US Federal House Bill HB2663

US Federal 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/7/25
• Refer: 4/7/25

Caption

Restore College Sports Act

Summary

The Restore College Sports Act would create a new federal entity, the American Collegiate Sports Association (ACSA), to replace the NCAA as the primary overseer and regulator of college sports. The bill places the ACSA under a commissioner appointed by the President with Senate confirmation and a four-year term, giving the new body authority over member institutions of higher education that choose or are required to participate. The bill also sets a series of nationwide rules for member schools. It would require equal distribution of name, image, and likeness (NIL) revenue and other athletics-related revenue among student athletes and member institutions, guarantee free transfer rights for student athletes without penalty or restriction, limit athletic conferences to schools in the same time zone, and cap coach salaries at no more than 10 times the full cost of attendance at the institution. It further requires equal sharing of television broadcasting revenue among member institutions. The bill amends the Higher Education Act to make ACSA membership and compliance a condition tied to federal higher education participation requirements.

Impact

If enacted, the bill would significantly alter federal oversight of college athletics by displacing the NCAA with a federally established association and tying compliance to the Higher Education Act. It would affect colleges and universities, student athletes, athletic conferences, coaches, broadcasters, and NIL collectives by imposing mandatory revenue-sharing, transfer, scheduling, and compensation rules. The measure would also create a new enforcement mechanism through federal higher education law, making ACSA membership and compliance part of institutional eligibility requirements.

Sentiment

Based on the available context, the bill appears to be introduced as a reform measure aimed at reshaping college sports governance and addressing concerns about athlete compensation, mobility, and revenue distribution. There are no recorded committee transcripts or votes in the provided material, so there is no documented floor or committee sentiment beyond the bill’s text and its referral to the House Committee on Education and Workforce. The overall framing suggests a pro-reform, pro-athlete equity posture.

Contention

The most likely points of contention are the bill’s replacement of the NCAA with a federally created regulator, the mandatory equal sharing of athletics and NIL revenue, and the free-transfer rule, all of which would substantially change existing college sports business models. Coaches, athletic departments, and schools that benefit from current revenue structures may oppose the salary cap and revenue-sharing mandates, while student-athlete advocates may support them. The time-zone conference requirement could also draw criticism from schools and conferences that value traditional regional alignments or existing media arrangements.