athletes. His remarks follow a federal court ruling that dramatically shifts the financial landscape for collegiate sports, particularly affecting the NCAA’s traditional methods of managing athlete earnings. The recent House antitrust settlement, finalized in early June 2025, allows for direct revenue sharing and mandates a fundamental restructuring of scholarships, laying the groundwork for a competitive yet potentially uneven playing field.
In a tweet, Trump expressed his discontent: “College Sports is in BIG trouble, just like I said it would be. A judge, with no knowledge or experience, ruled and, rather than fighting, the sports reps FOLDED. Can’t do that.” This statement encapsulates his belief that the legal decision undermines the integrity and robustness of college athletics.
The Settlement That Triggered a Shift
The origins of this legal shift can be traced back to 2020, when three federal lawsuits were filed against the NCAA. These lawsuits directly challenged the organization’s restrictions on athlete earnings from their name, image, and likeness (NIL). The ensuing class action lawsuit led to a substantial $2.8 billion antitrust settlement. The ruling, confirmed in June 2025, allows universities to share up to 22% of their athletic revenues with student-athletes while eliminating previous limits on scholarships. An overarching compliance framework is now being established, including the College Sports Commission (CSC) and monitoring efforts through a software platform known as NIL Go, intended to oversee and regulate athlete payments and ensure adherence to legal standards.
Bidding Wars and Budget Strains
This ruling poses profound implications for recruiting practices and financial allocations within athletic departments. High-profile institutions are reallocating millions toward football and men’s basketball to stay competitive in the evolving NIL market. Projections indicate that top-tier football programs may spend upwards of $35–40 million annually on athlete compensation, an expense that was previously dispersed across a broader range of sports. Trump and his allies warn that this trend may lead to the financial collapse of non-revenue sports—particularly women’s programs and Olympic sports—which rely on the existing structure of college athletics. The order from Trump’s administration declared: “The system is out-of-control. Federal action is necessary to restore balance.”
The Order’s Guardrails
To counterbalance these changes, Trump’s Executive Order issued on July 24 mandates that the Department of Education utilize its authority under Title IX to ensure universities maintain or ideally increase scholarships tied to non-revenue sports and women’s athletics. This executive action will compel federal agencies, including the Department of Labor, the National Labor Relations Board, and the Federal Trade Commission, to clarify the employment status of college athletes while enhancing protections for them.
The order seeks to distinguish between legitimate endorsements and pay-for-play arrangements that do not comply with fair-market value principles, intending to prevent universities from engaging in unethical compensation practices. However, legal experts have expressed skepticism about the order’s enforceability. As noted by Sam Ehrlich, a professor at Boise State University, “A lot will depend on whether agencies follow through promptly.” This uncertainty highlights the complexities of enforcement, particularly for collectives that operate outside the purview of university payroll systems.
Schools Caught Between Pressure and Policy
Colleges now find themselves at a precarious intersection of opportunity and obligation. The settlement encourages institutions to pursue talent through revenue-sharing and relaxed scholarship limits, creating potential liabilities while also enhancing flexibility. However, Trump’s executive order requires that schools navigate these new waters carefully, as failure to comply may jeopardize federal funding streams. Legal scholar Noah Henderson from Loyola University Chicago remarked, “There’s a contradiction here. The House settlement opened the doors. The federal order is now trying to dam the river.” Athletic directors face a daunting requirement to reconcile these conflicting pressures.
Federal Agencies Set Deadlines
The urgency of Trump’s order is underscored by its aggressive timelines, compelling the Secretary of Education to deliver an actionable compliance plan by August 26 that will govern NIL arrangements and scholarship minimums across high-revenue programs. By September 22, both the Attorney General and the FTC are expected to provide policy recommendations that will safeguard student-athletes while delineating legal boundaries to protect their rights against potential exploitation.
A notable aspect of this executive order is its implications for the operating capacity of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Currently, the agency lacks a full quorum due to pending appointments, which stalls immediate regulatory reform. However, the appointment of Trump-nominated candidates could sway future rulings in favor of protecting athlete rights, aligning operationally with the aims of his executive initiative.
Olympic Pipeline at Risk
Moreover, the executive order highlights the importance of a coordinated effort with the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee. Trump’s directive emphasizes the necessity of preserving collegiate athletics as a critical training ground for future Olympic competitors. Olympic sports such as wrestling, swimming, and track and field, which depend on a thriving NCAA, could face dire risks amid emerging pay-for-play systems that favor more lucrative sports. An anonymous official involved in Olympic training underscored the stakes, stating, “If everything becomes about football, we risk losing an entire generation of elite athletes in other sports.”
Long-Term Uncertainty
As it currently stands, the trajectory of college sports appears fraught with complexity. Despite the federal intervention, the resolution lacks clarity, especially as individual state laws governing NIL continue to diverge. With over 30 states implementing various legal standards, colleges face what many administrators describe as an unmanageable legal environment unless a cohesive national framework emerges. The U.S. Congress has introduced bipartisan legislation to regulate NIL compensation, yet progress remains stymied by legislative gridlock. This disarray, compounded by conflicting court rulings and executive mandates, leaves universities and student-athletes precariously navigating uncharted waters.
Trump’s assertion that “College Sports is in BIG trouble” resonates as a potential reflection of the turbulent landscape in the NCAA. As the clash between federal oversight and athlete empowerment unfolds, the outcomes of this struggle may shape the future of both collegiate athletics and the athletes it seeks to serve.
"*" indicates required fields
