Good morning, and thanks for your continued support of Extra Points.

Almost every Extra Points newsletter is written by me, but that doesn't mean I don't accept freelance pitches! I'm always interested in creative and unique newsletters, be they original reporting, thoughtful and unique commentary, or a mixture of the two. I also pay for every accepted post (starting at $250 a newsletter). If you have ideas, feel free to shoot me an email at, with FREELANCE PITCH in your email subject line.

I'm actually going on vacation later this month, and I'd love to publish a few freelance submissions while I'm away from the keyboard. So if you have an idea, now is a great time to talk.

I'm happy to publish one of those submissions today, from a regular Extra Points contributor, Katie Lever, of the University of Texas. Katie and I have been talking for a while about a newsletter to connect the roots of the concept of amateurism to the major debates of today, and I think you'll enjoy reading her contribution.

The Aftershocks of Amateurism

The sky isn’t falling, but the NCAA certainly has been acting like it is. And, from the NCAA’s perspective, the anxiety makes sense.

As name, image, and likeness reform marches on, and we rapidly approach the July 1st effective date for several state-level NIL bills, another piece of legislation has earned the NCAA’s scorn. On May 27th, Senators Chris Murphy and Bernie Sanders released the College Athlete Right to Organize (CARO) Act, which seeks to grant college athletes employee status under the National Labor Relations Board. The bill’s release was followed almost immediately by a statement from the NCAA staunchly opposing it, claiming that athletic employment would “directly undercut the purpose of college: earning a degree.”

The NCAA’s statement is likely an overreaction for many reasons, but most notably because the CARO Act, while groundbreaking, is also a significant longshot to actually pass. After all, lawmakers are just now warming up to NIL reform, and athletic employment would certainly generate more legislative pushback. But the NCAA’s resistance to the CARO Act is actually pretty logical, as the bill raises an important question: is athletic amateurism—and the NCAA’s framework for collegiate athletics by extension—relevant today?