8 Deals or Steals? Assets and Liabilities behind Incorporation of NIL within High Visibility University Sports

Guadalupe “Alex” Gonzalez and Korshina Tover

High-visibility university sports like football and basketball have from their inception, been critically dependent on their respective institution’s leveraging of the collegiate ideal for their overall success, in the process providing numerous benefits to the aforementioned academic organizations which house them. The collegiate ideal as heavily covered throughout lecture, refers to a key set of higher learning values where academic and campus life come to take equal positions of importance within universities while becoming increasingly interconnected with one another through a shared sense of place, helping to build collective identities and cultures amongst students. Ultimately, through utilizing the collegiate ideal, successful high-visibility sports programs enable schools to build close-knit campus communities, enhance their status in relation to their peers, and possibly acquire more future alumni and resources. And since student and institutional success are interdependent, these changes positively impact campuses often improving the mental health and academic performance of those who inhabit them, further benefiting both parties. However, this interconnected relationship between institutions and the aforementioned sports, with the collegiate ideal serving as a bridge, has begun to change rapidly in the last five years with the development and implementation of athlete monetization through name, image, and likeness (NIL) deals. In particular, the National College Athletics Organization’s (NCAA) acceptance of NIL has put heavy pressure on schools to outcompete one another in improving athlete success for the sake of both the former and their institutional benefit, bringing within itself a plethora of positive changes to said universities with a few challenges remaining. However, before proceeding with a deeper discussion of how NIL implementation is changing institutions, it’s important to first give a historical overview of the numerous events which led to said program’s creation.

From its 1906 inception, the NCAA refused to allow student-athletes pay beyond tuition and other academic-related expenses due to the organization’s bylaw 2.9 “Principle of Amateurism.” Said controversial rule demanded that college athletes’ sport participation be primarily motivated by “education and…the physical” for the sake of protecting them from “exploitation by professional and commercial enterprises” (NCAA Constitution Committee, 2021). The principle remained legally unchallenged until 2009 when a University of California Los Angeles player, Ed O’Bannon, successfully managed to argue in front of a district court that the NCAA’s actions violated the 1890 Sherman Antitrust Act; legislation enacted to avoid monopolies since their existence historically has driven the socioeconomic abuse of laborers and consumers alike (Icon Source, 2022). Bannon’s efforts got the ball rolling on how, as an industry generating billions of dollars per year, it was hypocritical for the NCAA to exclusively profit from athletes’ work while affirming such actions were done for the sake of protecting the former from being taken advantage of. Eventually, this all culminated in two separate yet connected events which ensured NIL deals were here to stay. First, California passed the “Fair Pay to Play Act” in 2019, enabling student-athletes within its borders to profit off their name and likeness (many other states followed suit afterward like New Jersey and Michigan) (Icon Source, 2022). The second event which served as the culmination of the modern NIL battle was the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in “NCAA v. Alston” where the country’s highest judicial body affirmed the aforementioned district court decision, agreeing that the NCAA’s refusal of payment for athletes stood in violation of antitrust laws (Murphy, 2021). Recognizing the changing landscape of college athletics, after the decision many universities began competing to offer related benefits to students, actions which ultimately changed the institutions for the better.

As previously covered, one of the largest ideas behind the collegiate ideal and universities’ leveraging of it through many endeavors (high visibility college sports being just one of them) is that ultimately institutional and student success are interdependent. This exact ideology has driven many of the positive changes which have arisen within schools as a result of NIL implementation, with higher learning bodies realizing that by improving athlete’s success, they too will profit and so will their wider campus community. The first of these subsequent institutional improvements, and a large focus of our interviews with the University of Washington’s (1) Director of Digital and NIL Strategy and (2) Assistant Director of NIL Education, has been the creation of academic business courses focusing on self-monetization and converting student-athletes into professionals. As discussed by Brett Sible (aforementioned assistant director), institutions like UW have come to recognize that “NIL is an opportunity to develop personal skills in building a brand, negotiating contracts, etc.” with the former developing courses like “Marketing 315: The Business of Personal Branding in Athletics” to empower its pupils. These collegiate ideal, pro-student athlete success-driven institutional changes (with universities being increasingly self-aware that the more NIL offerings they have towards the former the better their recruiting capabilities and subsequent competitiveness) have continued with schools like UW quickly developing NIL athletics departments and positions aimed at better-connecting students to resources and their community. This, as discussed in our interview with Sam Schwartz (aforementioned director), has benefitted student-athletes not only by allowing them to profit off their skills but also by connecting them to their university communities through strategic partnerships with local NIL collectives like Montlake Futures. Yet, while NIL implementation has ushered in a new era of institutional improvement for many colleges across the country, certain challenges remain that must be addressed.

While NIL deals have already showcased their positive effects in higher learning institutions through the increased benefits being offered to the former’s student-athletes, many obstacles persist around their implementation, affecting both universities, the collegiate ideal, and students alike. One of the largest concerns, as voiced by a UW football player we interviewed, is the possibility that NIL opportunities have created a higher incentive for student-athletes to attend institutions for financial benefits rather than the school’s educational opportunities, environment, and culture; elements all critical for the construction of the collegiate ideal as previously covered. Another challenge remaining which was also shared by the aforementioned individual, and which served as one of the NCAA’s biggest points against NIL incorporation, is the fear that the development of monetization would unfairly affect recruiting between certain types of schools (Murphy, 2021). With more rural universities possessing fewer funding options and struggling to obtain the resources necessary to enlist higher-skilled athletes in comparison to their large research public and private peers (which as we previously covered are rapidly adapting to the changing landscape only serving to increase disparities by the day). Perhaps one of the largest and unforeseen issues with NIL implementation has been the struggles institutions have encountered in getting their international students paid. As discussed with Schwartz, international student-athletes cannot currently participate in NIL activities within the U.S. due to federal employment laws. This continues to be a massive problem for diverse international schools like UW, who respectively has 82 international student-athletes playing within it (all of which can’t earn any money from NIL).

After decades of legal battles and social initiatives to grant student-athletes their fair pay, in the past couple of years the NCAA has finally permitted the former to profit from NIL deals. Recognizing that through the collegiate ideal, student and institutional success are interdependent, this development has led to higher learning bodies quickly adapting and implementing positive changes to benefit their high visibility sports-playing pupils. Such progressions have included the offering of business courses meant to empower students and turn them into professionals along with the creation of NIL departments aimed at aiding athletes in obtaining financial opportunities and better connecting the former to their communities. However, NIL implementation has also posed several challenges for institutions, student-athletes, and even the collegiate ideal. With some of the greatest problems circulating NIL pertaining to the possible incentivization for athletes picking schools due to money rather than the former’s cultural and academic opportunities, fear of recruitment disparities increasing between well-funded universities and their less endowed peers, and legal issues around properly paying international students. Ultimately, due to the infancy of NIL most of these concerns and challenges may be addressed over time, and if so, it’s clear that as a whole the former’s implementation has been a massive driver of institutional improvements and subsequent offerings for students across the U.S.

References (APA):

NCAA Constitution Committee. (2021). 2022-23 NCAA division I Manual. Retrieved from https://web3.ncaa.org/lsdbi/reports/getReport/90008

Murphy, D. (2021). Retrieved from https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/31679946/supreme-court-sides-former-players-dispute-ncaa-compensation

Icon Source. (2022). Retrieved from https://iconsource.com/everything-about-nil/#:~:text=NIL%20can%20trace%20its%20origins,and%20image%20in%20video%20games

Viriyincy, O. (2013). Renovated Husky Stadium . Retrieved from https://www.flickr.com/photos/viriyincy/albums/