THE NCAA agreed on Wednesday to authorize college athletes across the country to capitalize on their fame for the first time. The decision will allow students from coast to coast to enter into sponsorship deals, profit from their social media accounts, sell autographs and earn money from their names, images and likenesses, which could potentially bring millions of dollars to college athletes each year.
The decision Wednesday afternoon by the Division I Board of Regents, which oversees the highest level of college athletics in the United States, amounted to a capitulation to years of mounting legal and political pressure. The board acted less than 12 hours before state laws intended to challenge the NCAAGenerations-old rules were set to begin taking effect from Alabama to Oregon. Leaders of Divisions II and III, which include less visible and less wealthy sports programs but hundreds of thousands of players, have taken similar steps.
THE NCAA A last-minute policy change, which players and executives consider one of the most significant changes in the association’s 115-year history, will allow athletes to enter into sponsorship deals, which they frequent or not a university in a state subject to one of the laws that required the industry to act.
What were the rules?
THE NCAA has long prohibited players from being paid “to directly advertise, recommend, or promote the sale or use of any commercial product or service of any kind.” The association also said players, with few exceptions, would not be able to participate in a sport if they agreed to have an agent represent them.
How have the rules changed?
The rules haven’t changed that much NCAA decided to give it up.
Under the plan that association leaders approved Wednesday afternoon, Regulation 12 — a major part of the rule book that governs eligibility for amateurism and athletics — will not be enforced if a student receives payment in exchange for the use of the athlete’s name, image or likeness (also known as NIL). The NCAA also agreed to allow athletes to be represented in their NIL activities.
Schools in many states are expected to set policies on issues such as whether students can wear a university’s logo in an advertisement.
Athletes still will not be paid directly by universities beyond tuition, and the NCAA has been keen to ensure that athletes are not considered employees of their colleges.
“There are some things that will have to be fine-tuned as we move forward,” said Richard J. Ensor, commissioner of the Metro Atlantic Athletic Conference since 1988. “The basic rulebook here, it’s not going to change. “
Was this always the NCAA’s plan?
Barely.
The association admitted it would only need to rewrite its rules as pressure builds from states, starting with California in 2019.
Then college sports leaders began discussing a proposal that would have allowed approval while imposing what executives called “guardrails,” such as the power for a school to block a deal if it conflicted with “existing institutional sponsorship agreements.”
However, last week the Supreme Court ruled against the NCAA in a major antitrust case and left the industry more vulnerable to litigation. Many executives feared that a slew of national restrictions around NIL would lead to further lawsuits. They therefore opted for a more hands-off approach which they hope will prove more legally sustainable.
Will Congress do anything?
Maybe. A federal standard is among college sports administrators’ fondest wishes, in part because it would likely resolve any competition concerns related to disparate state rules that still take precedence over the NCAA’s amended rules. They also hope a federal law could give them better protection from litigation.
Congress has demonstrated interest in the topic through a series of hearings and bipartisan discussions among key senators. But the NCAA really wanted to have a deal done by early July. In interviews in June, several senators said negotiations were ongoing. Republicans are urging lawmakers to pass a measure narrowly crafted around name, image and likeness, while Democrats are pushing for broader protections for student-athletes.
“With the variety of laws passed by states across the country, we will continue to work with Congress to develop a solution that will provide clarity on a national level,” NCAA President Mark Emmert said in a statement Wednesday. . “The current environment – both legal and legislative – prevents us from providing a more permanent solution and the level of detail that student-athletes deserve.
Could the NCAA have sued to stop the state’s laws?
Yes, and the association has spent months refusing to rule out this possibility. Ultimately, they chose not to pursue a legal battle – at least for now.
The NCAA successfully fended off a state challenge to its authority in the early 1990s. That case, however, involved a single state law, and experts have warned that fighting today’s various state laws Today would mean a battle on many fronts with potentially unequal results.
How much will players win?
A few select stars, especially in football and basketball, could earn millions. But many more college athletes, many in those same sports, could likely generate thousands, if not tens of thousands, of dollars in revenue. Some people won’t make any money. NCAA laws and rules do not guarantee any transaction; they simply make them possible.
Luis Pardillo, chief executive of Dreamfield, a company that will work with student-athletes to market their personal appearances, said he knows of players charging rates as high as $2,000 an hour. But he and other executives predict the fees will evolve as the market evolves, with some athletes demanding even higher sums and others being pressured to lower their prices.
It’s 2021. Why did it take so long?
Make your choice of explanations. One crucial reason is that, for reasons as much financial, legal, as philosophical, it has taken a long time for many college sports leaders to become comfortable with the idea that students should be allowed to earn more than that. what it costs to go to school.
And although California passed a law in 2019 To allow players to cash in on their fame (this has yet to take effect) and push the NCAA toward changes, the NCAA is hardly designed for rapid action. The coronavirus pandemic, which has plunged the finances of the NCAA and college athletic departments across the country, hasn’t helped the schedule.
The NCAA was ready in January to vote on new rules, but the Justice Department, in the waning days of the Trump administration, raised antitrust concerns, prompting the association, at the request of Emmertto postpone the action.
This was not the case until an interview with the New York Times On May 7, Emmert publicly stated that the NCAA should again move forward with approving new rules.
“We need to get a vote on these rules that are before the membership now,” Emmert said, urging a vote “before or as close to July 1.”
