New Executive Order on College Sports, Portal Chaos — Impact for Providence College and Others

A sweeping new federal Executive Order aims to rein in what it calls an “out-of-control financial arms race” in college athletics—one that is driving universities into debt and threatening smaller sports programs nationwide.

The order focuses heavily on football and basketball, where escalating spending, relaxed transfer rules, and the explosion of name, image, and likeness (NIL) payments have reshaped college sports in just a few years.

According to the order, some universities are now carrying hundreds of millions of dollars in athletics-related debt, with one program reporting $535 million and another $437 million.

A System Under Strain

The administration argues that a combination of court rulings and state-level laws has created a fragmented system—one where schools compete not just on the field, but financially, with few consistent national rules.

That competition is forcing universities to spend aggressively to remain competitive—particularly in football—while risking cuts to other programs.

Women’s and Olympic sports are specifically identified as being at risk, as schools shift resources toward revenue-generating teams.

The NIL Factor

At the center of the issue is NIL compensation—payments to student-athletes for use of their name, image, and likeness.

While legal and increasingly common, the order takes aim at what it calls “fraudulent NIL schemes,” where athletes may be paid above fair market value in arrangements tied more to recruitment than legitimate endorsements.

The order seeks to prohibit:

• Use of federal funds for NIL or revenue-sharing payments
• Improper financial arrangements tied to recruiting
• Interference with athlete contracts between schools

It also calls for stricter oversight of athlete agents and the creation of a national registry.

A Local Lens: Providence College

While much of the national attention focuses on powerhouse football programs, the financial pressures described in the order extend to smaller Division I schools like Providence College.

Providence College competes at a high level in basketball—one of the very sports driving the current financial model. PC has been hit harder than any other Big East program, with reports noting up to six players entering the transfer portal shortly after it opened

That puts institutions like PC in a challenging position:

• Competing for talent in an increasingly expensive NIL environment
• Maintaining compliance with evolving NCAA and federal expectations
• Balancing athletics spending with academic priorities

If stricter national rules emerge—as the order encourages—schools like Providence College could benefit from a more level playing field. But in the short term, uncertainty may continue as policies shift.

A Program in Transition

Recent developments at Providence College underscore just how quickly the landscape can shift.

The Friars are coming off a disappointing 2025–26 season, finishing 15–18 overall and 7–13 in Big East play, falling short of expectations after being projected as a top-four team in the conference.

The struggles ultimately led to the dismissal of head coach Kim English after three seasons, with the program posting a combined 48–52 record during his tenure.

In today’s college sports environment, a losing season is no longer just about wins and losses—it can trigger coaching changes, roster turnover, and millions of dollars in shifting commitments almost overnight.

Federal Leverage: Follow the Money

One of the most significant aspects of the order is how it ties athletics behavior to federal funding.

Universities that receive federal grants or contracts could face scrutiny or consequences if they violate evolving athletics rules tied to eligibility, transfers, or financial practices.

That raises the stakes considerably, turning what has largely been an NCAA-driven system into one with potential federal enforcement.

Athletic Alliance – Leaders of Big Ten, SEC, ACC and Big 12 praise new College Sports order:

The leaders support the new order, which aims to tighten rules on player transfers and eligibility while curbing pay-for-play booster collectives. They also urge Congress to pass national standards for NIL deals and athlete compensation.

NCAA President Charlie Baker—who has worked closely with Rhode Island’s neighbor, Massachusetts—called the order a “significant step forward” toward a simpler eligibility process.

The Executive Order outlines a federal framework to stabilize college athletics, including:

Financial Oversight

• Prohibits use of federal funds for NIL payments or athletic compensation
• Targets “fraudulent” NIL deals above fair market value
• Links athletics compliance to federal grant and contract eligibility

Athlete Rules

• Encourages a 5-year eligibility limit
• Limits transfers (one standard transfer, with an additional if graduating)
• Calls for medical coverage for athletic injuries

Protection of Non-Revenue Sports

• Requires revenue-sharing models to preserve women’s and Olympic sports
• Seeks to prevent resource shifts away from these programs

Enforcement & Legal Action

• Directs federal agencies to evaluate compliance
• Encourages challenges to conflicting state laws
• Calls for a national registry of athlete agents

Timeline

• Major provisions take effect August 1, 2026

NCAA: ‘We Need Congress to Seal the Deal’

Charlie Baker, president of the NCAA, signaled cautious support for the direction of the Executive Order, while emphasizing that federal legislation will ultimately be needed to bring stability to college athletics.

Speaking in Phoenix ahead of the Women’s Final Four, Baker said that while he had not yet reviewed the full order, what he had seen “is pretty consistent with the things we’ve been talking to [the administration] and to Congress about.”

“We need congressional action to sort of seal the deal on a number of these things,” Baker said, noting that bipartisan agreement may be within reach. “Based on my own conversations with a lot of Democrats and Republicans in Washington over the course of the past month or two, I do think there’s a lot of common ground there.”

Baker also underscored why federal involvement has become necessary.

“On some of these issues, it’s hard for us to do this without at least some support from the feds,” he said. “The courts are one way to settle the debate, but it takes a really long time, and it creates a lot of uncertainty.”

For schools like Providence College, Baker’s comments reinforce that while the Executive Order may set the direction, the ultimate rules governing recruiting, NIL payments, and competitive balance are likely to be decided in Congress.

What Happens Next

The order pushes for national standards, but also acknowledges that Congress may ultimately need to act. Key provisions are set to take effect August 1, 2026, giving agencies time to develop enforcement mechanisms and universities time to adjust. In the meantime, colleges across the country—including in Rhode Island—will be watching closely.

Because while the games are still played on the court and field, the future of college sports may now be shaped as much in Washington as it is on campus.

The $500,000 Business Trip: Inside “Jordan”’s Portal Jump

This story follows “Jordan,” a hypothetical standout guard at a Rhode Island school (like URI, Bryant, or PC), to illustrate the modern “business of being a student.”

• School A offered a $200,000 “marketing contract.”
• School B countered with $400,000, plus a luxury apartment and a leased SUV.
• School C went to $500,000, combined with a direct $50,000 check from the university’s new Revenue-Sharing pool.

• Only 75% of his Rhode Island credits were accepted.
• His specific Marketing track didn’t exist at the new school.
• To stay eligible to play (and keep his $500k), he had to switch his major to “General Studies.”

Full Text: Executive Order on College Athletics

The following is the full text of the federal Executive Order titled “Urgent National Action to Save College Sports,” released by the White House:

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1.  Purpose and Policy.  America’s system of college sports has long provided scholarships and life-changing educational, athletic, and leadership opportunities to millions of America’s future leaders and formed an important part of our national fabric.  In July, I signed an Executive Order to protect college sports from endless lawsuits and destabilizing financial obligations that could jeopardize women’s and Olympic sports, but it has become clear that more comprehensive executive action is required before college sports are lostforever.

College football is the primary revenue generator for university athletic departments, including revenue to support women’s and Olympic sports, and is used by many universities to attract students, donations, and goodwill as millions of Americans gather with families and friends to watch each Saturday.  These factors place enormous pressure on many universities to be competitive in football.  The same dynamic exists for basketball to a lesser degree.  Amid this pressure, the rules governing pay-for-play, eligibility, and other aspects of college athletics have been substantially loosened through a number of judicial rulings.  Additional rules that could institute order and consistency in these systems have been nullified by some State legislatures that are incentivized to advantage their own State’s universities in the competitive market for student-athletes by minimizing barriers to recruitment.  This chaotic state of affairs has undermined competition, reduced opportunities for student-athletes, and jeopardized support for the current range of college athletics, particularly women’s and Olympic sports.  Fair competition cannot occur without a consistent set of rules concerning pay-for-play or player eligibility that cannot be endlessly relitigated in court.

The convergence of enormous pressure to win in football and basketball and the loosening, both by litigation and by State legislation, of consistent rules or limits concerning eligibility, transfers, and pay-for-play schemes has created an out-of-control financial arms race in these sports that is driving universities into debt, threatening to siphon resources from other sports, and damaging student-athletes’ educational and graduation opportunities.  The athletics-related financial threats these crucial universities face are substantial: Already, one major athletic program closed fiscal year 2025 with $535 million in athletics-related debt, and another has $437 million in such debt, while others face enormous annual athletics-related deficits.  These financial perils will inevitably siphon funds from universities’ educational and research purposes, which could impact their capabilities and responsibilities as Federal contractors and grantees.

Absent a comprehensive national solution, therefore, the escalating financial demands to succeed in football and basketball combined with the significantly loosened rules governing eligibility, transfers, and pay-for-play schemes may force curtailment of women’s and Olympics sports, and may even jeopardize the overall financial well-being of universities with which the Federal Government has important financial relationships.  Universities are important defense research contractors for the Department of War, important medical research contractors for the Department of Health and Human Services, and important scientific research contractors for the National Science Foundation. The health of the university system is integral to the Federal Government’s basic functioning.

Further, without a national solution to protect the future of competition and opportunity in all college sports, it is possible that the largest college football programs will be forced to seek stability through a negotiated solution that may result in the withdrawal of financial and other resources from women’s and Olympic sports.

The Congress is strongly encouraged to expeditiously pass legislation that satisfactorily addresses these issues.  But further delay is not an option given what is at stake — the 500,000 annual educational, athletic, and leadership-development opportunities that provide almost $4 billion in scholarships.  This executive action will preserve college sports for future generations.

Sec. 2. Effective Date.  Sections 3 through 6 of this order shall be effective on August 1, 2026.  Agencies shall immediately begin work to ensure that appropriate regulatory or policymaking measures will be in place by the effective date so that the requirements of the operative sections can be implemented as soon after the effective date as possible.

Sec. 3. Definitions.  For the purposes of this order:

(a) “Improper financial activities” means the following actions taken by a federally-funded higher education institution, including its officers, agents, affiliates, or representatives:

(i)   intentionally devising or participating in a fraudulent name, image, and likeness (NIL) scheme;

(ii)  knowingly accepting contributions, financial or otherwise, from persons who intentionally devise or participate in a fraudulent NIL scheme;

(iii) using Federal funds for NIL or revenue-sharing payments or for any type of payment or benefit to a coach, assistant coach, general manager, recruiter, or other person engaged in coaching or managing an athletic team; and

(iv)  tortiously interfering with a contract between a student-athlete and another federally-funded higher education institution, including a scholarship agreement;

(b) “Fraudulent NIL scheme” means a scheme to pay for goods or services, including NIL services, above the actual fair market value of those goods or services in connection with a student-athlete’s participation in intercollegiate athletics, including through the use of collectives or similar entities.  The term does not include:

(i)  revenue sharing between a higher education institution and a student-athlete that is consistent with interstate intercollegiate athletic governing body rules; or

(ii) fair market value compensation provided for the NIL rights of a student-athlete by a third-party not affiliated with the athletic department of a higher education institution for a valid business purpose that is related to the promotion or endorsement of goods or services provided to the general public for profit and that is not tied to participation in the athletics program of a particular higher education institution, at rates and terms commensurate with compensation paid to individuals with NIL rights of comparable value who are not student-athletes at the applicable higher education institution;

(c) “Higher education institution” has the meaning given the term “institution of higher education” in section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001), provided that this term only includes an institution that reports (as required under section 485(g) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1092(g))) having generated not less than $20,000,000 in total revenue (as adjusted on July 1 each year by the percentage increase, if any, during the preceding 12-month period, in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics) derived by the institution from the institution’s intercollegiate athletics activities during the preceding academic year, as determined in accordance with paragraph (1)(I) of section 485(g) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1092(g)); and

(d) “Interstate intercollegiate athletic governing body” means the entity that sets common rules, standards, procedures, or guidelines for the administration and regulation of varsity sports teams and intercollegiate athletic competitions, but that is not an intercollegiate athletic conference, provided that the governing body may include persons affiliated with an intercollegiate athletic conference.

Sec. 4. Protecting Women’s and Olympic Sports and Preserving Higher Education Financial Responsibility.  (a)(i) Agency heads that contract with or provide grants to higher education institutions, shall, as appropriate, evaluate violations of the applicable, lawful, and operative interstate intercollegiate athletic governing body rules in effect as of August 1, 2026, concerning the following, to determine whether they are a cause so serious or compelling in nature to affect the present responsibility of the recipient:

(A) eligibility limits;

(B) transfers between institutions;

(C) revenue-sharing permitted between higher education institutions and student-athletes; and

(D) permissible and improper financial activities.

(ii) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget, in consultation with the Administrator of General Services, shall issue guidance to contracting and grantmaking agencies to ensure compliance with this order and to reinforce the suspension and debarment policy regarding violations of the rules described in subsection 4(a)(i) of this section.

(b) The interstate intercollegiate athletic governing bodyfor higher education institutions should, in consultation with student-athletes and in its discretion, update or clarify itsrules before August 1, 2026, as appropriate, to adequately protect opportunities for scholarships and collegiate athletic competition in women’s and Olympic sports and ensure the financial stability of higher education institutions, including by establishing the following, to the extent permitted by lawand applicable court orders:

(i)   age-based eligibility limits to promote fairness, consistency, safety, and opportunities for student-athletes under which:

(A) participation in college athletics is permitted for no more than a five-year period, with limited exceptions for military service, missionary service, and other periods of absence from participation that are in the public interest; and

(B) professional athletes cannot return to college athletics;

(ii)   transfer-related rules that:

(A) provide for the ability to transfer one timeduring the five-year period with immediate playing eligibility, and one additional such time if the student-athlete obtains a four-year degree;

(B) prioritize the academic development, success, graduation, and long-term well-being of student-athletes; and

(C) ensure that the transfer window does not incentivize interference with athletic seasons or the academic year, or otherwise undermine the integrity of participation and competition in college athletics;

(iii) medical care for student-athletes for intercollegiate-athletics-related injuries during their period of enrollment and for a reasonable period of time thereafter;

(iv)  the implementation of revenue-sharing between higher education institutions and student-athletes in a manner that preserves or expands scholarships and collegiate athletic opportunities in women’s and Olympic sports, including through provisions toprevent revenue-sharing from being allocated in a manner that results in a reduction in scholarships and opportunities in women’s and Olympic sports;

(v)   a prohibition on the use of Federal funds by higher education institutions for NIL or revenue-sharing payments or coaching or athletic compensation, in accordance with any applicable Federal law and Federal contract terms;

(vi)  a prohibition on improper financial activitiesregarding student-athletes, including collectives orother entities or methods used to facilitate third-party, pay-for-play payments; and

(vii) a national student-athlete agent registry and reasonable protections for student-athletes from excessive agent commissions.

​(c)  To aid contracting and grantmaking agencies’compliance with subsection 4(a) of this section, the Administrator of General Services shall propose, consistent with law, an appropriate, regular collection of information to evaluate compliance with the rules covered by subsection (a)(i)(A)-(D) of this section for completion by appropriate higher education institution officials.

(d) The Secretary of Education shall consider takingappropriate action, including through rulemaking where necessary, to require regular reporting by higher education institutions that includes:

(i)  the total number of roster spots by varsity team, as of the day of the first scheduled contest for the team; and

(ii) the total amount of money spent on athletically related student aid or other payments, separately for men’s and women’s teams overall.

(e) The Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission shall take appropriate action to enforce 15 U.S.C. 45 and 15 U.S.C. 7801–7807 with respect to violations by student-athlete agents and related individuals or entities.

Sec. 5. Legal Actions to Invalidate Certain State Laws.  (a) The Attorney General shall take appropriate measures to further meritorious actions to invalidate State laws that conflict with interstate intercollegiate athletic governing body rules and:

(i)   discriminate against out-of-state commerce or unduly burden or impede interstate commerce in violation of Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution of the United States;

(ii)  impair a contractual relationship in violation of Article I, Section 10, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States; or

(iii) are otherwise invalid under Federal law.

Sec. 6.  Consultation.  Relevant White House components and executive departments and agencies are encouraged to, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, consider input from appropriate leaders in collegiate athletics and administration and other experts regarding effective implementation of this order.

Sec. 7. Severability.  If any provision of this order, or the application of any provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this order and the application of its provisions to any other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

Sec. 8.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i)   the authority granted by law to an executivedepartment or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(d)  The costs for publication of this order shall be borne by the Department of Education.

​​​​​​DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,

April 3, 2026.