Writers: Ryan Raimondo, Bailey Hawkesby-Mullins, Katie Stein

Ever since the NCAA had given the privilege of letting college athletes make money based on their Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL), athletes have had the blessing to have some money in their pocket. College athletes have been able to make thousands, even millions of dollars through NIL. But it also has driven athletes to now only look at universities for the money and popularity, distracting them from the importance of loyalty. Athletes also are driving more brand deals in, due to the sport they play, which questions the fairness of NIL. This raises the big question “Is NIL beneficial or detrimental to college athletics?”

In June 2021, The NCAA finally allowed student athletes to benefit financially from NIL, without fear of losing their eligibility and it remains consistent with state laws. NIL has now flooded the internet, with athletes signing wild brand deals from companies like Nike, Adidas, Under Armour and many others. NIL has been able to compensate athletes for all of the hard work they put into balancing both school work and sports, because of all of the sacrifices athletes make. Sacrifices include learning and academic resources, social life, physical and mental toll and others like career limitation and missed opportunities. 

An occurring conflict has taken over the NIL scene by constantly questioning whether the NIL is fair across all sports. Often we see athletes, specifically male athletes, being a part of the football and basketball program. Those athletes become more recognizable leaving other sports and athletes without the opportunity to become involved in NIL. However, by using athletes as a part of such programs. Those athletes often attract more lucrative deals among companies as opposed to lesser seen sports such as soccer, track and field, field hockey, and many more. 

Women’s soccer player, Mary Kate Sullivan, explains her side on NIL. Mary Kate, involved in NIL, has been able to build connections and use her deals to expand her network. She explains that NIL has been incredibly beneficial to not only herself, but to other athletes. She says “NIL has opened doors for many opportunities”, and goes into detail by emphasizing all of the time and effort athletes put into their sports. Thus leaving little to no time to herself which can put a strain on her physical and mental well being. Mary Kate then goes into saying, “it is definitely beneficial especially for the work athletes put into their sports and they can benefit off of their name”. Mary Kate says that she is being compensated for her strengths by balancing both school and sports, and NIL helps athletes as they are dedicating most, if not, all of athlete’s time to their sports. 

 

Indiana University track sprinter, Dezmone Starks, also had a lot to say about NIL. Dezmone has received many NIL deals from companies like Liquid IV, Amazon Music and Postgame. Starks says, “For me as a student athlete, I run short on money, so when I promote a business, I’m able to get money in my pocket.” Athletes use NIL to provide them wealth as most college kids need a way to make money. He believes no matter the amount to get offered from a brand, it still promotes the athlete and gives them some money that they can use in the future. As a track athlete, Starks doesn’t get the benefits of big brand deals like football and basketball players do, but he understands that football and basketball somewhat “run” universities in a way since they make the most ticket sales, revenue, and popularity on a college campus. Even though he could see NIL turning into a problem in the future, he says “I see more on the beneficial side because money is money and that’s what college athletes want.” Looks like Starks is running on the track and running up his brand deals to collect revenue. 

Lastly, Galen Clavio, the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Education, professor, and Director of the National Sports Journalism Center at Indiana University, spoke at a press conference held by Professor Steve Layton during a class lecture. Clavio was able to share his knowledge and perspective on NIL while addressing the history, current policies, and where it is headed in the future. Clavio began by mentioning the changes that NIL has brought to college athletes and said “This is not a case of new rights being granted to college athletes, it is instead, the removal of restrictions that were being imposed by college athletic departments upon College athletes”. This emphasizes the remake of NIL and how recent alterations have opened up new opportunities that can be beneficial for college athletes. However, Clavio then further explained that NIL can also be detrimental to college athletes. Furthermore, he went in depth on how NIL is not always fair to everyone and said ”Whether we want to acknowledge it, the market value of a men’s golf team member is generally going to be significantly less at the college level than it would be for a comparable basketball player or football player. This is simply because of the sheer amount of money through television contracts, ticket sales, and other items that come through basketball and football that don’t come through golf”. This scenario Clavio provided is a prime example of some of the drawbacks to NIL. Not all athletes have the same opportunities to receive NIL deals or payments due to the different circumstances that come with each sport or the level of popularity between each individual athlete. Overall, NIL can be both a positive and negative experience for college athletes and many factors contribute to what an athlete can get out of it.

College Athletes, popular or not, still seek NIL deals that not only make them money, but also gives them the recognition that they deserve and the NCAA is still making changes to make sure that NIL is beneficial and fair to all college athletes. 

https://youtu.be/Xt-mYP4zpPA

Even though most college athletes think that NIL is beneficial, the rest of the world may not feel the same way.

###

 

By Dylan Rome, Jeremy Weese and Olivia Zwack

BLOOMINGTON, Ind. (Nov. 5 2024)

In June of 2021, the collegiate sports world went through a significant shift in its long-standing argument: should student-athletes gain revenue from their name, image, and likeness (NIL)?  Three and a half years later we have seen the unmistakable impact NIL is making on the culture of sports (especially college football). Players run the risk of being selfish teammates by choosing popularity from the public over team victories.

NIL deals are altering the traditional trajectory from high school through college to the NFL, blurring the strict lines the NCAA once maintained between collegiate and professional athletes

Although athletes have been generating millions of dollars in revenue for decades, the Supreme Court did not overturn this ruling until three short years ago. The highly debated argument was finally settled, and athletes were able to receive compensation. It must be made clear this is not “pay to play”. The NCAA is restricted from paying athletes directly. Athletes can earn money through external tunnels like social media and commercials. For some players, NIL opportunities can make staying in college more appealing than entering the pros if their earning abilities skyrocket at a collegiate level.

Rookies enter teams with a substantial amount of financial value, an unknown dynamic and power shift. The NFL’s structure to a rookie contract in the first round centers upon a four-year term with a fifth-year extension option and salaries are determined by draft order. The big rewards came after a fourth or fifth year in the league emphasizing experienced and committed players.  NIL deals have destroyed the value system where athletes can now earn money as early as high school.

The days are over when draft day symbolizes the first financial reward for an athlete’s hard work, dedication, and talent. For high-scouted players, it marks a continuation of earnings and something way less significant. 

In an interview with Aaron Lord, a track and field athlete here at Indiana University, he explained his experiences with NIL deals and observations from being in the NCAA. “Instead of them [college athletes] staying for 1 or 2 years in college and then signing a pro contract, players are staying longer in the NCAA,” Lord said. Previously, athletes weren’t permitted to earn money until reaching  a professional level whereas now they have an opportunity to financially benefit more in college.

Lord said, “People who normally wouldn’t come into the NCAA are coming in now even internationally to try and make some money.” He described how track and field has been gaining traction across the globe. However, international athletes struggle to profit from NIL due to U.S. visa restrictions.  While NIL opened doors for U.S, athletes, international students are restricted from these opportunities. The NCAA still offers exposure and the highest quality training for international athletes. 

Dr. Clavio, an expert in NIL and head of sports media at Indiana University, stressed the challenges of balancing social media and  being a college athlete by saying, “It’s pressure if you’re a college athlete with a social media following to maintain your audience and build upon your audience… and then there’s everyone else trying to catch up.” This quote highlights the chase for recognition on social media which can compete with getting better at your sport.

Along with striving for maximum financial compensation as a college athlete, Clavio said, “The quarterback elected to transfer because if he was indeed promised that money and it was not delivered, why should he stay?” Financial compensation is not promised at a professional level, forcing an athlete to bet on their abilities. In college, players can maximize their economic window with NIL.   Uncompensated talents such as the example of a quarterback transferring show imperfections in NIL and room to improve.

Interviewing Patrick Shaller, a highly scouted freshman tight end on Northwestern football team he stated, “The big names look at their floor in the league [NFL] and their celling at college and decide the best financial decision”. The quote exemplifies a newly provocative financial question: should athletes stay in college longer? Shaller said, “I can already see college football becoming an unfair atmosphere where players stay longer than they need”. Before NIL, players leave college as early as possible to maximize financial earning now the phenomenon of staying keeps highly-skilled players in the NCAA.

The future presents an uncertain line between college and professional sports. The fear of unambitious colligate sports continues to rise.

Passersby in Bloomington share their thoughts on the latest NIL rulings. Many were eager to share their take on the latest news.

Cover Image: Aaron Lord, a track athlete at Indiana University, rounds a turn at one of his track practices. Lord has personally been affected by the latest NIL rulings.

Cover Image Credit: Olivia Zwack

By Ellie Moran, Dezmone Starks, and Lily Sirignano

BLOOMINGTON, IN (Nov. 5, 2024)

With the recent 2021 removal of NIL restrictions on college and high school athletes, sports enthusiasts and analysts have begun to see a major shift in the world of athletics. For the first time, students have been able to profit off of their name the same way any other adult can, causing major discourse in the sports industry and recruiting process.

Up until 2021, student athletes signed papers that took away their ability to benefit off of their personal brand and “the right to profit off [their] name, what [they] look like, and how [their] likeness is utilized within any form of media or advertising,” said Dr. Galen Clavio, associate professor at Indiana University.

With the implementation of the NIL, also known as name, image and likeness, these athletes face a number of new opportunities that they can finally benefit off of. Colleges and universities have reaped the benefits of their athletes’ names and skills, and now the athletes can see the profits that they deserve after putting in hours of hard work. With this change, athletes are able to support themselves and their future, IU track athlete Kristina Vincic said. As both athletes and institutions navigate this new era and these new opportunities,  some see it as a distraction that could negatively effect the recruiting process.

Prior to 2021, student athletes at the high school and college level were prohibited from accepting sponsorships, endorsing products, and any other deals that would leverage an athletes personal brand and make them money. This restriction was lifted by the NCAA, an organization that consisted of over 1,100 schools at the first, second and third division. The NCAA was unsure how to manage the return of these rights to athletes, so they left it up to each state to decide. For many years, the NCAA argued that athletes had no personal brand value, and the brand value that they did have came from the universities they represented. Student athletes have proved this to be false. With the relatively new landscape that student athletes have faced, many of them have seized the opportunities presented to them, leveraging their personal brand earning hundreds of dollars. 

When it comes to profit, the implementation of NIL has given college athletes a significant advantage. College athletes typically do not make money within their respective sport, however, NIL now allows for brands and companies to sign deals with students. Often these deals come in the form of advertisements promoted by the athlete on social media. 

“It can even be about building a connection with local businesses,” said sophomore Indiana University track athlete Kristina Vincic. Vincic is a member of the IU women’s track team, specializing in the 4×100 meter relay.

Many of Vincic’s teammates have a great deal of experience with NIL deals, often promoting brands on their personal social media pages. While this benefits the athletes financially, it also benefits their overall media appeal. “A lot of local companies, as well as bigger ones, have looked at us as a good representative of IU athletics,” Vincic said. Strong media appeal can provide athletes with more sponsorships, opportunities, and monetary gain, she said. 

These NIL opportunities create valuable financial prospects and promote real world experiences. By engaging in these deals, athletes can focus on their personal brand while allowing them to continue with training, competing and committing to their sport. “I think when you start talking about brands, I think that is very much an individual, or independent thing, less to do with an institutional or coaching staff,” Ed Beathea, Associate Head Coach of Indiana University Track, Field and Cross Country said.

Every NIL agreement an athlete pursues is handled independently and outside of their sports schedules, meaning athletes are responsible for their own brands. They can improve their brands on their own time while maintaining their sports schedules. “I have not had a single athlete ask for any kind of support in regards to managing their personal lives, academics, athletics and NIL,”  Beathea said. It is possible for athletes to create a strong brand outside of athletics without it being a distraction.

With this new era of NIL opportunities, many people expected that athletes’ priorities would shift now that they could make money off of their brand. However, in most cases, those expectations have been proved wrong. Universities have reaped the benefits of athletes’ names and performance for too long, and now athletes finally have the ability to profit off of their personal brand. Name, image and likeness has presented athletes with a number of opportunities, and the removal of restrictions is something to celebrate. 

Indiana University students and others around campus share their opinions on the effects of NIL legislature changes. The recent changes have proven to be controversial, with many different perspectives seen not only around this campus, but all over the country. 

###