# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
ARCHIVED WEBSITE

This topic was archived on Mar. 22, 2024, in light of recent developments. A reconsideration of the topic is possible in the future.

The NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) is a nonprofit organization formed in 1906 that regulates college athletics, including game rules, athlete eligibility, and college tournaments. As of Mar. 2021, the NCAA was composed of "[n]early half a million college athletes [who] make up the 19,886 teams that send more than 57,661 participants to compete each year in the NCAA's 90 championships in 24 sports across 3 divisions."

The NCAA is seemingly the final authority to decide whether college athletes should be paid to play college sports. However, in 2019, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed the Fair Play Act that allows college athletes to hire agents, sign endorsement deals, and be paid for the use of their likeness.

California was the first state to pass a NIL (name, image, and likeness) law, which takes effect on Jan. 1, 2023. But California was quickly followed by more states. As of June 10, 2021, 18 states have passed NIL laws; five more states have passed bills that were awaiting the governor's signature to become law; 14 states have introduced NIL bills; and one state has a bill passed by the Senate and awaiting a House vote, according to the Business of College Sports.

The NCAA was scheduled to vote on new NIL rules in Jan. 2021, but it then postponed the vote, citing "external factors." Days before the scheduled vote Makan Delrahim, JD, Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice under the Trump administration, questioned the proposed rules' compliance with antitrust laws.

Additionally, the US Supreme Court agreed to hear a case (National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Shawne Alston, et al.) about whether the NCAA is violating antitrust laws by restricting college athletes' compensation. The Supreme Court heard arguments on Mar. 31, 2021 as the NCAA March Madness tournament heads into Final Four games just days later on Apr. 3. Respondents were split 50/50 in a June 1, 2021 New York Times survey about whether the NCAA strictly limiting paid compensation is constitutional.

Gabe Feldman, JD, Professor of Sports Law, Director of the Sports Law Program and Associate Provost for NCAA compliance at Tulane University, noted that the last time the NCAA was at the Supreme Court was in 1984 (NCAA vs. the Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma). The ruling changed the broadcast regulations for college football. Feldman explained, "That was a shape-shifting decision that in many ways fundamentally changed economics of college football and college football television. And ever since that 1984 decision, courts have been relying on that language to try to interpret antitrust law applies to all NCAA restrictions, including player compensation."

On June 21, 2021, the US Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the NCAA cannot ban certain payments to student athletes under the premise of maintaining amateurism. Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch, writing for the majority, stated, "traditions alone cannot justify the NCAA's decision to build a massive money-raising enterprise on the backs of student athletes who are not fairly compensated. Nowhere else in America can businesses get away with agreeing not to pay their workers a fair market rate on the theory that their product is defined by not paying their workers a fair market rate. And under ordinary principles of antitrust law, it is not evident why college sports should be any different. The NCAA is not above the law."

On June 28, 2021, the NCAA Division I Council recommended to the NCAA Division I Board of Directors that student athletes be allowed to profit from their name, image, and likeness. Schools would not be allowed to pay students and no one could offer compensation for students to attend a particular school. If adopted, the rule would only apply to Division I schools and would be temporary until the NCAA or Congress acts.

On June 30, 2021, fewer than 12 hours before some states' NIL laws went into effect, the NCAA Division I Board of Directors issued an interim ruling stating that Bylaw 12 (the rules that say athletes cannot receive payment) will not be enforced. Divisions II and III of the NCAA followed suit and the changes went into effect for all three divisions on July 1, 2021.

The University of North Carolina became the first school to organize group licensing deals for student athletes in July 2021. UNC athletes will be able to earn money for NIL marketing including UNC trademarks and logos in groups of three or more athletes. For example, a student athlete will be compensated for the sale of a jersey featuring their name, or for a sponsorship deal in which they appear wearing a UNC jersey. Group licensing deals in theory can allow lesser-known players to reap the benefits of appearing alongside a well-known player.

By Jan. 2022, without a clear NIL structure from the NCAA, some schools were questioning how to navigate deals for players or whole teams without violating NCAA policy.

NCAA president Charlie Baker sent a letter on Dec. 5, 2023, to the 362 Division I member schools calling for reformations including creating a separate division for the top-earning schools that would mimic professional sports and updating NIL regulations so female athletes could better benefit. The rule changes will have to be considered by the NCAA governing boards, a process which could take up to a year.

A 2019 Seton Hall Sports Poll found that 60% of those surveyed agreed that college athletes should be allowed compensation for their name, image, and/or likeness, while 32% disagreed, and 8% were unsure. This was quite a change from polling conducted in 2017, when 60% believed college scholarships were enough compensation for college athletes.

Should Colleges and Universities Pay College Athletes?

Pro 1

The NCAA, colleges, and universities profit unfairly from the work and likenesses of college athletes.

The NCAA reported over $1.06 billion in revenue in 2017 (the most recent available numbers). In 2018, NCAA president Mark Emmert was paid more than $2.7 million. Nine other NCAA executives were paid more than $500,000 in 2018, with one paid more than $1.3 million.

Michael Sokolove, author of The Last Temptation of Rick Pitino (2018), explained, "If you look at a program like [University of] Louisville, ...they generate about $45 million a year in revenue. They give out 13 scholarships. That adds up to about $400,000 a year. The rest of it gets spread out to the coach, who makes $8 million a year, to the assistant coaches, who make as much as a half-million dollars a year. All throughout the athletic department, people are making six-figure salaries. It does not go to the players, what I call the unpaid workforce."

As of Nov. 17, 2020, the University of Alabama head football coach Nick Saban was the highest paid NCAA college football coach, making $9.3 million per year. 81 other head football coaches made more than $1 million annually and another 29 more than $500,000.

The highest paid men's basketball coach was the University of Kentucky head coach, John Calipari, who was paid $8.2 million per year. 69 other head men's basketball coaches were paid more than $1 million annually, and another three more than $500,000.

Michigan coach Jim Harbaugh, who was forecast to earn about $11 million in 2023, says, "I would take less money for the players to have a share. I hope other coaches would use their voice to express the same thing."

College athletes, arguably the stars of the show who earn millions year after year for the well-paid NCAA executives, coaches, and staff, were forbidden by the NCAA from not only being paid for their work-, but from seeking other related compensation such as endorsement deals. And, as John I. Jenkins and Jack Swarbrick, President and Athletics Director of Notre Dame University argue, "We have been vocal in our conviction that student-athletes should be allowed to... profit from their celebrity - for one simple reason: Other students are allowed to. If a college student is a talented artist or musician no one begrudges him the chance to make money from his skills. And athletes should as far as possible have the opportunities other students enjoy."
Read More

Pro 2

College athletes are risking their bodies as well as their future careers and earning potential to play for colleges and universities while often receiving a sub-par education.

Governor of California Gavin Newsom, stated, "Collegiate student athletes put everything on the line - their physical health, future career prospects and years of their lives to compete. Colleges reap billions from these student athletes' sacrifices and success but, in the same breath, block them from earning a single dollar. That's a bankrupt model."

Zachary Kerr, PhD, Researcher at the University of North Carolina's Center for the Study of Retired Athletes, stated, "I definitely think research indicates strong evidence that injuries during one's sports career can potentially be associated with adverse health outcomes later in life."

In 2017, 67% of former Division I athletes had sustained a major injury and 50% had chronic injuries, 2.5% higher than non-athletes.

Azmatullah Hussaini, MD, President of the New York/New Jersey chapter of the American Muslim Health Professionals, and Jules Lipoff, MD, Assistant Professor of Dermatology at the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, offered additional context: especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, "[g]iven that athletes are disproportionately Black in the biggest revenue-generating sports - football and basketball - this dynamic also evokes America's horrific history of unpaid slave labor. It's hard to ignore the racist undertones when the financial benefit to these institutions is based on the unpaid work of young Black men."

The NCAA requires players to have health insurance but does not pay for that insurance and can refuse to pay medical expenses for sports injuries, some of which can have life-long consequences for the players' bodies and career opportunities. The NCAA also does not prohibit schools from canceling injured athletes' scholarships, leaving athletes without a sport or education.

Adding insult to sometimes literal injury, college athletes are also frequently denied the NCAA's other form of "compensation": a quality education. As Jon Solomon, Editorial Director for the Sports and Society Program at the Aspen Institute explained, "The most glaring example occurred when the University of North Carolina was found by outside parties to have organized fake classes that enabled dozens of athletes to gain and maintain their eligibility... of the 3,100 students who took the fake classes over 18 years, 47.4 percent were athletes... North Carolina avoided NCAA penalties by essentially arguing that the NCAA should stay out of irregularities in college courses." The NCAA polices athletes' finances but does not ensure a quality education.
Read More

Pro 3

College athletes are often valued at more than $1 million, but they (and their families) frequently live below the poverty line.

A study by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that the top two college football positions-the quarterback and wide receiver-were worth $2.4 million and $1.3 million per year respectively, while starting men's basketball players in the Power Five schools were worth between $800,000 and $1.2 million per year.

If college players earned about 50% of their teams' revenues like the NFL and NBA players do, the average football player's yearly salary would be $360,000 and the average basketball player's yearly salary would be $500,000.

The study found that "[t]he player-level analysis reveals that the existing limits on player compensation effectively transfers resources away from students who are more likely to be black and more likely to come from poor neighborhoods towards students who are more likely to be white and come from higher-income neighborhoods."

College athletes are required to make up the difference between NCAA scholarships and the actual cost of living. Tuition shortfalls amount to thousands of dollars per year and leave about 85% of players to live below the poverty line. For example, fair market value for a University of Texas football player was $513,922. However, players lived $778 below the federal poverty line and owed $3,624 in tuition.

About 25% of Division I athletes reported food poverty in the past year and almost 14% reported being homeless in the past year. Erin McGeoy, a former water polo athlete at George Washington University, explained, "a common occurrence was that we would run out of meal money halfway through the semester and that's when I started to run into troubles of food insecurity." She turned to boarding dogs in her no-dogs-allowed apartment in order to pay rent because housing costs increased each year but her housing allowance remained static.

The NCAA keeps players in poverty and denied them ways to earn money, while making millions on their performance.
Read More

Con 1

Scholarships are fair financial compensation for college athletes, especially considering the precarious finances of athletic departments.

According to the NCAA, the organization provides "more than $3.6 billion in athletic scholarships annually to more than 180,000 student-athletes." Divided equitably, each student would receive about $20,000 per year. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, the average total cost of public college (tuition, fees, room, and board) for the 2017-18 academic year was $17,797. Considering other scholarships and aid are widely available and not all college athletes require financial aid, the NCAA scholarships are generous.

Further, most college programs do not generate the income needed to run their athletic programs, much less pay athletes. In fiscal year 2019, the collective expenses of the 65 Power Five schools-the largest and richest Division I schools in the NCAA-exceeded revenue by $7 million. Other Division I schools had an almost $23 million collective difference between revenue and expenses. No Division II or III schools' revenue exceeded expenses.

If students were paid, the NCAA argues, many colleges and universities would have to offer fewer scholarships and the remaining scholarships would be distributed unfairly to top football and men's basketball players because those two sports bring in the most revenue. Schools would also have to cut unprofitable sports including gymnastics, swimming and diving, tennis, track and field, volleyball, and wrestling. Discrepancies between men's and women's sports such as the weight room during the 2021 NCAA basketball tournament would only worsen.

Paying players would also limit the literal and figurative playing fields to elite universities with large budgets. As John Thelin, PhD, Research Professor of History of Higher Education & Public Policy at the University of Kentucky, explained, "paying salaries to players will increase [athletic] program expenditures without necessarily increasing revenues... [and] a handful of powerful programs will stand to gain in competition for athletic talent simply because they can afford to pay salaries. Others will mimic as they try to keep up but eventually will fall short in trying to outbid Auburn University, Florida State, the University of Southern California or the University of Texas in the college player arms race."
Read More

Con 2

Very few college athletes will go pro, so athletes should take advantage of the education being offered in exchange for playing a college sport.

The reality is that the vast majority of college athletes will never play professionally. Of the 36,011 college baseball players, only 8,002 are eligible to play professionally each year. 1,217 will be draft picks, but only 791 will be drafted yearly, meaning about 9.9% of college baseball players will go pro, which is the largest likelihood in NCAA sports.

The major money-makers, football and men's basketball, have very low odds. Of the 73,712 NCAA football players, about 16,380 are draft-eligible and 254 will be drafted, meaning about 1.2% of college football players will go pro. Of the 18,816 male basketball players, 4,181 are draft-eligible and 60 will be drafted, but only 52 will go pro, or a 1.2% chance a college basketball player will play professionally. The odds are even lower for women's basketball at 0.6%.

The NCAA noted, "[p]rofessional opportunities are extremely limited and the likelihood of a high school or even college athlete becoming a professional athlete is very low. In contrast, the likelihood of an NCAA athlete earning a college degree is significantly greater; graduation success rates are 86% in Division I, 71% in Division II and 87% in Division III."

In other words, it would be more prudent and more profitable for college athletes to focus on education as their compensation.

Data analyzed from the Department of Labor showed nine out of 10 new jobs were going to employees with college degrees in June 2018. Further, a Gallup poll of "74,385 U.S. adults with a bachelor's degree, finds that college graduates who participated in NCAA athletics experience a host of positive long-term life outcomes at greater rates than non-athletes."

Those positive outcomes include: 70% of NCAA athletes graduated in four years or fewer, 50% agree that college was worth the cost, 39% earned an advanced degree, 33% have "good" jobs after graduation, and 24%
"are thriving at the highest levels," all higher percentages than their non-athlete peers.

Amy Perko, CEO of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, said of the Gallup findings, "It's a positive report for the educational benefits for college sports, and it reinforces the point that we've tried to make over the years. There's an important role for college sports in higher education, and that role needs to be placed in the proper perspective as part of the educational mission, not apart from it."
Read More

Con 3

Paying college athletes would not solve the real problem: the American amateur sports system is broken.

Football and basketball players cannot play professionally immediately after high school. The NBA requires players to be at least 19 and a year out of high school, while the NFL requires players to be three years out of high school. These rules can effectively limit players' options to playing in college or choosing another profession altogether. Most players have no real "amateur" sport option and those who would rather not go to college have no other established feeder system to make it to a professional team.

Further confusing the issue, the NCAA does not have a consistent or fair definition of "amateurism" and allows some significant forms of financial compensation. College athletes are allowed to compete in the Olympic Games and be financially compensated, such as Joseph Schooling, a University of Texas swimmer, who earned a $740,000 bonus for winning Singapore's first gold medal ever at the 2016 Rio de Janeiro Summer Games for the 100m butterfly. College athletes may also play a second sport professionally and be compensated, such as Clemson quarterback Kyle Parker who earned a $1.4 million baseball signing bonus from the Colorado Rockies in 2010 while still playing football for the Tigers. Tennis players may earn up to $10,000 in prize money yearly while playing college tennis and college football players may earn up to $550 in bowl gifts.

B. David Ridpath, EdD, Associate Professor of Sports Administration at Ohio University, noted, "The only amateur quality about college athletics is that colleges refuse to pay their players." Ridpath explained, "The United States is the only country in the world that has a significant portion of elite athletic development and commercialized sport embedded within its education systems. Consider that ten of the biggest outdoor sports stadiums in the world (excluding auto racing venues) are American college football stadiums. None of the largest ones are NFL stadiums."

To fix the problem, and separate athletes who are getting an education just because they want to play a sport from those who actually want to go to college, the United States needs a true amateur or minor league that feeds into professional sports.
Read More

Discussion Questions
1. Should college athletes be paid? Why or why not?

2. Should the college athletics system be revised in another way to compensate amateur athletes? Explain your answer.

3. How should the NCAA (or another governing body) balance college athletes' sport, educational, and financial interests? Explain your answer(s).

4. Do you think well-established minor-league systems would be attractive to high-school graduates and college athletes less interested in (or ill-prepared for) higher education? Explain your answer(s).
Take Action
1. Consider the pro position of the National College Players Association that paying college athletes is a civil rights issue.

2. Explore the NCAA site and think critically about the organization as the governing body of college athletics.

3. Analyze the argument that paying athletes would "ruin college sports" from Cody J. McDavis, former college basketball player.

4. Consider how you felt about the issue before reading this article. After reading the pros and cons on this topic, has your thinking changed? If so, how? List two to three ways. If your thoughts have not changed, list two to three ways your better understanding of the "other side of the issue" now helps you better argue your position.

5. Push for the position and policies you support by writing US national senators and representatives.
Sources

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Should College Athletes Be Paid? Top 3 Pros and Cons

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Proponents say colleges profit unfairly off of the athletes. Opponents say the athletes are paid in tuition. Explore both sides of the debate.

# data[].attributes.body
Explanation & Planning Prompts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
2. Workshop Wheels - description & questions.pdf

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Colorado Gov. Signs Bill Allowing NCAA Athletes to Profit Off Name, Likeness

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Colorado became the second state to sign a bill allowing college athletes to be paid for the commercial use of their identities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Backwards Planning for Workshop for Aspen

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When name, image and likeness reforms swept through the NCAA in June, it ushered in a new era for college sports and student athletes alike, one that some observers have likened to the Wild West, with little in the way of guidance as schools and players navigate new terrain.

But if policies allowing athletes to profit from their name, image and likeness are akin to the Wild West, the NCAA is the sheriff tasked with overseeing law and order in this uncharted territory. And that's a tough job-NIL laws are a patchwork across states. Some states have no NIL laws, forcing colleges located within their borders to rely on the loose guidelines the NCAA provided at the last minute as a court opinion opened the door for NIL last summer.

The lack of clear-cut NCAA policies has created a host of confusion around many aspects of NIL, including whole-team deals, experts say.

For example, Brigham Young University recently signed an agreement with a protein bar company, in which scholarship football players can receive $1,000 each for representing Built Bar, while nonscholarship teammates receive a stipend that will "cover the cost of their tuition for at least one year," according to ESPN. The University of Miami offers another example of an early whole-team deal, with scholarship football players earning money for promoting a chain of gyms on social media. And while BYU and Miami may be early leaders on whole-team NIL deals, they're in territory that hasn't been clearly defined by the NCAA.

"There's not really any guidance from the NCAA," said Erin E. Butcher, a higher education attorney at Bricker & Eckler in Ohio. "Where does a group deal cross the line from a permissible NIL deal to being some sort of improper recruiting inducement or pay for play?"

Now it appears the NCAA is taking a look at programs that have potentially crossed the murky lines of NIL. NCAA president Mark Emmert, without going into specifics, announced in December that the organization was investigating "a number" of schools for possible NIL violations.

Asked for details on potential or ongoing investigations, the NCAA declined to comment. Early media coverage, however, has indicated that the NCAA has expressed interest in Miami and BYU, particularly the whole-team deals signed by both football programs.

Whole-Team NIL Deals

According to , the NCAA may be probing those deals, announced last summer, for possible pay-for-play violations.

As of publication, Miami said it had not been contacted by the NCAA regarding an NIL deal signed with a chain of gyms.

BYU, however, said it has been contacted by the NCAA with questions about the NIL deal between its football team and the protein bar company.

"We have communicated with the NCAA concerning the Built Bar NIL arrangement," Jon McBride, associate athletic director for communications and media strategy at BYU, said in an email. "They have informed us they do not have any additional questions at this time. We will continue to monitor and abide by the NCAA interim NIL policy."

Asked about the BYU and Miami NIL deals, Kenneth L. Shropshire, professor and CEO of the Global Sport Institute at Arizona State University, flagged two possible concerns for the NCAA.

At BYU, he suggested the concern may be related to scholarship limits for the football team. While NCAA Division I football teams are limited, by rule, to 85 scholarships, having an outside organization pay for the cost of attendance for walk-ons may blur the lines of what is appropriate.

At Miami, Dan Lambert, the gym owner and architect of the whole-team NIL deal for the football program, also founded a corporation dedicated to identifying NIL opportunities for Miami student athletes. Shropshire suggested that the breadth of the team deal raises the question of "how much influence one individual could have on a team or a program" through NIL agreements.

Thilo Kunkel, a professor and director of the Sport Industry Research Center at Temple University, said that one way schools can run afoul of the NCAA on such deals is if athletes are collecting NIL money without providing a service, which is essentially a pay-to-play issue.

"The payment is directly linked to a certain deliverable," Kunkel said. "Oftentimes, these deliverables are social media posts. However, some of these athletes that are at these universities don't even have a public Twitter or Instagram account. So that means that they're getting paid for a deliverable that they essentially can't fulfill as it currently stands."

Beyond pay for play, legal experts said that schools have to be careful to avoid signing whole-team NIL deals that may be a potential recruiting inducement and thus an NCAA rule violation.

"I think the NCAA may be interested in whether this is going to give a school an advantage over other schools," Butcher said. "Are people going to want to come to a school because they're getting paid to participate when they could go to a different school and not have that deal?"

But again, legal experts noted these boundaries are undefined in the new territory of NIL.

"The line between an NIL opportunity and a pay for play and a recruiting inducement is paper-thin," said Patrick Stubblefield, a sports attorney at Freeman Lovell in Utah and a former college compliance official. "And it's not entirely clear where that line should be drawn."

NIL Risk vs. Reward

Kunkel noted that even as questions circle whole-team deals, they can benefit the companies that ink the agreements as well as the athletes cashing in.

"These organizations get a lot of positive media attention beyond the actual deal," he said. "They get immediately associated with the whole university without paying for the university brand."

But universities need to look hard at whole-team deals in the infancy of NIL, he said: "I think the probe is already sending a signal to universities that have been thinking about group deals to make sure you have your legal ducks in a row before you actually sign something."

The possibility of NCAA investigations, said Stubblefield, should send a message to colleges to tread carefully into whole-team NIL deals. He suggested colleges hire outside counsel to help navigate these gray areas and to ask questions of the NCAA prior to signing such agreements.

Ultimately, he said he'll be surprised to see the NCAA take action unless there are clear violations, noting that the organization is exposed to its own degree of risk in policing NIL.

"Early indications were that the NCAA was going to take a hands-off approach to NIL, which makes sense to me. Because they're putting themselves at a fair amount of risk," Stubblefield said. "Say they strike down certain deals-if the NCAA steps in and takes a heavy-handed approach, they put themselves in a fair amount of legal risk given the Alston opinion."

The Alston opinion, a Supreme Court case that paved the way for NIL over the summer, leaves open the possibility that student athletes could push the NCAA for direct compensation.

Despite the uncertainty surrounding whole-team NIL deals-now under the specter of NCAA compliance investigations-colleges have continued to sign such agreements in recent weeks. The University of Alabama women's gymnastics team, for example, signed a teamwide deal in late December that requires each athlete to participate in interviews and post to social media on behalf of the sponsor, CrowdPush, an online fundraising platform.

Regardless of the outcome of the probe, some experts think the NCAA is responsible for creating the possible compliance issues. Despite having years to plan for the potential of NIL for student athletes, Kunkel said, the organization did little to ready itself. The lack of a well-designed NIL framework makes compliance harder for schools, he said. Now the NCAA finds itself policing an area it never prepared colleges, students or itself to navigate.

"With the lack of a framework," Kunkel said, "people are going to start bending the rules."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Lack of clear NCAA rules creates confusion around NIL

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When name, image and likeness reforms swept through the NCAA in June, it ushered in a new era for college sports and student athletes alike, one that some observers have likened to the Wild West, with little in the way of guidance as schools and players navigate new terrain.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
LIVE WORKSHOP: Get immediate access to our workshop for parents of high school or college athletes. We cover how to get started, the types of opportunities available (for every sport, at every level), questions to ask agents, contract terms to look out for and more!

We are tracking state laws and state high school association rules governing name, image and likeness below.
Disclaimer: This information is made available for educational purposes. It provides general information and is not intended to provide specific legal advice. This information should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.
Last Updated on December 28, 2022

In what states is it clear that high school student athletes can monetize their name, image and likeness?
Parents of high school and college athletes: join our Facebook group to help you navigate NIL

State

NIL Monetization Allowed?

Governing Rule

Current Rule(s)

Connecticut

Yes

CIAC voted in June 2022 to allow NIL subject to rules prohibiting certain categories (adult entertainment, alcohol, tobacco, nicotine, cannabis, controlled dangerous substances, prescription pharmaceuticals, gambling, weapons, firearms and ammunition). Subject to additional rules.

District of Columbia

Yes

Rules amended for 2022-23 to add: "These provisions are not intended to restrict the right of any student to participate in a commercial
or marketing endorsements provided there is no school team, school or DCSAA affiliation name or
logo visible. The student may not appear in the uniform of the student's school and cannot utilize the marks, logos, etc., of the school or DCSAA as any part of any endorsement. DCSAA must be notified of all student commercial or marketing endorsements."

Idaho

Yes

Rules amended to allow NIL in July 2022. Athletes can participate in commercial endorsements as long as there is no school team, school, league, district or IHSAA affiliation.

Iowa

Yes
NIL Guidance
Rules amended August 2022 to allow NIL, subject to guidelines.

Maine

Yes
MPA Handbook
New NIL policy approved in July 2022. NIL allowed, but no one employed by a school can be involved. Athletes also cannot reference their member school or wear any logos, etc. Prohibited categories include adult entertainment products and services, alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, controlled dangerous substances, prescription pharmaceuticals, casinos and gambling (including sports betting, lotter, betting in video games, etc.), weapons, firearms and ammunition.

Maryland

Yes

MPSSAA
Subtitle 06
Chapter 03
Section 10 ( amended December 2022)

Rules amended December 2022. NIL allowed with the following prohibitions: making any reference to a school or MPSSAA in NIL activities, wearing a school-based jersey or displaying the school's name, mascot, logo or other identifying marks, endorsing or promoting products/services of a third-party NIL partner during school-based team activities and events. Prohibited categories: adult entertainment, alcohol, tobacco and nicotine-related products, cannabis, controlled dangerous substances, prescription pharmaceuticals, casinos and gambling (including sports betting and the lottery), video games, online games, and mobile devices, weapons, firearms and ammunition.

Mississippi

No

Currently prohibited. Loss of amateur standing through: entering competition for monetary guarantee (including gift certificates); entered competition for share of gate receipt; accepted money; entered competition for prizes or merchandise of more tha $1K in retail value; sold or pawned a prize; accepted payment of expense allowances in excess of actual expenses. Also cited NFHS's ruling against high school NIL opportunities.
The state law which granted college athletes NIL rights, specifically says it does not apply before enrollment at a post-secondary institution: "No student-athlete shall enter into a name, image, and likeness agreement or receive compensation from a third-party licensee relating to the name, image or likeness of the student-athlete before the date on which the student-athlete enrolls at a postsecondary educational institution."

New Hampshire

Yes

Bylaws amended in December 2022 to allow NIL. Commercial endorsement allowed if there is no school, team or NHIAA affiliation (including no use of uniform, marks, logos, etc.).

New Jersey

Yes

Executive Committee officially approved NIL on 11/10/21. Student-athletes are permitted to receive payments for coaching and providing athletic instruction, however student-athletes may not play on the teams that they coach. The student-athlete's compensation must be commensurate with the work performed. A student-athlete may profit off of the use of their own name, image and likeness (NIL). Such permissible activities include commercial endorsements, promotional activities, social media presence, product or service advertisements, and non-fungible tokens (NFTs). Prohibited from referencing school or NJSIAA or using school logos or marks. Also prohibited from endorsing certain categories and services including adult entertainment products and services, alcohol products, tobacco and nicotine-related products, cannabis products, controlled dangerous substances, prescription pharmaceuticals, casinos and gambling (including sporst betting, the lottery, and betting in connection with video games, online games and mobile devices), and weapons/firearms/ammunition.

North Dakota

Yes

NDHSAA ( amended June 2022)

New policy passed in June 2022 to allow some NIL activities. No use of school uniforms or school logos/trademarks in NIL activities. Booster clubs cannot be involved with NIL.

Oregon

Yes

OSAA
Rule 8.4 (voted to set new parameters as of 10/10/22)

Voted to set new parameters to allow NIL as of 10/10/22 ( see here)

Pennsylvania

Yes

Amended in December 2022 to allow NIL ( summary).

Tennessee

Yes
TSSAA NIL Rule
Amended in December 2022 to allow NIL. "The change establishes that students are allowed to receive payment for instructional services and other activities not related to performance provided that they are carried out in a manner that does not suggest or reasonably suggest the endorsement or sponsorship of the TSSAA school. The student's activities for which they are compensated may not include an image or likeness of the student in a uniform, or other clothing or gear depicting the name or logo of the TSSAA member school the student is attending or has attended. No reference to TSSAA accolades or championships may be used in the student's activities for which they are compensated."

NIL Trackers
Research assistance provided by: Jeffrey Parry

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
LIVE WORKSHOP: Get immediate access to our workshop for parents of high school or college athletes. We cover how to get started, the types of opportunities available (for every sport, at every level), questions to ask agents, contract terms to look out for and more!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
College athletes should be paid because they bring a substantial amount of money into their colleges, boost admission rates, put in full-time hours, and do not have the time to get a full-time job on top of their sport.
And yet, ridiculously, in many sports, it's illegal to pay college athletes because it's considered amateur sports.

These are the overarching reasons for which student athletes should be paid. However, there are several more that are justified below.

Reasons Why College Athletes Should be Paid

1. Student athletes bring in money
College sports bring in tremendous amounts of money. Football, basketball, and baseball, in particular, generate billions of dollars a year for colleges in ticket sales, merchandise sales, and advertisements.
Considering the massive revenue generated for colleges because of the student athletes, it only makes sense to pay them for their time, commitment, and energy.

As the system currently operates, it may be argued that college athletes are being exploited. college athletics is the main avenue into professional sports. Thus, the athletes need to go through college athletics even if the pay is low or non-existent. As a result, they feel they have little choice but to put in free labor for the colleges.

Read Also: 42 Colleges with Bear Mascots

2. No time for a part-time job
Not all college athletes have the bank of mom and dad to back them up. Many college athletes are admitted into colleges on scholarships and have little extra money to support themselves.
Living costs such as rent, food, and textbooks add up so many students find part-time employment to cover these costs.

For college athletes, a part-time job really isn't an option. College athletics take up a significant amount of time and are extremely physically and mentally demanding on top of college classes.

Many athletes therefore struggle to make ends meet even though they work day in and day out.

3. Transparency about revenues generated
College sports teams have budgets so there is some degree of knowledge as to where money is coming from and how much of it there is. However, the details are extremely murky, and athletes are often kept in the dark.
As a result, there is no guarantee that the sports teams will see the money they have brought in re-invested in their sport.

In other word, the athletes are bringing money into the colleges that is being redirect - often to inappropriate expenditures.

In fact, there have been several scandals now whereby certain college shareholders have used sports-generated funds inappropriately or even for personal gain.

4. Brings better athletes (higher incentive)
College sports are already incredibly competitive but add the element of payment into the mix, and the bar will raise even higher.
Many star athletes choose not to pursue their sport in college for the simple reason that it isn't paid.

Payment would raise the incentive so the caliber would be even higher than it currently stands.

In fact, if the college athletics system changed, it may increase participation in sports overall meaning the pool of possible stars will grow.

5. Renowned sports teams increase college admissions
College sports do not just bring in revenue. They also attract students, which is another reason the athletes are valuable labor for the college.
There have been many instances of an average college (academically speaking) cultivating a champion sports team and therefore college applications skyrocket.

Further, once a college has a more competitive applicant pool and a renowned reputation, it can raise tuition fees. Thus, college sports can generate money for the school both directly and even indirectly.

6. Athletics are expensive
Playing a sport or doing an athletic activity at a college level usually means the athlete has dedicated a significant portion of their life and personal money to that skill.
In other words, you have to be very good to pursue a sport in college which means you have put in the work to get that good.

Athletics can be expensive and for a student to have practiced to the degree required to make it into college means that they have likely invested a fair amount of money over time.

Students should be paid if they are playing full-time in college as they have invested the resources to be there and should reap the rewards of that investment.

7. College athletes put in the same hours as a full-time job
Considering the hours of practice, games, travel, and physical and mental maintenance, the time commitment can be equal to that of a full-time job.
If someone is putting in the same hours as a full-time job which means they cannot get a job on top of their sport (as explained in point #2) then surely they should be paid for their time commitment.

8. Players bring in merch money
Another point about revenue generation is that merchandisers capitalize not only on teams but on specific players. For instance, if the top college football quarterback wears the number 14 then merchandisers will intentionally produce more merch with this number.
Thus, particular players are generating huge profits and often receive nothing monetary in return.

And it's big money - NCAA merchandise deals are estimated to be worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

There are even stories about college athletes freelancing on the side by simply offering to go and do talks or meet-ups with fans who are willing to pay the athletes for their time. But, they're still often unable to profit from the jerseys that have their own names on them!

9. College athletes should have a safety net in case they cannot go pro
Not every college athlete goes on to play in the NBA or the NFL and makes millions of dollars a year.
Those that graduate and do not make it into the professional realm of their sport are left with little to restart their lives on, particularly if their grades have slipped because of their commitment to their sport.

Most college athletes spend their entire childhood and adolescence working on their sport and then graduate college with few other skills. If college athletes were paid, then at least they would have a nest egg to live on while they figure out their next steps.

10. College coaches are paid handsomely
If you consider the situation closely, it seems strange that college sports teams are populated by students who are unpaid but are coached by professionals who are paid extremely well.
Without the athletes, there would be no team for the coach to coach so it seems unfair and frankly, confusing why one key stakeholder would be paid while the others wouldn't.

For the sake of fairness, you would expect the revenues to be more evenly spread around all the people in the team.

11. The sport causes damage to their bodies
Sports like football cause serious damage to athletes' bodies. Many can only play into their early 30s.
As a result, every year of their career is highly valuable and extremely important. While most white-collar jobs enable people to continue working in the profession into your mid-60s, these athletes are going to need to make a lot of their lifetime income in the span of about 10-20 years.

This makes the fact that they're underpaid for several years of their careers even more unfair.

12. They are free media exposure for the schools
College athletics generates a lot of media exposure for schools. In fact, if it weren't for college basketball and football, a lot of schools would never make it onto the television.
And yet, thanks to college athletics, schools have excellent media exposure that often presents them at their best: stadiums of fans wearing the college's colors, cheering on their school.

This media exposure makes the colleges household names and inspires many young people to want to go to those colleges, even from a very young age.

13. It's often an issue of racial justice
A significant number of college footballers and basketballers are young Black Americans. By contrast, the vast majority of the coaches are white.
The visuals of a team of young black athletes being underpaid and unpaid for their labor isn't great for the colleges' attempts at achieving racial justice. This is even more stark when we see how much the white coaches are paid. The coaches, after all, aren't putting their bodies on the line.

14. They are expected to do extracurricular tasks
College athletes do more than training and playing. They often have to turn up for media appearances and college events throughout the year.
This makes the fact that they're unpaid even more egregious. The hours they put into extracurricular and co-curricular activities should be paid - just like a job. For example, if an employee is expected to turn up to an event, they would rightly expect payment for their time.

15. They generate school spirit
Sports is perhaps the number one way schools generate spirit and a sense of community. The college and its supporters come together to cheer on their team.
This school spirit may be considered an intangible benefit to the school, but it has many flow-on benefits. It enhances the college's image, motivates students, and increases the students' satisfaction with their college experience.

A college with a buzz and a positive school spirit can lead to positive word-of-mouth reviews and attract future students.

16. They generate corporate sponsorships
Without college athletes, corporate sponsorships for colleges will never happen. Here is just another way in which they generate money for colleges without compensation.
Corporations sponsor teams that are successful and that have a great image. The sponsorship allows the corporation to generate positive attitudes toward their brand by association with the athletes.

If only a bit of the corporate sponsorship went toward paying the athletes, who often appear in the ads or next to the brand names on t-shirts and posters, then the athletes could have a much better standard of living.

Are there Arguments Against Paying College Athletes?

Some key arguments against paying college athletes are:

They get scholarships: Most college athletes get a full ride scholarship, which is highly valuable and a form of payment for their labor. Nevertheless, they generally don't get any monetary benefits that they can put in the bank for their futures.

They don't have to do it if they don't want: If the athletes didn't see a net benefit out of competing in college athletics, they wouldn't do it. No one is forcing them into it! (Of course, the fact that it's just about the only path to a career as an elite athlete makes it appear to be some degree of coercion).

They get great training: The athletes get access to excellent coaches that they wouldn't have access to otherwise. These coaches are world-class and expensive for the schools to hire. This is a form of non-monetary payment.

It's their chance to get seen: The athletes also get a benefit in the form of visibility to scouts. They get their name out there, get watched performing their sport, and get an opportunity to eventually get a contract that will be extremely lucrative. This is another great non-monetary benefit that the college is providing for the athletes.

They will be paid handsomely afterward: If the athletes get a contract, it would likely be a million-dollar-plus contract that will make up for the lack of pay during their early years at college.

Conclusion

College athletes work extremely hard and arguably, are not far behind their professional counterparts. Furthermore, they bring in a great deal of money and goodwill to the colleges they serve. At the end of the day, they're providing labor to the colleges. So, it makes little sense that they are unpaid.

Related debate topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
16 Reasons College Athletes should be Paid (And 5 Against) (2023)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
College athletes should be paid because they bring a substantial amount of money into their colleges, boost admission rates, put in full-time hours, and do

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
High school athletes in Iowa can now be paid for their name, image, and likeness.

The Iowa High School Athletics Association and Iowa Girls High School Athletic Union announced on Aug. 17 guidelines for high school athletes to receive compensation for their NIL.

Although athletes can now accept pay for their NIL, the IHSAA and Iowa Girls High School Athletic Union both released a strict set of rules athletes must follow:

"The compensation is not contingent on specific athletic performance or achievement."

"The compensation (or prospective compensation) is not provided as an inducement to attend a particular school ("undue influence") or to remain enrolled at a particular school."

"The compensation is not provided by the school or an agent of the school (e.g., booster club, foundation, etc.)."

The guidelines also prohibits athletes from using IHSAA/Iowa Girls High School Athletic Union or member school logos, apparel or equipment in NIL activity.

While high school student athletes cannot be compensated for their performance or enrollment in a particular program, athletes can earn compensation for selling personal merchandise, appearing in advertisements, and hosting lessons or camps.

These new guidelines are beneficial for athletes who can now be paid for their NIL that they previously could not be compensated for. However, NIL compensation for high-school aged students begs the question: should teenage athletes be a source of profit?

In the media, we have heard countless stories from former child actors and actresses who were abused and taken advantage of by the industry.

In the past month, actress Jennette McCurdy has made headlines with the release of her book, "I'm glad my mom died." In this memoir, McCurdy writes about the abuse she encountered as a child on the popular TV show "iCarly."

This abuse came from inside the home and from prominent figures in the industry. As a result of this abuse, McCurdy struggled with obsessive-compulsive disorder, eating disorders and anxiety triggered due to the pressure of adults.

But McCurdy's experience is nothing unusual. Many former childhood stars have come forward about the abuse they experienced in the industry by individuals profiting off their childhood.

With all to respect to Iowa high school athletes, I don't anticipate many athletes achieving comparable success to child actors in Hollywood. Hopefully these new guidelines only positively impact athletes whose NIL has gone previously uncompensated.

But this is something we should keep in mind as NIL takes shape in Iowa. Should we really be using the names and images of high school students?

There remains the possibility with these new guidelines that athletes NIL could be abused by those who seek to profit from their popularity. This could result in teenage athletes experiencing burnout, stress, and other mental health issues.

The reality is athletes NIL could be taken advantage, so we should be cautious of how high schoolers NIL are being used. To what extent should a high school athlete become a profitable figure?

With the IHSSA and Iowa Girls High School Athletic Union new guidelines, we should all be mindful of how these teenagers NIL is being used. There are several benefits athletes and their families can gain from these guidelines. But the greed of some may lead to negative implications for said athletes.
Columns reflect the opinions of the authors and are not necessarily those of the Editorial Board, The Daily Iowan, or other organizations in which the author may be involved.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Opinion | The problem with paying high school athletes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
High school athletes in Iowa can now be paid for their name, image, and likeness. The Iowa High School Athletics Association and Iowa Girls High School Athletic Union announced on Aug. 17 guidelines for high school athletes to receive compensation for their NIL. Although athletes can now accept pay for their NIL, the IHSAA and...