NIL for College Athletes
Josh Childers
Dr. Clinton Jenkins
Intro to American Government
14 April 2022
Blog Post #3 – NIL in College Sports
For years, one of the biggest debates in college sports was over whether or not the athletes should be paid. Some argued that receiving a free education and an experience that few others will ever have was sufficient in exchange for the athlete representing their school. Others argued that the athletes deserve to be paid because they create tons of revenue for their for their schools, media outlets, and sponsors. On July 1, 2021, the NCAA approved NIL rules that allow athletes to profit off of their name, image, and likeness. This means that athletes can develop their own merchandise, promote products and services, and be paid for event appearances. This was a complete game changer and has had a massive impact on what college sports look like.
There are obviously many benefits to NIL. It has given athletes the ability to capitalize on the image that they have worked so hard to build up. These athletes create a ridiculous amount of money for everyone involved in college sports, so it is only fair that they receive some sort of compensation for themselves. Also, many of these athletes will not go on to play their sport professionally, so NIL gives them a way to take advantage of their image while it lasts. Being a college athlete takes up a very large amount of time which makes it nearly impossible for athletes to get part time jobs. These athletes still have to pay for basic necessities out of their pocket, so NIL makes it easier for them to afford the things they need. It’s clear that the NIL policy has many benefits for college athletes
The biggest argument against NIL is that it could compromise the quality of the NCAA’s product. Players will want to go to wherever they can make the most money, so teams that cannot offer as much money will be at a major disadvantage and bigger schools will reap the benefits. As a result, college sports will become less competitive, and the big schools will dominate even more. Nick Saban, the greatest college football coach of all-time, has been one of the more notable figures to voice their concerns about NIL:
The concept of name, image and likeness was for players to be able to use their name, image and likeness to create opportunities for themselves. That’s what it was. So last year on our team, our guys probably made as much or more than anybody in the country. But that creates a situation where you can basically buy players. You can do it in recruiting. I mean, if that’s what we want college football to be, I don’t know. And you can also get players to get in the transfer portal to see if they can get more someplace else than they can get at your place.
Schools like Alabama will be able to offer their players the opportunity to make more money because they are in the national spotlight. Sponsors will be willing to give their players more money because they are more recognizable. Saban points out that this will give bigger schools a major advantage in recruiting simply because they can give them more money. NIL has also led to a crazy increase in the number of players who have entered the transfer portal. Essentially what Saban is saying is that the rich get richer.
The NIL policy is in its infancy, so it is not surprising that it has some problems, but what are the possible solutions? Obviously, the NCAA cannot go back and abandon the NIL policy. College athletes would revolt if they lost their income all of a sudden. They must find some way to regulate it. This could prove to be very difficult because different states have different laws regarding NIL for college athletes. As of right now, NIL has created a free-for-all that is in desperate need of regulation. In order to find the solution, the commissioners of each of the conferences in the NCAA must meet together and work to find a solution that allows athletes to take advantage of NIL, while still preserving that competition that makes college sports so great.
https://www.si.com/college/2021/07/01/ncaa-nil-reaction-criticism-athlete-benefits