^{Hello friends! Welcome to the Sports Court NIL Newsletter where three times per week, I will discuss insights and news related to name, image, and likeness in three minutes or less.}

Today’s Case

NCAA returns to Congress to discuss NIL

This past Wednesday, the House Subcommittee on Innovation, Data, and Commerce held a hearing called “Taking the Buzzer Beater to the Bank: Protecting College Athletes’ NIL Dealmaking Rights.” (Link to witnesses & hearing.)

While there have been several congressional and state-level hearings on NIL and college athletics (and this was my first time watching one), this was the first congressional hearing in the post-Mark Emmert era. Administrators and coaches have been pleading for a national standard. Legislators from both parties have introduced legislation, yet nothing has advanced.

The Verdict:

The entire hearing was a mess.

• While some members of Congress took it seriously and asked insightful questions, it was a lot of grandstanding/being a homer for their favorite college teams and/or alums.

• The focus of the hearing was supposed to be on NIL, with a focus on collectives. Yet, not one person from a collective was invited to speak.

  • The politicians repeatedly asked questions about NIL payments and contracts used as recruiting inducements, agent fees, the relationship between collectives and athletic departments, etc.

    • These politicians seemed to be lumping together NIL discussions as a whole, when there is distinction between brand deals for athletes vs. collective agreements for athletes. Treating both as the same will lead to more confusion.

• The six witnesses that were called gave good responses to questions; however, they were not optimal people for the discussion. I would have liked to see:

  • A person who runs a collective, preferably one that supports a large P5 program

  • A lawyer specializing in NIL activities

  • An agent or athlete representation who executes NIL brand deals at a large scale

  • A third party representative, such as an Economics or Finance professor who understands the market of college athletics

  • An big name athlete at a major P5 program to discuss the large scale deals they received/are pitched.

• The NCAA will continue to push the narrative of “lack of transparency,” “differing state laws,” etc. in order to have a federal law mandate. In turn, this federal law will put up guardrails on student-athletes and make it harder for these athletes to be compensated.

Question of the Day

Who should be the final authority on creating NIL laws?

• Federal Government

• State Governments

• NCAA

• Other

Vote on the Sports Court Instagram Story and comment below.

Thank You for reading today’s newsletter

Reply back to this email with a newsletter idea, and I'll add it to my list!

Also, please share this newsletter with anyone you know who may be interested in NIL news.

Court is adjourned. Go be great!!