The verbiage on the bill is if a sport takes in more than twice as much money as it spends on scholarships for that sport, it would be required to set aside some of the money to pay the athletes I'm that sport. So, I doubt D2, D3, or JUCO would meet those criteria.
Among the schools that could truly afford such legislation would be USC, UCLA, Stanford and Cal. If any of those 4 schools would question their football or basketball sport future, that would have earth shaking repercussions throughout California's intercollegiate athletic programs.
Below is info from another web article about the California legislation
Sportico reported that, “Based on 2018 financial figures schools provided to the U.S. Department of Education, the legislation would have worked out to FBS football players in California earning, on average, $132,000 per year ... while men’s basketball players would receive an extra $107,000 and women’s basketball players would get $15,000 more annually.”
It would be interesting to see the figures by each of the 20+ schools impacted and not averages. The article mentions the football player average would $132,000- but I bet the USC average is 2-3x that number.
Even in hoops schools like Fresno, San Jose, Santa Clara, Pepperdine, Saint Mary's, etc. may question why they want to continue to subsidize their school's athletic programs even more than they already do. I am sure most non P5 schools in California (and across the country) rely HEAVILY on their basketball revenues to fund their Olympic Sports.
It would also be interesting if the California Legislation would be outside the Federal Title IX legislation.
