The Rise of Overspending in College Athletics
College football has officially entered a new era of financial excess. Multi-million-dollar contracts and record-breaking buyouts have become the norm rather than the exception. LSU’s parting with Brian Kelly will reportedly cost the school more than $53 million, while Penn State owes James Franklin $48.6 million. Combined with other ongoing buyouts, universities are set to pay nearly $170 million just to part ways with coaches.
In response, U.S. Representative Michael Baumgartner (R-Wash.) has introduced the Correcting Opportunity and Accountability in Collegiate Hiring (COACH) Act, which aims to rein in these runaway salaries. The proposal would cap total compensation for athletic department employees, including salaries and buyouts, at no more than ten times the cost of a school’s undergraduate tuition and fees. It would amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 and create an antitrust “safe harbor” to legally protect schools that adhere to the cap.
Can the Government Really Regulate College Coaching Salaries?
A Clash of Financial Philosophies
Baumgartner’s bill does not exist in a vacuum. It comes at a time when the Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) era has completely transformed college athletics. Players are finally compensated for their market value, endorsements, and media influence. Yet while a majority of student-athletes are navigating NIL deals worth tens or hundreds of thousands, some coaches are walking away with tens of millions for losing seasons.
That imbalance is hard to ignore.
NIL was supposed to empower athletes and level the playing field, but the financial disparity between players and coaching staffs remains staggering. Under the COACH Act, the goal is not to punish success but to introduce accountability and balance. If universities are willing to spend public funds and taxpayer-backed aid on athletics, there should be limits ensuring those resources support education and equity.
Oversight is Necessary, But Should It Come from Congress?
Here’s the question: Can or should the government regulate coaching salaries?
Personally, I’m all for structure and oversight, but I’m skeptical that Congress should be the one implementing it.
College football needs a governing body that operates like a professional league, similar to how the NFL, NBA, or MLB are run. These leagues have salary caps, player unions, and collective bargaining agreements that balance business interests with fairness. College athletics currently has none of that. Instead, it’s a free-for-all where schools chase headlines with massive contracts and buyouts, often at the expense of academic programs and Olympic sports.
If college sports truly wants to be treated like a business, then it needs to be run like one. That means financial transparency, standardized contracts, and leadership that ensures stability for players, coaches, and institutions alike. The current system is unsustainable.
The Bigger Picture
Baumgartner’s COACH Act shares DNA with his earlier proposal, the Restore College Sports Act. That plan sought to replace the NCAA with a new organization called the American College Sports Association (ACSA), a governing body with a commissioner appointed by the President. That plan also proposed equal NIL revenue sharing among all student-athletes.
Whether or not these proposals ever become law, they represent a growing frustration with how unregulated college sports have become. The NIL era gave athletes long-overdue rights, but the system needs structural balance. Without it, universities will continue hemorrhaging money, chasing prestige, and forgetting the “student” in student-athlete.
Final Thoughts
The COACH Act might not be perfect, but we desperately need a conversation starter. College athletics is caught between two worlds, part business and part education, and it’s time for someone to bridge that gap. Regulation, whether through Congress or a newly formed governing body, may be the only way forward. Right now, college football is running like a business with no rules, and chaos has a way of eventually catching up to everyone.
