Collective bargaining in college sports would look a lot like the pros: a salary cap and a spending floor, a pay scale for freshmen, players paid directly for playing instead of for their "name, image and likeness," and rules both sides agree to instead of rules the NCAA writes alone. That's the outline in a term sheet negotiated by Tennessee men's basketball players and school leaders and released by the athlete group Athletes.org. It isn't binding, but it's the most detailed look yet at what a college sports labor deal could be.
It was a practice run. I still think it matters more than most real news this week.
What the Tennessee basketball term sheet actually says
Tennessee athletic director Danny White brought Athletes.org in to present to his football and basketball teams, introduced them and left the room. The basketball team is the one that came out with a term sheet. Player representatives Tyler Lundblade, Campbell Duncan and DeWayne Brown II took the deal to their teammates, and it was agreed to on October 1, according to the AP.
The agreement covers five areas: money and compensation, player movement and eligibility, health and time commitments, rules and enforcement, and academics. The money pieces are the headline:
- A hard cap and a floor. Schools couldn't spend over the cap, and they'd have to spend at least 89% of it over a four-year period or a negotiated share of the athletic budget, according to On3.
- A freshman pay scale, like rookie scales in the NFL and NBA, to limit bidding wars over unproven high school players.
- Postseason revenue sharing with players.
- Pay for playing. Money would come straight from the athletic department for athletic services, not dressed up as NIL.
- No NIL inducements. Third-party NIL deals couldn't be used to get players to sign out of high school, transfer or stay.
- Real penalties for schools, coaches and players caught going around the cap.
No dollar figures were released. That's the biggest missing piece, and it's the one every other school will want to see.
How the Tennessee deal differs from the House settlement revenue sharing cap
College sports already has a kind of cap. Under the House v. NCAA settlement, schools can share up to about $21.3 million with athletes in 2026-27, a figure set at 22% of average power-conference athletic revenue and rising roughly 4% a year. Outside NIL deals over $600 have to clear the College Sports Commission's review system.
The problem is that nobody bargained for it. The athletes weren't at the table as a union, which is why the cap is still exposed to antitrust lawsuits. Pro leagues can cap salaries because a union agreed to it. College sports can't say that.
The settlement also keeps up the fiction that players are being paid for their NIL. White called that "intellectually dishonest" and told the AP, "We're paying them to play sports." I agree with him. Most of the money flowing to a starting point guard has nothing to do with selling his likeness.
Why collective bargaining in college sports is so hard
A union needs an employer to bargain with. That's where every past attempt has stalled. Northwestern football's union push failed partly because some Big Ten schools are public and outside the National Labor Relations Board's reach. Efforts at Dartmouth and USC didn't get far either.
Athletes.org's model tries to get around that with a central employer, similar to how Major League Soccer employs its players, instead of making athletes employees of each university. Executive director Brandon Copeland told the AP it wouldn't require new laws. White said a central employment entity is "critical."
Washington isn't helping much. The Senate passed the Protect College Sports Act 77-22 in September, but the bill largely left employee status and collective bargaining alone to win Democratic votes, according to the AP. It's still waiting on the House.
Who pays and who wins under a college sports CBA?
The athletic department pays, directly. That's simpler than today, where money comes from revenue sharing, booster collectives and brand deals all at once.
Schools would get what they've wanted for years: cost certainty and legal protection. A negotiated cap is much harder to sue over. A floor also means the schools that underspend would have to pay up.
Players would get a guaranteed spending floor, a share of postseason money and a say in the rules. Stars could lose some of their bidding power, especially freshmen, which is exactly how rookie scales work in the pros.
Boosters and NIL collectives lose the most. If outside money can't be used to recruit, their main job goes away.
TV networks and conferences would get something too: fewer lawsuits and fewer surprise rule changes hanging over the product they pay billions for.
Will collective bargaining come to college sports?
Not soon. The NCAA and the big conferences still oppose it, there's no central employer yet, and the AP reported that skeptics think a real deal could take years.
But a Power Four athletic director just sat across from his own players and reached terms. That's never happened before. The NFL and NBA got to stability through bargaining, not through Congress. I think college sports ends up in the same place. Tennessee just showed what the first draft looks like.
