In the United States, the SCORE Act is gaining traction among conservative groups seeking to reform the name, image, and likeness (NIL) regulations in NCAA athletics. This act aims to provide the NCAA with a limited antitrust exemption to protect it from lawsuits related to eligibility rules and to prevent student-athletes from being classified as employees of their colleges. The letter from over 20 conservative organizations, which includes groups like the Center for a Free Economy and the National Taxpayers Union, promotes the SCORE Act as a common-sense solution to unify varying state laws regarding NIL rules. They assert that without such reforms, the current patchwork of state regulations could lead to chaos in college athletics, demanding immediate action from lawmakers. The conservative coalition argues that the proposed SAFE Act by some left-leaning groups would dangerously enable trial lawyers to sue athletic departments over NIL regulations, thus risking student-athletes' status as employees and potentially forcing them into unions. Furthermore, the SAFE Act envisions a government-managed media contract system for college sports, which they believe could stifle the free market and infringe upon individual liberties. This perspective reflects a broader ideological battle over how college athletics should be regulated and the optimal balance of government and market intervention. The SCORE Act, introduced in July, has already garnered some bipartisan support. Prominent figures, such as Senator Ted Cruz, are advocating for this legislation, which underscores the importance placed on maintaining the amateur status of student-athletes while navigating the complexities introduced by NIL changes. The act makes provisions for schools to allocate 22% of college sports revenue collectively to student-athletes, while expressly forbidding the use of student fees to support NIL payments. This revenue-sharing model is designed to ensure equity in compensation without compromising the educational integrity of college sports. As college athletics increasingly intersect with economic interests due to NIL rights, the NCAA has had to adapt its eligibility policies, which recently allowed former G League players to compete in NCAA sports. This move reflects a growing trend where more athletes with professional backgrounds are choosing to enroll in college, driven by the lucrative opportunities presented by NIL agreements. The NCAA is facing ongoing challenges from lawsuits about these eligibility rules, with many critics claiming they inhibit athletes' ability to capitalize on their talents. The evolution of NIL reforms thus remains a pivotal issue that could reshape the landscape of collegiate sports for years to come.