Olympic Sports Funding Mandate Urged in Congress
USOPC Seeks Protections for Non-Revenue Programs Amidst College Sports Bill
U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee leaders are lobbying lawmakers to ensure future college sports legislation guarantees continued financial commitment to Olympic programs. They aim to prevent schools from solely prioritizing high-revenue sports like football.
SCORE Act Debate Intensifies
Sarah Hirshland, CEO of the USOPC, expressed concerns that the current version of the SCORE Act, which mandates schools sponsor at least 16 teams, might not sufficiently protect Olympic sports. This minimum number aligns with existing NCAA rules for Power Four conferences, but Hirshland fears it offers little incentive for schools to fund less lucrative, Olympic-focused disciplines.
“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 stated to the Associated Press.
The USOPC points out that most of the 67 Power Four institutions already sponsor more than 16 sports, with the average exceeding 21. This highlights the potential for the proposed 16-team minimum to be a loophole rather than a safeguard.
Athlete Pipeline at Stake
The connection between college athletics and Olympic success remains strong. At the recent Paris Olympics, a significant 75% of U.S. Olympians and 53% of Paralympians had ties to American college sports.
The SCORE Act, recently advanced by a House subcommittee, is slated for markup. Hirshland and USOPC Chair Gene Sykes have been actively discussing amendments that would require schools to maintain their current percentage of spending on Olympic sports.
“The bill, as it’s written, would make it too easy for a school to starve 15 programs and invest in one. 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.’”
—Sarah Hirshland, CEO, U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee
Broader Legislative Aims
Beyond Olympic sport protection, the SCORE Act aims to offer limited antitrust immunity to the NCAA. It also seeks to unify the complex landscape of name, image, and likeness (NIL) regulations under a single federal law, replacing the current patchwork of state-by-state rules.
With schools now permitted to pay athletes up to $20.5 million in NIL deals starting this month, concerns are rising about the financial future of Olympic programs. Much of this revenue is expected to flow to football and basketball players, the primary revenue generators.
While the act includes a 16-team minimum to protect Olympic sports, Sykes and Hirshland remain unconvinced of its efficacy.
“The USOPC is committed to being a partner in this process and would welcome the opportunity to share further insights, data, and recommendations.”
—Gene Sykes and Sarah Hirshland
The legislation also stipulates that athletes should not be classified as employees, a point of contention that could impede its progress in the Senate. Hirshland noted that the USOPC’s primary focus is on robust protections for Olympic sports, rather than taking a definitive stance on the employment issue.
The USOPC advocates for maintaining current spending percentages on Olympic sports as a practical and effective solution. “We don’t want schools to starve Olympic sports by cutting them or starving them,” Hirshland emphasized. “We want them to continue to provide investment in the growth of these sports.”