Trump’s College Sports Gambit: A Political Play or Genuine Solution?
Donald Trump’s potential foray into the tumultuous world of college sports has sparked a mixture of hope and skepticism. With his approval ratings waning, global conflicts persisting, and economic uncertainty looming before the 2026 midterms, the allure of claiming credit for "saving college sports" – whether or not he truly does – is undeniably politically appealing. The image of Nick Saban, the iconic football coach, standing behind the Resolute Desk, offering a thumbs-up of support as Trump signs some executive order, is certainly a potent one. But will this initiative actually address the fundamental issues plaguing college athletics, or is it merely a superficial attempt to score political points?
Some college sports administrators might welcome Trump’s involvement, hoping that it will finally break the gridlock that has paralyzed meaningful reform. However, many others are rolling their eyes, questioning the true impact of a presidential commission when the potential solutions are already well-known.
The fundamental challenge facing college sports boils down to two possible paths. First, Congress could pass legislation, which Trump would then sign, granting the NCAA the authority to enforce its rules without constant legal challenges related to Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) deals or eligibility issues. Second, a group of major revenue-generating schools could unite to create a new system that allows for collective bargaining with athletes, establishing mutually beneficial rules and bringing order to the current chaos. There seems to be no third option.
Even if Trump were to consolidate Saban’s public grievances about NIL and the transfer portal into an executive order, the overall impact would likely be minimal. Such an order, arbitrarily limiting earning potential or freedom of movement, would almost certainly trigger a wave of lawsuits, further enriching the legal profession, which has already profited handsomely from the ongoing turmoil in college sports.
While Saban’s contributions to the game and his concerns about the current state of college sports are valid, the primary goal of this commission should not be to simply revert to the pre-NIL era. Such an attempt is doomed to fail and could even provoke a college athlete revolt, disrupting major events like college football weekends or the NCAA basketball tournament, which generate hundreds of millions of dollars.
This is where the prospect of yet another college sports commission causes concern. The track record of such panels in addressing these complex issues is abysmal. The Condoleezza Rice-led Commission on College Basketball, for example, produced recommendations that quickly became irrelevant.
Furthermore, any recommendations from the commission or executive orders from Trump will be largely ineffective without congressional action to protect the NCAA. However, the NCAA has been lobbying for such legislation for nearly six years without success. Despite numerous hearings and much rhetoric, there is little evidence that resolving the chaos in college sports is a high priority for Congress.
Moreover, Trump himself presents a significant obstacle. Democrats in Congress may be hesitant to hand him a political victory, particularly in the lead-up to the 2026 midterms, by allowing him to showcase his role in "fixing" college sports at events like the Final Four.
Ideally, leaders would come together to solve problems regardless of political considerations. However, college sports are now deeply entwined with politics, and political calculations inevitably influence decision-making.
Ultimately, the responsibility for fixing college sports lies with college sports themselves. It will be difficult to achieve consensus and some may suffer as the system evolves towards greater professionalization. However, relying on a president with limited understanding of the issues, advised by figures like Saban and Tuberville primarily for perceived political gains, is simply a delaying tactic employed by college presidents who refuse to confront the realities of the changing landscape.
These institutions can either wait for Congress to intervene or take proactive steps to save themselves. Adding Trump to the equation only postpones the inevitable. The future of college sports hinges on either legislative action from Congress or self-governance by major revenue-generating schools. The former is uncertain, given the political climate, while the latter requires a willingness to embrace change and compromise. Trump’s involvement, while potentially adding some initial momentum, ultimately serves as a distraction from the core challenges that must be addressed by those within the system itself. The question remains whether college sports leaders will seize this opportunity to forge a new path forward, or continue to rely on external forces for salvation.
