Trump, Saban, and the Future of College Sports: Is Real Change Finally Coming?
- Jason Meyer
- May 15
- 3 min read

On May 1st, President Donald Trump delivered the commencement address at the University of Alabama. As fate would have it, he also made time to meet with legendary football coach Nick Saban. Following that meeting, Trump announced the formation of a Presidential Commission on College Sports, appointing Saban as its head and naming Texas Tech donor and NIL collective founder Cody Campbell as a key supporter.
Despite the headlines, Saban appears to be downplaying his involvement, raising questions about how serious or structured this initiative really is. Still, the idea of a commission—especially one led by figures outside the NCAA—forces us to consider whether outside pressure is exactly what college sports need right now. Could this be the jolt the NCAA needs to get off the couch and take meaningful action?
Even NCAA President Charlie Baker has expressed cautious optimism, suggesting that outside leadership may finally drive the change the NCAA has failed to deliver. But will this commission actually lead to reform? Let’s dig in.
Initial Reactions: Cautious Hope
Our first reaction was mixed. On one hand, it’s encouraging to see someone in a position of power take an interest in fixing a deeply flawed system. The NCAA has long been powerless against the growing influence of major conferences, powerhouse schools, deep-pocketed donors, TV networks, and revenue-generating championships and bowls. In theory, backing from the executive branch could provide the NCAA with the authority it needs to corral all stakeholders and pursue unified reforms.
On the other hand, the Trump administration's track record of abrupt, litigation-prone policy moves—often issued via executive order or legally shaky directives—raises serious concerns. Any proposed changes from this commission may lack enforceability unless passed through Congress, which is currently gridlocked and ineffective. In the worst case, these moves could destabilize delicate negotiations already underway. And stepping back—do we even want the federal government heavily involved in sports? Most would agree that should be a last resort.
If It Moves Forward, Who Should Be at the Table?
Even if Saban’s involvement is largely symbolic—especially given his focus on enjoying retirement—if this commission moves forward, it needs to be done right. That starts with making sure the right people are in the room. This commission should include representatives from across the college sports landscape, including:
Athletic Directors
Representatives from major and mid-major conferences, across all NCAA divisions (I–III)
Athletes from Power 4, mid-major, and smaller conferences
Coaches from both revenue-generating and non-revenue sports
TV network executives
University educators and academic leadership
NIL collective leaders
Sports agents and professional representation
Championship and bowl leadership (e.g., CFP, Rose Bowl, March Madness, College World Series)
Legal experts (especially on Title IX, unionization, and contract law)
A diverse and balanced commission is crucial. Leaving out any critical voices could undermine the effort before it gets off the ground.
What Should the Goal Be?
The commission’s goal should be to articulate a clear, fair, and sustainable future for college sports. That includes:
Defining appropriate player compensation models
Fixing the transfer portal
Creating strong, fair NIL governance
Ensuring job stability for coaches
Maintaining consistent and equitable revenue streams
Honoring existing contracts (TV, bowl games, championships)
And preserving academic opportunities for all athletes, regardless of sport or ability
Final Thought
If anyone on the commission happens to be reading this—and made it this far—we strongly encourage you to review our proposal for the future of college athletics.
It offers a solid, realistic foundation for meaningful reform and can serve as a guiding framework as you navigate the complexity of today’s college sports ecosystem.



Comments