THE CASE FOR FAIR COMPETITION IN COLLEGIATE ATHLETICS: NCAA RECRUITING OVERSIGHT, INDEPENDENT SCOUTING, AND ANTITRUST REFORM

By Qhawe Brian Pittman Bey
Founder, Junior College Phenoms LLC
Founder, Pittman’s Pocket
Independent National Football Scout and Recruiting Analyst

Statement for the Record Submitted to the [Ted Cruz]
United States [Senate / House of Representatives]
Subject: Legislative Reform, NCAA Recruiting Certification, Independent Scouting Businesses, and Antitrust Protections

Introduction: The Fight for a Fair and Open Recruiting Market

The debate over the future of collegiate athletics must extend beyond student-athlete Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) compensation. Congress must also examine the competitive structure governing the independent scouting and recruiting industry, particularly the barriers faced by small businesses that identify, evaluate, and connect athletic talent with collegiate programs.

For independent scouts and recruiting entrepreneurs, access to collegiate coaching staffs, recruiting platforms, and certification systems can determine whether a business survives or is excluded from the marketplace. When a dominant governing organization controls the conditions under which independent recruiting services may compete, questions arise concerning transparency, conflicts of interest, fair competition, and the appropriate limits of regulatory authority.

As the founder of Junior College Phenoms LLC and an independent football scout and recruiting analyst, I submit this article to urge Congress to investigate whether existing NCAA recruiting-service certification practices create unnecessary barriers to entry, restrict competition, or disproportionately disadvantage independent and minority-owned businesses.

My experience and the issues raised in Pittman v. NCAA provide a basis for requesting meaningful legislative scrutiny of these concerns.

I. The NCAA Recruiting Certification System and Potential Restraints on Trade

The NCAA’s recruiting-service certification framework warrants independent examination to determine whether its requirements are transparent, consistently enforced, and reasonably related to legitimate athlete-protection and recruiting-integrity objectives.

Independent scouting services provide evaluations, prospect information, recruiting exposure, and connections between athletes and collegiate programs. These services can be particularly important to junior college athletes, underrecruited prospects, and players from historically underserved communities.

When certification requirements become difficult to understand, inconsistently administered, or unnecessarily burdensome, independent businesses may struggle to compete with larger, established organizations.

The central question is whether certification requirements protect the integrity of college recruiting or, in practice, impose unjustified commercial barriers that restrict market participation.

Congress should examine whether the relevant policies and their enforcement comply with applicable federal antitrust law, including Section 1 and Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act where the required elements can be established. The investigation should consider market structure, actual competitive effects, available alternatives, and any legitimate justifications for the challenged practices.

The objective is not to eliminate reasonable oversight. It is to ensure that oversight does not become a mechanism for suppressing lawful competition.

II. Independent Scouting as Essential Infrastructure for Athlete Opportunity

Independent scouts often perform substantial work identifying talent that may otherwise receive limited attention from collegiate programs. Their evaluations can help coaches identify prospects whose potential is not fully reflected in conventional rankings, recruiting databases, or institutional scouting networks.

This work is especially relevant to historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs), junior colleges, and other programs operating with limited recruiting resources.

A competitive independent scouting market can expand access to information, improve talent identification, and create additional pathways for athletes seeking educational and athletic opportunities.

Restricting qualified independent services without transparent and consistently applied standards may reduce these opportunities. It may also limit the ability of small businesses to develop new evaluation methods, recruiting technologies, and data systems.

Congress should therefore consider the economic and public-interest consequences of recruiting regulations for athletes, schools, independent evaluators, and minority entrepreneurs.

A fair system should promote athlete welfare while allowing qualified businesses to innovate and compete on equal terms.

III. The Issues Raised in Pittman v. NCAA

The litigation involving Qhawe Brian Pittman Bey and the NCAA raises questions concerning the administration of recruiting-service requirements, the treatment of independent scouting operations, and the availability of meaningful remedies when a business disputes an organization’s regulatory decisions.

The case, identified in the underlying Florida litigation as Pittman v. NCAA, presents an opportunity for policymakers to consider whether existing administrative structures provide adequate transparency, consistency, and procedural fairness to independent businesses.

The concerns raised include alleged inconsistencies in the application of certification requirements, disputes involving recruiting relationships, and questions about the handling of information and evidence relevant to the parties’ competing positions.

These matters should be evaluated through the documentary record and the applicable legal standards. Allegations of antitrust violations, administrative misconduct, or civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) violations must be distinguished from judicial findings and independently established facts.

Congress should not need to prejudge the outcome of pending or previously litigated disputes to recognize the broader policy question: What protections should exist when a private governing organization exercises substantial influence over access to a commercial marketplace?

A transparent, independent review process would help ensure that disputes are assessed fairly and that businesses have a meaningful opportunity to challenge decisions affecting their ability to compete.

IV. Antitrust Accountability and the Risks of Excessive Immunity

Congressional consideration of antitrust protections for the NCAA must account for the potential consequences of granting broad exemptions without adequate safeguards.

An organization exercising significant influence over collegiate athletics should not receive blanket protection from scrutiny merely because its rules are associated with sports governance.

Any proposed exemption should be carefully defined, supported by evidence, and limited to legitimate objectives. Congress should examine whether such protection could weaken competition, discourage innovation, or reduce accountability for decisions affecting independent businesses and athlete opportunities.

The relevant inquiry should include whether restrictions on recruiting services are reasonably necessary to achieve legitimate objectives and whether less restrictive alternatives are available.

Legislative reform should preserve appropriate protections for student-athletes while ensuring that independent businesses retain access to fair procedures and lawful opportunities to compete.

V. Legislative Recommendations for the Protect College Sports Act and Related Reforms

Congress should condition any new statutory protections for the NCAA or other collegiate athletic governing organizations on meaningful transparency, independent oversight, and safeguards against anticompetitive conduct.

The following reforms are recommended:

1. Independent oversight of recruiting-service certification

Establish an independent review mechanism for recruiting and scouting certification decisions. The mechanism should provide written reasons for denials, consistent evaluation criteria, reasonable processing deadlines, and a fair process for appeals.

2. Protection against arbitrary exclusion from the marketplace

Require clear, objective, and consistently applied standards for recruiting-service participation. Any restriction should be supported by legitimate, documented reasons and subject to appropriate review.

3. Fair access for qualified independent scouting businesses

Prohibit unjustified discrimination against qualified independent recruiting platforms, including minority-owned businesses. Where a restriction is challenged, the governing organization should be required to identify the applicable rule and explain its legitimate purpose.

4. Federal administrative due-process safeguards

Consider a formal complaint and review process for small businesses alleging arbitrary certification decisions, inconsistent enforcement, or exclusion from recruiting-related commercial opportunities.

5. Transparency concerning recruiting-service policies and financial arrangements

Require appropriate disclosure of certification criteria, material policy changes, relevant fees, and financial relationships that could create conflicts of interest. Congress should evaluate whether additional reporting requirements are warranted to identify practices that undermine fair competition.

6. Protection of proprietary business information

Establish reasonable safeguards for confidential scouting methodologies, original evaluation systems, and proprietary business information submitted during certification or compliance reviews. Disclosure requirements should be narrowly tailored to legitimate regulatory purposes.

7. Stronger protections for HBCUs and underrecruited athletes

Examine how recruiting-service restrictions affect HBCUs, junior college programs, and athletes who depend on independent evaluators for visibility. Develop policies that expand legitimate recruiting opportunities without compromising athlete welfare or recruiting integrity.

8. Independent examination of alleged anticompetitive conduct

Where credible evidence supports concerns about market exclusion, discriminatory enforcement, or coordinated commercial restraints, Congress should consider requesting an appropriate review by relevant federal enforcement authorities.

These reforms would create a framework in which regulatory oversight remains effective while independent businesses receive fair treatment and meaningful procedural protections.

VI. The Economic and Public-Interest Consequences

The independent scouting industry is more than a collection of private businesses. It can serve as a bridge between overlooked athletic talent and educational opportunities.

When qualified independent evaluators are able to compete, athletes may benefit from additional exposure, schools may receive broader recruiting information, and new businesses may develop innovative evaluation and technology platforms.

Conversely, unjustified barriers to participation may concentrate access among a limited group of established organizations and reduce opportunities for smaller enterprises.

These concerns deserve particular attention where independent scouting supports HBCUs and junior college athletes, who may face different recruiting-resource limitations than athletes at better-funded institutions.

Congress should evaluate these consequences using documented evidence, including certification outcomes, processing times, appeals, market participation, and the effects of challenged policies on athletes and competing businesses.

VII. A Call for Accountability Without Presuming the Outcome

The purpose of legislative reform is not to substitute political judgment for the courts or to declare disputed allegations proven before they have been established.

Rather, the purpose is to ensure that organizations exercising substantial influence over collegiate athletics operate under transparent rules, provide fair review procedures, and remain accountable under applicable law.

My experience as an independent scout and founder of Junior College Phenoms LLC has informed my concerns about the ability of independent recruiting businesses to participate in this market. The issues raised in Pittman v. NCAA should be considered alongside broader evidence concerning recruiting-service certification and the competitive structure of collegiate athletics.

Congress has an opportunity to ensure that future legislation protects athletes without creating unnecessary barriers for the independent businesses that help identify and develop their talent.

VIII. Conclusion: Fair Competition Must Be Part of College Sports Reform

The future of collegiate athletics should not be determined exclusively by the interests of the largest institutions or the organizations responsible for governing them.

Athletes deserve meaningful opportunities. Schools deserve access to qualified recruiting information. Independent scouts and entrepreneurs deserve transparent rules and fair procedures. Minority-owned businesses deserve the opportunity to compete without unjustified exclusion.

Congress should carefully examine the NCAA’s recruiting-service certification practices, assess the competitive consequences of proposed antitrust protections, and adopt reforms that promote accountability, transparency, and equal access to lawful commercial opportunities.

Any legislation addressing the future of college sports should recognize that a fair marketplace requires more than athlete-compensation rules. It also requires safeguards against unjustified restraints on the independent businesses that help athletes reach the next level.

Respectfully submitted,

Qhawe Brian Pittman Bey
Founder, Junior College Phenoms LLC
Founder, Pittman’s Pocket
Independent National Football Scout and Recruiting Analyst

Submitted for congressional consideration and inclusion in the public record.