MUMBAI: It’s a sign of where things have reached in Indian cricket. Siddhesh Lad is a seasoned first-class player. The 34-year-old Mumbai batter, known as the ‘Crisis Man’ of his team for a long time, made his debut first-class around 12 years back in Nov 2013, and has scored 5623 runs in 82 matches@44.27, with 15 hundreds and 30 fifties. Lad scored five hundreds -he was the top run-getter for Mumbai with 774 runs in eight matches@77.40 in the 2025-26 Ranji Trophy season. However, the consistent domestic cricket batter has now lost faith in the Ranji Trophy being the platform from where national selectors pick potential India players.While speaking to TOI on the sidelines of the jersey launch event of Mumbai South Central Maratha Royals, the defending champions of T20 Mumbai League, on Thursday, Lad stated that he firmly believes that it is performance in the IPL, which is considered as the sole criteria for selection. Season 4 of the T20 Mumbai league begins at the Wankhede Stadium from Monday.Citing the example of Jammu & Kashmir pacer Aaquib Nabi, who was the highest wicket-taker in the Ranji Trophy last season with 60 scalps in 10 matches at 12.56 and helped his team win their maiden title last season, being ignored for the one-off Test against Afghanistan, Lad told this paper, “I think you are 100% right when you say that performing well in the IPL is the benchmark for breaking into the Indian team. The harsh reality is that domestic cricket performances are ignored by the national selectors. The Ranji Trophy has been devalued. I won’t deny that. I’m not saying that I’ve performed well, so pick me into the Indian team, but I think someone like Auqib Nabi, If he has worked so hard and won the Ranji Trophy single-handedly for J&K, which is not so easy, performed exceptionally well in the Ranji Trophy, then he deserved to be picked in India’s Test side.”Explaining his point further, Lad said, “I mean even the IPL players know how difficult it is to play the whole (Ranji Trophy) season and maintain your fitness. However, nowadays, if you don’t do well in the IPL, or don’t have a good season in the IPL, your chances of coming into the Indian Test team are slim. If you don’t play in the IPL, then it is difficult for you to move forward (in your career).”Nabi had taken 44 wickets@13.27 in the 2024-25 Ranji Trophy season. Mincing now words at spelling out the harsh reality of Indian cricket, Lad said, “You are sending a wrong message to the domestic cricketers, that even if you do well in Ranji Trophy, it doesn’t make any difference to your cricketing career, but if you do well in a few games in the IPL, you can make it to India’s test team. At the start, everyone is like, ‘If you perform in the Ranji Trophy, then you will play for India, if you don’t perform then you won’t. But in the end, when we really see the selection, that’s when a lot of things go wrong.”In that kind of scenario, would he advise promising youngsters in the Maratha Royals team to focus on playing and doing well in the T20 Mumbai League and the IPL, rather than trying to break into the Mumbai Ranji Trophy team?

“Definitely, I would say that. I won’t deny it that if you see that you can play for India after just one season of the IPL, something that you possibly can’t do after playing Ranji Trophy for a decade, then that means that we can’t tell the players to focus only on the Ranji Trophy. If the player is playing well in the T20 Mumbai League, then there is a shortcut for him to subsequently play in the IPL and make it to the Indian team,” Lad said, matter of factly.As a domestic cricket thoroughbred, Lad is hurt by the way things have shaped up in Indian cricket in present times. “I have seen so many players who have performed exceptionally well in the Ranji Trophy. However, just because they did not get that opportunity in IPL, they never had the chance to come into India’s Test side,” Lad rued.Meanwhile, Lad and Maratha Royals head coach Amit Dani welcomed the availability of Mumbai and Rajasthan Royals pacer Tushar Deshpande, who missed the last season , for the Maratha Royals this time.

Aspirant Lams Lamina during the PVL Draft Combine Day 1. –MARLO CUETO/INQUIRER.net

MANILA, Philippines–Lams Lamina is eager to elevate her game as the National University Lady Bulldogs setter prepares for a new journey in the Premier Volleyball League.

Lamina, projected as at least a Top 2 pick in the 2026 draft class, admitted she felt some jitters entering a “different world” as one of the 42 applicants for the 2026 PVL Rookie Draft on June 3 at Novotel.

“Honestly, it still hasn’t fully sunk in that this is really happening. That I’m now entering a different world, the pro level, adult life,” Lamina told the reporters in Filipino in the Draft Combine on Thursday at GameVille Ball Park.

“I came from a school where I spent 11 years with my teammates. That had basically been my whole life since Grade 7. So right now, I’m just really looking forward to finally playing for a professional team.”

Lams Lamina relishes her draft journey with Alyssa Solomon. #PVL2026 | @LanceAgcaoilINQ pic.twitter.com/61fmGZeBlz

— INQUIRER Sports (@inquirersports) May 28, 2026

The NU lifer, who won two UAAP Best Setter awards and captured three titles in five straight Finals appearances, believes she still has plenty of room to grow.

“I think my ceiling is still really high because I still haven’t proven anything yet in the pros. Personally, that’s my goal, to prove to myself again that I can reach my dreams and become even better,” she said.

“There will definitely be a lot of challenges, pressure, and expectations. At the same time, I know I’ll learn so much, especially from the veteran players I’ll get to compete against. Hopefully, I can learn a lot from them.”

PVL Rookie Draft Aspirants during day 1 of the Draft Combine. –MARLO CUETO/INQUIRER.net

Advertisement

Lamina was also excited to share the Draft experience with teammate Alyssa Solomon and to see Bella Belen training at the same venue with Capital1 Solar Spikers, which owns the No. 2 pick.

“It’s exciting because if she (Solomon) really joins, the competition among teams will become even stronger,” she said “Honestly, I don’t really think about that [teaming up with Bella at Capital1]  because we still don’t know which teams will pick us. At this point, whoever drafts us, we’ll just give our best.”

When she enters the pros, Lamina could go up against the league’s brightest setters like Jia De Guzman and Gel Cayuna, but her focus is on her own progress to help the team that will draft her.

“I don’t really focus on comparing myself to them because we all have our own path and journey. I just want to focus on myself and make the most of whatever opportunity I get to show my game here in the pros,” said Lamina.

“I think I’ll just keep doing what I did in the UAAP. The love I have for volleyball and the way I always give my 100 percent effort — that’s the same mindset I’ll bring into the pros.”

So why have Barca moved for Gordon?

After all, the La Liga champions also had the option – and still do – of making Marcus Rashford’s loan move from Manchester United a permanent one for £26m.

However, Barca have so far prioritised a move for his international team-mate, who also offers versatility on the left and through the middle, but is three years younger and on a lower wage.

There is also a belief within the club that there is more to come from Gordon both with and without the ball.

When Barcelona manager Hansi Flick spoke about Newcastle being a “very intense” side, earlier this season, the 25-year-old will have been among those at the forefront of his thoughts with his speed and aggression.

Flick places as much importance on players’ work rate as their flair and Gordon ranks in the top 40 Premier League forwards for possession won in the final third, high pressures applied and high pressures in the opponent’s half this season.

Yet it is Gordon’s goal return in Europe which clearly caught the eye of Barca and, indeed, fellow suitors Bayern Munich.

Although there were a few penalties along the way, and he came up against some leaky defences, only Real Madrid forward Kylian Mbappe (15) and Bayern Munich striker Harry Kane (14) have scored more goals in the Champions League this season than Gordon (10).

It is a stage Gordon has relished, having sounded like someone who had grown a little jaded with how the Premier League had become “a lot slower and a lot more set-piece based”.

“Sometimes it’s about duels – who wins the duels wins the game – or moments,” he said of the top flight back in January.

“The Champions League is a bit more of an older style game. It’s a bit more football based. Teams come and try and play proper football.”

Feverish support for local players has long been a fixture of the French Open, a privilege that comes with playing on home turf.

For many of those players, however, the “turf” itself hardly feels like home.

While Roland Garros is the ultimate symbol of clay, the French Open’s home country has produced remarkably few specialists of the ochre surface in recent decades. Some players, like Adrian Mannarino, are even described as being “allergic” to the red dirt.

Of the 30 French players who entered the tournament this year, only nine made it past the first round, the third lowest tally in the past three decades, suggesting yet another disappointing run for a nation starved of success.

Lining up for an ice cream outside the French Open’s centre court, local fans Benjamin and Pablo offered one explanation for the lack of home wins.

“In places like Spain or Argentina, the kids are practically raised on clay,” said the pair from the Basque Country, one sporting a Gallic horned helmet, the other a French tricolour. “But in France we play on pot-holed concrete courts.”

The demise of clay

Self-flagellation has been a recurrent theme at Roland Garros, particularly when recalling more successful times.

Three years ago, at an event making 40 years since Yannick Noah’s 1983 triumph, France’s last male champion had a stark piece of advice for youngsters hoping to emulate his feat: to pack their bags and go abroad.

“You have to go and nourish yourself elsewhere, because we’re used to losing at all levels,” he said. “All coaches have lost. None of them have won. So you’re surrounded by people who have all lost.”

Henri Leconte, the last Frenchman to reach a final, was even blunter a few years earlier as organisers marked three decades since his 1988 defeat.

“They don’t train on clay as much as we used to,” said the flamboyant Leconte. “They are afraid to play at the French Open. They are always coming with an excuse, saying, ‘Oh, I have a bad back or elbow’.”

Read moreForty years after Noah’s triumph, French tennis seeks path to Grand Slam glory

Leconte was right about one thing: training on clay has indeed declined, though the players are hardly at fault.

In the 1950s, almost all tennis in France was played on clay. But by the mid-1970s, when the young Noah and Leconte were honing their skills, the percentage of clay courts had slumped to 50%.

Nowadays, they account for just 16% of the roughly 31,000 courts recognised by the French Tennis Federation (FFT). Tennis tournaments on French soil have largely followed the trend: just 19% on the men’s circuit are played on the red dirt, and 34% in the women’s.

In comparison, clay courts account for more than 60% of all courts in Spain, Italy and Switzerland, all of which have produced Grand Slam title winners in recent years, and up to 80% in Germany.

“That’s what we grew up on,” Germany’s Alexander Zverev said after his first-round win on Sunday, when quizzed about Europeans’ greater agility on clay compared to Americans or Australians. “We move through the slippery surface better, because we’re used to it (…) Nobody can really teach you how to slide,” added the men’s second seed.

The paradox behind the decline of clay in France is that it coincided with a broader boom for the sport, spurred by the so-called “5,000 courts” plan launched in 1981 by the FFT’s then-president Philippe Chatrier – whose name was later given to the French Open’s centre court.

Aimed at helping small towns and villages to build their own courts, Chatrier’s plan accelerated a tenfold increase in the number of licensed players in the country, from 100,000 in the 1960s to more than 1 million in the 1990s.

The overwhelming majority of new courts, however, were made of concrete – a far cheaper and easier surface to build that also requires minimal maintenance. The concrete boom led many existing clubs to dig up their clay courts and switch to hard surfaces, accelerating the demise of clay.

Democratisation ultimately reinforced a social divide at the heart of tennis, says historian Patrick Clastres, who has co-authored a book on the history of the sport in France.

“Tennis has always been an elitist sport, associated with the leisure class,” he said. “Efforts to democratise tennis opened the sport to the middle class and even some working-class constituencies, while clay courts remained largely the preserve of a social elite.”

‘90% hassle’

Clay courts are made of layers of stones, gravel, clinker (a volcanic residue) and limestone, capped by a thin layer of crushed brick about two millimetres thick, which gives the courts their famous ochre hue.

Each of the French Open’s 18 courts requires more than a ton of clay, which has to be regularly watered to avoid it drying up and cracking. The heatwave pummeling Paris this week has kept the tournament’s 200 groundskeepers especially busy, requiring them to soak the courts at night and shower them with calcium chloride in the morning to help retain the surface moisture during the day.

Read moreNo Alcaraz, no party? Five reasons not to miss this year’s French Open

Such heavy maintenance translates into prohibitive costs for many clubs that operate on a fraction of the French Open’s budget.

In an interview with French daily Libération, the head of a tennis club in Normandy said clay courts “offered 10% of the benefits for 90% of the hassle”. He added: “A hard court just needs two hours with a pressure washer every year, that’s all. With clay, you have to reckon on a good seventy hours per court each year, just to redo the lines that crack in the frost and replenish the crushed brick.”

Since 2021, the FFT has offered clubs that remain committed to clay a maintenance grant of €800 per year per court. It also helps them build new courts, covering at least 30% of the cost, up to a limit of €100,000 per court.

Such measures are “not enough”, the federation’s head Gilles Moretton conceded last month in an interview with Le Monde, announcing plans to help clubs with ageing concrete courts to switch to hybridclay – a new surface that is much cheaper to build and maintain.

Just three centimetres thick, as opposed to one metre for traditional clay, the hybrid surface requires much less watering and does not need annual resurfacing. Converting a concrete court costs around €35,000 – 60% of which will be covered by the FFT.

The federation also plans to foster the development of more junior tournaments played on artificial clay to ensure young players get enough match practice on the surface, which experts say is virtually indistinguishable from ordinary clay.

According to Clastres, however, the subsidies remain “insufficient for many towns to save their struggling clubs, let alone switch back to clay”.

A formative surface

The decline of clay courts in France has in turn stripped French youngsters of a crucial formative experience on a surface that is widely regarded as the most demanding.

While it is notoriously difficult for players to adapt to grass tournaments like Wimbledon, clay requires the most tactical nous and the broadest palette of skills, featuring spin, slice, drop shots and the famous slides. The slowest of the three surfaces, it is also the most physically taxing.

According to Patrick Mouratoglou, who coached Serena Williams for a decade and founded France’s best known private tennis academy on the French Riviera, the country’s centralising instinct has also conspired to deny aspiring players some much-needed clay-court practice.

Watch moreFrom Serena to Coco: How to coach a tennis superstar

“You don’t suddenly become good on clay when you’ve been training at the FFT’s National Training Centre in Paris, which is an indoor hard-court facility. It makes no sense,” he said. “The project is fundamentally flawed from the outset. All the more so because clay courts are extremely formative.”

Mouratoglou said any national training centre “should be outdoors, in the south of France”, where conditions are right for clay.

Critics, including Leconte, have also accused the FFT of choosing “quantity over quality”, fostering an abundance of young talents instead of focusing on the handful who are most promising.

Supporters of the French model, however, stress that individual success at Roland Garros and at the other majors is not the only measure of a sport’s success.

France has the second highest number of licensed players in Europe, after Germany. It is also one of the few countries that has succeeded in making tennis “genuinely popular”, said Clastres.

“In Italy and Spain, the climate means you can play all year on clay. In the US, college scholarships allow a select few to make it to the top. And in Eastern Europe, families have been willing to let their kids drop out of school to pursue a career in tennis,” he added.

“France has a different model, one that has brought the sport to a broader segment of the public and produced many players ranked among the top 100 – but relatively few Grand Slam champions.”

It was announced earlier this month that Vasiliy Lomachenko is set to return to the sport, one year after announcing his retirement, and now the Ukrainian’s first target has been reported, with ‘Loma’ opting for a path towards a title.

Lomachenko claimed world honours at featherweight, super-featherweight and lightweight within his first 12 professional bouts, becoming a three-belt unified titleholder at 135lbs before a shock defeat to Teofimo Lopez.

However, the amateur extraordinaire eventually got his shot at achieving his dream and becoming an undisputed champion when he challenged Devin Haney for the throne in 2023, only to lose a controversial unanimous decision to the American.

The following year, Lomachenko defeated George Kambosos to capture the IBF lightweight crown, but that outing looked set to be his last, when the beloved southpaw technician hung up the gloves due to a ‘lack of motivation’.

Yet, at the age of 38 years old, Lomachenko is set to return after two years of inactivity, promising to be involved in ‘big fights only’, with a long-awaited clash with Gervonta Davis being mooted.

According to BoxingScene though, his comeback is hoped to be against ‘formidable challenge’ Charly Suarez, who notably came close to trumping Emanuel Navarrete when challenging for the WBO super-featherweight title last year. 

The Filipino has twice been ordered a rematch with ‘Vaquero’, who now holds both the WBO and IBF marbles, ever since their no-contest, but he instead next faces Manuel Avila on iVB Boxing’s Saturday, July 11, card in San Francisco.

It is believed that victory over Suarez will allow Lomachenko to usurp Suarez and take his position in a showdown with Navarette for the unified super-featherweight titles – a fight which ‘Loma’ called for when his comeback was announced.

MIRAMAR BEACH, Fla. — The same morning a landmark, bipartisan bill promising to regulate the unwieldy realm of college sports was introduced in the Senate, the Southeastern Conference’s decision-makers were busy behind closed doors devising their own plans.

That’s life for College Athletics Inc. these days. There is renewed hope on Capitol Hill that the new legislation — the Protect College Sports Act — will provide the antitrust protection the NCAA and its members have long sought. But the obstacles in the way — committee hearings, an August summer recess and the upcoming midterm elections — can’t be avoided.

Contingency plans must be developed. The SEC and Big Ten are not resting on their laurels.

The 111-page bill released Wednesday would codify the House v. NCAA settlement and outline federal NIL standards, a five-year eligibility rule, a revenue-share floor and a narrow antitrust safe harbor. In its second half, an amendment to the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961 would allow schools to pool media rights across conference lines and prohibit the SEC and Big Ten from acquiring or merging with another conference to form a Super League.

It’s those two final pieces that could deter the Big Ten and SEC leadership from a full-throated endorsement of the bill developed by Sens. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Maria Cantwell, D-Wash. The bill is written tightly enough that any breakaway by the Big Ten or SEC, the two conferences that have driven the last decade of conference realignment, would be structurally illegal.

The ACC and Big 12 signed a letter of support before the bill was released last week. The SEC and Big Ten did not, opting to reserve their opinions until they reviewed the lengthy document. Both conferences stood pat on those positions on Wednesday, though it’s clear they already have opinions, particularly the apparent target painted on their chests tied to the SBA.

“I’ve made my position on the notion that we need the SBA clear, which I don’t think we do,” Sankey said. 

Asked who shaped the bill, if not the SEC, he said only: “I think that bill speaks to some of the voices of influence other than ours.”

Billionaire Texas Tech booster Cody Campbell, an advocate in Washington and a member of President Trump’s committee on college sports, has been a proponent of amending the SBA to allow schools and conferences to pool media rights. 

Cantwell, who introduced earlier versions of the broadcast amendment in a separate draft, said the SEC and Big Ten have always opposed it. 

“They didn’t like it when I introduced it with (Sen. Cory) Booker and they didn’t like it when I introduced it with (Sen. Eric) Schmitt,” she told CBS Sports. “And my guess is they still don’t like it.”

The portal panic and radical plan

But the more immediate question of enforcement for name, image and likeness deals is what has the conferences charging forward with their own plans, and the work behind the scenes might be moving faster than many believed.

The football transfer portal opens in January. By then, Georgia athletic director Josh Brooks said, the College Sports Commission — built out of the House v. NCAA settlement to enforce its terms — will be drowning in submitted deals.

“There’s so much over-the-cap money being dedicated or contracted,” Brooks said. “There’s so much money that’s already just been put into the system for basketball that if we don’t have some relief or an execution plan on how we’re going to get there by football, by the portal…”

He left the sentence unfinished.

CSC chief executive Bryan Seeley, who briefed SEC athletic directors and presidents Thursday, confirmed the anxiety among the schools.

“A lot of schools, it appears, made a lot of NIL guarantees coming out of the football transfer portal and basketball transfer portal that they’re not allowed to do under the rules,” Seeley said. “And now there is increasing pressure on them to get those NIL deals cleared. A lot of those NIL deals will not go cleared because they don’t comply with the rules.”

Options are being weighed to bring the CSC enforcement component under the SEC’s own management. It’s not a full break from the settlement framework, but a conference-level supplementary arm that handles deal approvals, denials and penalties.

“Keep the CSC, but let us work with them directly on how we’re going to handle [it],” Brooks said. “I think there’s some freedoms and flexibilities within the settlement that conferences can then subject [to their] own.”

An even more provocative idea is a conference-level cap-relief system Brooks called the SEC’s “own luxury tax.” Without it, conferences will be limited to $21.3 million in revenue-sharing with players during the 2026-27 academic year, according to the House settlement terms.

“Maybe we develop our own luxury tax or something that gives us room so we can grow our rev share number, because otherwise the storm hasn’t hit yet,” Brooks said. “The amount of deals that are going to be submitted to CSC in the next three months is going to be astronomical.”

“That’s what we’ve got to figure out,” Brooks continued. “We’ll abide, but the penalties, can we set the penalties?”

Brooks said the conference has met on the question every two weeks. Sankey referred to the “luxury tax” discussion as just that — a discussion.

“I’m assuming some other people talked about it, and I would define it as that,” the SEC commissioner said.

Similar ideas have been discussed within the Big Ten, but the conferences are not working together. 

“We can’t collude,” Brooks said. 

The SEC, he added, is more worried about schools outside the conference circumventing the CSC than how the CSC is run inside it.

“That’s like me and you arguing over filing taxes,” Brooks said. “I have a much bigger problem with those that aren’t even filing taxes. Let’s stop that first. If we can’t even get to that base level, then I would rather just coalesce in our own conference and govern 16 on that issue alone. Not saying that’s a full breakaway or whatever you want to call it. But what’s the first step of that?”

Seeley said the CSC is open to changes, provided the conferences — which designed the CSC a year ago — drive them. 

“If the rules want to change or if enforcement policies want to change, that’s fine with us,” Seeley said. “Let’s not just do a short-term fix without a longer-term solution.”

Calming the transfer portal waters

Despite their internal contingency plans, administrators recognize that federal intervention remains the most permanent fix for their legal exposure.

Oklahoma athletic director Roger Denny, whose background is in corporate tax law and sports business transactions, said the legal reality college athletics faces leaves only two endgames for the enterprise.

“When you’re talking about antitrust law, there are two routes to solve that issue: legislation, collective bargaining,” Denny said. “As we watch the SCORE Act fall apart again last week, I think folks look and see that legislation might not be as viable.”

Thus, the SEC and the Big Ten are exploring their own governance models. Yet Brooks still called the bill’s introduction a “big first step” after the previously supported SCORE Act was pulled from the House floor before a vote last week. Some SCORE Act language carried over into the new bill, though the blanket antitrust protection that drove Democratic opposition has been pared back. The new safe harbor immunizes only the NCAA’s enforcement of transfers, eligibility, revenue-cap rules, agent regulations and mid-season coaching changes — and only if those areas are codified in the NCAA’s own rulebook.

Coaches and athletic directors applauded the bill’s limits on transfers and eligibility, which have prompted a wave of lawsuits filed by players against the NCAA. The new guidelines cap eligibility at five seasons of competition and limit players to one transfer per career. A second transfer triggers a year of lost eligibility.

Brooks said those two pieces alone could calm the waters.

“If you’ve got five-(for)-five, and clean that up, and a one-time transfer, those two things would provide a lot of stability. Because then kids that transfer would be more inclined to sign a two- or three-year deal.”

The bill creates a federal NIL floor, preempting the 39 state laws that athletic departments have spent four years navigating. Athletes must disclose any NIL deal worth more than $600 within 30 days, and the NCAA must build a public, searchable database of anonymized deal data. That transparency has been championed by many coaches and athletic directors, who decry the rising costs of player payments through NIL deals as agents continue to demand more money by pitting schools against each other in cloak-and-dagger bidding wars.

“College sports are at a breaking point,” Cruz said in a statement released Wednesday. “Fans can see their favorite teams being hollowed out by transfer chaos, fake NIL bidding wars, eligibility lawsuits and a system that allows the richest programs to keep pulling away. The Protect College Sports Act is a bipartisan plan to restore order. Student athletes can profit from their name, image, and likeness, but college sports still needs real rules, competitive balance, rivalries, and a true connection to education. This bill protects athletes and fans and keeps college sports from becoming a two-conference minor league.”

Another big change for players in the bill: agents must register with the state and the NCAA, and their fees are capped at 5%.

“These people are unscrupulous in their activities,” Cantwell told CBS Sports. “There are definitely unscrupulous agents out there taking advantage, particularly at that high school level, promising people a career and then basically repossessing their cars.”

Where Washington draws the line

While the player restrictions offer the stability leagues crave, the bill introduces heavy-handed regulations on operational freedoms that make power-conference leadership deeply uncomfortable.

The bill does not include language capping coaches’ salaries, a push initially made by President Trump’s committee tasked with proposing regulations for college sports. But there is a clause barring FBS coaches and coordinators from leaving a school during a competitive season for another job. Cruz refers to it as the “Lane Kiffin Rule,” a reference to the former Ole Miss coach ditching the playoff-bound Rebels for LSU last November. Violators would be suspended for the following season.

Asked whether the federal government should have a say in when schools hire, fire and interview football coaches, Sankey leaned into the awkwardness.

“I’m a federal-government-is-less type of person philosophically,” he said. “But if that’s something that helps from an orderliness standpoint, that could be healthy. When you ask the federal government for help, though, you never know where it goes.”

Preservation of Olympic sports is also central to the legislation, something Cantwell believes can be achieved through the new entity that pools media rights. To trigger that revenue, at least 75% of FBS membership must opt in — practically every FBS school outside the Big Ten and SEC’s footprint. The Big Ten and SEC appear to have zero interest in participating.

“We cannot starve the entire ecosystem,” Cantwell said. “This solution is a way of saying, while you’re dealing with the new realm of NIL and media rights sharing with athletes, make sure that you take care of the scholarship and roster levels for women in Olympic sports.”

Another apparent shot across the bows of the Big Ten and the SEC is the threat of a super league. Any conference with more than $1 billion in revenue — the SEC and Big Ten — cannot merge with or acquire another conference if doing so would push covered-entity membership for pooled media rights below the 75% threshold.

The governance impasse

Meanwhile, leaders in the Big Ten and SEC believe there is a way to govern themselves within the structures of the bill — or the House v. NCAA settlement — without facing legal troubles. It’s not quite a plan as it is an idea with legs.

The reasoning is simple: the timeline for the bill in Washington, D.C., is tight.

The bill needs 60 Senate votes. Previously, the SCORE Act could not get there. Congress is set to enter summer recess in August, and after that, legislators will be in campaign mode before the midterm elections in November. The bill sits in Cruz’s Commerce committee, where he is chair and Cantwell is a ranking member.

The legislation will also face opposition, of course. All bills do. From the left, Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., a longtime advocate for collective bargaining for college athletes, said the bill’s “primary effect seems to be to limit the compensation of athletes while protecting the huge salaries of all the adults — coaches, ADs, sports industry executives — who are getting rich off the performance of the players.”

Still, there is the lingering issue in college athletics: with 138 schools and voices, not everybody will be on the same page. That has played out over the decades and has been amplified in recent months as athletic directors voiced distrust in the very system they helped develop.

Trev Alberts, the Texas A&M athletic director who helped build the CSC, traced the impasse to the same issue: “We are sending a very strong message that college athletics refuses to be governed.”

Sankey framed it on Wednesday as a choice: “The issue is, do people really want to be governed? … People have to commit to the system.”

Brooks said the SEC will not wait for it. 

“I have faith in our conference that we can move steps in that direction,” he said. “The first step is we attack what’s most pressing, which is implementation of the House settlement and how we work around the CSC and how we implement that.”

The next step, by his timeline, could land in January.

Former British heavyweight champion David Price has named the most satisfying victory of his 32-fight professional career.

Once seen as a fierce rival to Tyson Fury, Price blew opponents away after turning over to the pro scene following a stellar amateur career where he picked up the gold medal at the 2006 Commonwealth Games and the bronze at the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games.

After claiming the British and Commonwealth titles by knocking out Sam Sexton, and then making two defences, Price met his match in Tony Thompson, who famously derailed plans to compete for world honours.

Price never reached the heights that his amateur pedigree suggested he may, and speaking to Boxing News, he revealed that his final career victory, against Dave Allen in 2019, was ‘the most satisfying of his career’ for a number of reasons.

“Dave Allen was always trying to get a fight with me when he was just starting to make a name for himself and I had no interest in it. There was nothing to gain from fighting Dave Allen, so I was never kind of biting or reacting to him.

“Then, I bumped into him in Nando’s when I was training with Dave Coldwell up in Rotherham. He was kind of apologetic and explaining why he had been doing it all, so we squashed it there and then. It was like an ‘OK, don’t do it again’, kind of thing, then two weeks later it started again.”

“He was just a bit odd. In the build-up to the fight, I thought, ‘I will go along with being pally’, but really I wanted to f**k him up – and I did, which is why it was so satisfying. That win was a really, really satisfying win, I could have retired after that fight, happily.

“It gave me that much of a satisfaction that I thought ‘I can leave boxing happy now’.”

Advertisement

“I’d say so [it was the most satisfying win of my career], because I was getting written off by everyone.”

When the two British heavyweights met in 2019, Price produced a fine display to break Allen down, causing a cut that hampered the Doncaster man’s vision and caused trainer Darren Barker to pull him out in the tenth.

After the win, Price returned to the very same O2 Arena just three months later in a clash against Derek Chisora, but the Liverpudlian was halted after four rounds of action, in what proved to be his career finale.