NCAA Board Of Governors Announces Wide-Ranging Support For Student-Athlete NIL Compensation

NCAA Board Of Governors Announces Wide-Ranging Support For Student-Athlete NIL Compensation

With its hand forced by a number of state initiatives to allow payment to college student-athletes for their name, image and likeness (NIL), the NCAA Board of Governors (BOG) is supporting a number of rule changes that will permit those and other money-making activities for those playing on their courts and fields of competition.

The BOG supports payments for endorsements, social media branding, personal appearances and student-owned business opportunities among others – a huge departure from previous rules that banned all such compensation.

There are some limits, most notably that the student-athletes will not be allowed to use any school logos or trademarks in their endeavors, although they can identify themselves, their school and the sport they play. Additionally, schools cannot pay the student-athletes for any such opportunities, nor could they use existing student-athletes in recruiting or as a conduit for any other advertising. Boosters, while able to establish NIL deals with student-athletes, likewise would not be able to use them in any recruitment efforts.

Student-athletes will be able to hire agents to help them find and develop compensation avenues – another huge rift in the previous Maginot Line drawn by the NCAA. Agents would reportedly not be able to negotiate with professional sports teams while their clients remained in college, although details on that remain to be developed.

Without question, this is merely the first step on the path to opening the NIL gates. Specific rules will have to be laid down, then submitted to each NCAA division (I, II and III) for approval. While some rules could be implemented in this calendar year, a formal vote on the rules changes are expected in January, 2021.

Get all of our print editions with your subscription today!

Several guiding principles and “guardrails” were laid out by the NCAA’s Federal and State Legislation Working Group for the new rules. Most are clearly aimed at having one governing set of rules for NCAA athletics, rather than a mishmash of state laws that would likely conflict with one another. Some of those guidelines include:

  • Making clear that compensation for athletics performance or participation is impermissible. Reaffirming that student-athletes are students first and not employees of the university.
  • Protecting the recruiting environment and prohibiting inducements to select, remain at or transfer to a specific institution.
  • Ensuring federal preemption over state name, image and likeness laws.
  • Establishing a “safe harbor” for the Association to provide protection against lawsuits filed for name, image and likeness rules.
  • Safeguarding the nonemployment status of student-athletes.
  • Maintaining the distinction between college athletes and professional athletes.
  • Upholding the NCAA’s values, including diversity, inclusion and gender equity.

“As we evolve, the Association will continue to identify the guardrails to further support student-athletes within the context of college sports and higher education,” said Val Ackerman, commissioner of the Big East and working group co-chair. “In addition, we are mindful of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on higher education, college sports and students at large. We hope that modernized name, image and likeness rules will further assist college athletes during these unprecedented times and beyond.”

Getting federal buy-in and support for the proposed legislation is critical, and was the focus of work by the NCAA’s Presidential Subcommittee on Congressional Action – an adjunct to the Federal and State Legislation Working Group.

“The evolving legal and legislative landscape around these issues not only could undermine college sports as a part of higher education but also significantly limit the NCAA’s ability to meet the needs of college athletes moving forward,” working group chair Michael V. Drake said. “We must continue to engage with Congress in order to secure the appropriate legal and legislative framework to modernize our rules around name, image and likeness. We will do so in a way that underscores the Association’s mission to oversee and protect college athletics and college athletes on a national scale.”

There are many questions to be answered, of course, as the specific legislation is created. Enforcement against violators who offer NIL opportunities in return for signing at or remaining at a particular school is just one, especially given the NCAA’s wholly inconsistent history in dealing with recruiting violations in the past.

Home Page forums NCAA Board Of Governors Announces Wide-Ranging Support For Student Athlete NIL Compensation

  • This topic has 9 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated by Kevin Kinder.
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • Author
  • #116463

    NCAA Board Of Governors Announces Wide-Ranging Support For Student Athlete NIL Compensation With its hand forced by a number of state initiatives to a
    [See the full post at: NCAA Board Of Governors Announces Wide-Ranging Support For Student Athlete NIL Compensation]


    Allowing college student-athletes to profit from their name, image and likeness is definitely coming, like it or not. Colleges that don’t have a plan are going to be left behind. In Neal Brown’s video conference this morning, he talked about how WVU had been developing a plan, and some of those specifics would be announced in the near future. Brown’s attention to detail makes me feel good that WVU will be ready when NIL is approved. Now there are a million other questions after that, but at least it seems the Mountaineers will go in with a plan, which is important.


    There will need to be some form of national guidelines that will keep things and some rogue colleges from going overboard.


    Here’s a starting point:
    Just give the athletes the same privileges and limitations that the coaches have! Is there any reason that this shouldn’t be the case?
    A drill down from this premise will bring all the questions and reasons of why there should be a difference!
    Will there be a ceiling on how much an athlete can earn?
    Why should a coach be able to change schools and not an athlete?
    Can one athlete share his money with another one or the team?
    Will the athlete pay taxes on his/her money?



    First, remember that colleges aren’t involved in this. It’s up to the players to do their own deals.

    That said, enforcement of any violations is problematic. If the NCAA doesn’t equally enforce penalities on colleges and coaches that cheat now in recruiting, how will they do it against those who violate whatever rules are put in place?



    Until we wee the full proposed legislation, we won’t know what all is involved. However, it’s fair to assume that the pay will be capped at “market value” – there is language about that in current guidelines for jobs players could have. However, how can you determine that, especially in the online sector? There is no such cap on coach earnings.

    Changing schools is not part of the NIL legislation. The one-time free transfer rule is scheduled to be boted on May 20.

    Once a player earns money, he can do with it what he wants. And yes, he will pay taxes on it, just like any other wage earner.


    Tony – Good questions, and I don’t know the exact answers right now, but I do not believe that the student-athlete will have a limit on their NIL earnings, but anything they do earn on NIL will be taxable, just like if they were working any job.


    It’s too late.  The Genie is out of the bottle.  NIL payments will bring out the worst in recruiting and there is nothing that the NCAA can ……. will ……. do to stop it.  The highest rated recruits will go to the teams that can guarantee payments by their big donor friends that own companies to kids for “NIL” in social media.  Won’t matter if they have 50,000 or 50 followers.  Money will flow like a break in the dike.  No stopping it now.



    what I meant was that if each state can make its own rules on this there would not be an even playing field.  Some states would have a very loose, wide spread policy while another state might have a more narrowly written policy.

    The NCAA would have a migraine if they tried to keep all programs in line with an unequal set of rules.


    Oh, ok Shep. 100% agreed. If the rules aren’t the same, it will be a huge advantage for schools in those state that have very liberal rules, like the propositions for California are.

    I don’t see any way that the NCAA could deal with this. If that happens, then it’s probably going to become mostly unregulated.

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Home Page forums NCAA Board Of Governors Announces Wide-Ranging Support For Student Athlete NIL Compensation

Home Page forums NCAA Board Of Governors Announces Wide-Ranging Support For Student-Athlete NIL Compensation