POWER HUDDLE ON THE LINKS: Notre Dame AD Pete Bevacqua and SEC’s Greg Sankey to Meet with President Trump to Tackle Future of College Sports, NIL, and Revenue Sharing
The world of college sports is on the cusp of transformation, and the latest sign of this evolution comes in the form of a highly anticipated meeting between three powerful figures: Notre Dame athletic director Pete Bevacqua, Southeastern Conference commissioner Greg Sankey, and former U.S. President Donald J. Trump. The three are scheduled not only to tee off together for a round of golf but also to dive into serious discussions that could shape the future of collegiate athletics. At the heart of their dialogue will be the increasing complexity of federal regulation, the role of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) rights, and the rapidly evolving revenue-sharing landscape. These conversations, expected to go beyond mere pleasantries on the green, could hold significant implications for athletes, universities, and governing bodies across the NCAA.
The significance of this meeting lies not just in the stature of its participants but in the timing. College sports have entered a new era. NIL has shifted power toward student-athletes, and court rulings combined with state-level legislation have triggered waves of uncertainty. The NCAA, once the sole arbiter of amateurism, finds itself in a weakened position. As various stakeholders wrestle for control, the question looms: who will ultimately set the rules for the next generation of college athletics? It appears that Bevacqua and Sankey are seeking to influence the answer to that question with support from a political heavyweight in Trump.
Pete Bevacqua, who officially took over as Notre Dame’s athletic director in 2024, is no stranger to high-level negotiations and strategic vision. A former chairman of NBC Sports, Bevacqua has already demonstrated a forward-thinking approach to media rights, branding, and athlete empowerment. His leadership at one of the most storied programs in the country places him at the intersection of tradition and transformation. He understands the importance of preserving the values that define Notre Dame while also adapting to the shifting economic and social realities of college sports.
Greg Sankey, meanwhile, has become the most influential commissioner in college sports. Under his stewardship, the SEC has grown into an unrivaled powerhouse, both in terms of competition and financial clout. Sankey was instrumental in the conference’s expansion to include Texas and Oklahoma, moves that have already begun to reshape the national landscape. He has long advocated for clear and consistent federal regulation of NIL and has frequently warned against a patchwork system of state laws that create competitive imbalances. His presence at this meeting signals a desire to push for a unified national framework—one that could be facilitated through legislative backing or executive influence.
Enter Donald Trump. Though no longer in office, the former president remains a polarizing yet potent figure with deep ties to the sporting world. A known fan of college football and an experienced dealmaker, Trump’s involvement in discussions about NIL and revenue sharing is both strategic and symbolic. With the 2024 election cycle having reignited national conversations around education, youth development, and the role of government in private enterprise, Trump’s input—or potential endorsement—on college sports policy could carry significant weight. He also remains a key conduit to federal lawmakers, especially among conservatives who may be wary of expanded NCAA or governmental oversight.
Their meeting isn’t happening in a sterile boardroom or on Capitol Hill—it’s taking place on the golf course. While the casual setting might raise eyebrows, it also reflects a growing trend in how business is done among power brokers. Golf, with its unique blend of leisure and strategy, has long served as the backdrop for dealmaking in American politics and business. More importantly, it allows for unguarded, extended conversations—precisely the kind that could pave the way for future policy proposals or legislative frameworks.
One of the key issues expected to dominate the discussion is the long-debated question of NIL regulation. Since the Supreme Court’s 2021 decision in NCAA v. Alston, student-athletes have gained unprecedented freedom to profit off their name, image, and likeness. This has led to a boom in endorsements, local business partnerships, and even collective bargaining-style arrangements orchestrated by boosters and alumni groups. While NIL has been a boon for athletes, it has also created regulatory chaos. Each state has different laws, and some schools operate under different expectations. The NCAA has been largely ineffective in creating a cohesive policy, leaving schools like Notre Dame and entire conferences like the SEC in an administrative gray zone.
Sankey has previously argued that federal intervention is necessary to ensure fairness and transparency. Bevacqua, for his part, has indicated that Notre Dame will always strive to operate above board but cannot ignore the arms race unfolding around them. Together, they bring two powerful perspectives to the table—one institutional and one structural—each with a vested interest in leveling the playing field while still allowing for innovation and athlete empowerment.
Revenue sharing represents an even more contentious topic. Several lawsuits currently moving through federal courts could ultimately classify student-athletes as employees. If that happens, colleges may be required to pay athletes directly—fundamentally altering the amateur model. Schools in the SEC and programs like Notre Dame would likely be able to adapt quickly due to their vast financial resources. But for smaller schools, the ramifications could be catastrophic. That’s why stakeholders like Sankey and Bevacqua are keen on shaping the conversation before the courts do. A preemptive federal solution, possibly one that establishes a revenue-sharing cap or creates athlete-specific trust funds, might be on the agenda.
Trump’s potential role in this cannot be overstated. He has a long history of weighing in on sports policy, from kneeling protests in the NFL to pandemic-era college football schedules. If he sees a political upside to aligning with popular college programs and advocating for athlete rights—or, conversely, for preserving traditional amateurism—he could rally support from lawmakers who have been reluctant to act. Moreover, Trump’s ability to command media attention ensures that whatever comes out of this meeting will not go unnoticed. It could be the first step in a broader campaign to bring college athletics under a federal regulatory framework.
The presence of a high-profile political figure also raises questions about the influence of electoral politics on sports. With Trump potentially eyeing a return to the White House, his stance on college sports could become a campaign talking point. Voters in key battleground states care deeply about college football, particularly in the South and Midwest. Taking a bold stance on NIL reform or athlete compensation could appeal to both populist and conservative sensibilities. For Trump, it’s not just about the policies—it’s about the optics of leadership and the ability to show he’s still a power player in every arena.
There is also a deeper cultural dimension to this meeting. College sports are more than just entertainment; they are community institutions, identity markers, and economic engines. As schools increasingly resemble professional franchises, the soul of college athletics risks being diluted. Bevacqua and Sankey, though focused on modernization, also recognize the importance of preserving the values that make college sports unique—team loyalty, academic commitment, and community engagement. Any regulatory or revenue-sharing framework must balance these traditions with the realities of a billion-dollar industry.
As the conversation unfolds, many eyes will be on what follows this meeting. Will it result in a formal policy proposal? Could we see the introduction of a federal bill co-authored by Trump allies? Might the NCAA receive a mandate or roadmap for enforcing NIL compliance? Or will this be just another symbolic gesture, a photo-op that sparks headlines but fizzles in follow-through? That remains to be seen. What’s certain, however, is that the future of college sports is no longer being shaped exclusively by athletic departments and conference commissioners. It now involves former presidents, federal lawmakers, and an increasingly vocal public demanding fairness and transparency.
This meeting could very well mark a pivotal point in the history of college athletics—a moment when leaders from different spheres united around a common goal. Whether motivated by concern for athlete welfare, institutional survival, or political opportunity, Bevacqua, Sankey, and Trump are stepping into a vacuum left by indecision and fragmentation. And in doing so, they may chart the course for what college sports will look like in the decades to come.
As the sun sets on the fairways and the final putts drop, what remains is not just a game of golf but the beginning of a much larger game—one that could redefine what it means to be a student-athlete, what schools owe to their players, and who gets to write the rules for a new era of college sports.
