The NCAA issued its first infraction related to name, image, and likeness and improper inducement and improper facilitation. This infraction centered around University of Miami booster John Ruiz, the head women’s basketball coach, and NIL superstars Hanna and Haley Cavinder, among others.
As per the negotiated resolution, “women’s basketball head coach violated NCAA rules when she facilitated impermissible contact between two prospects and a booster, according to an agreement released by the Division I Committee on Infractions. In facilitating the contact, the head coach also violated rules on publicity before signing and, because of her direct involvement, she violated head coach responsibility rules.”
While many speculated whether the NCAA should have been focusing on this area of their regulations, others surmised this might be a hint of things to come. While the negotiated settlement did not hand down a punishment to the athletes or the booster, many believed the move to punish the women’s basketball program made the NCAA look bad.
Out of curiosity, who does everyone think receives the most negative blowback from the NCAAโs NIL punishment of Miami Womenโs Basketball?
Sure, some werenโt technically punished but being dragged through headlines could be seen by some as worse than otherwise minimal discipline.
— Dan Lust, Esq. ๐ (@SportsLawLust) February 24, 2023
The NCAA looks to be cracking down on schools that are toeing the line between permissible and impermissible activities, but it is unclear who or where the NCAA might target next.
When a state doesn’t have a NIL law, they follow the NCAA interim policy which in some cases is broader than state laws. This has led to some states amending or totally repealing, as is the case in Alabama, their NIL laws. Will changing the laws in your state make you more valuable to prospective college athletes? Only time will tell, but it seems that creating more athlete-friendly laws would be more appealing to athletes.
In Texas, high school athletes are not allowed to monetize their NIL which puts the state at a disadvantage and has caused some high school athletes to graduate early and leave the state so they can pursue deals earlier, see Quinn Ewers. However, recently House Bill 1802 was introduced which would amend the Education Code and allow those athletes competing in University Interscholastic League (UIL) the ability to monetize their NIL if they meet certain requirements. Although, the requirements rule out a large majority of high school athletes.
๐งต๐ฃ๏ธProposed Amendment to Texas NIL law
The proposal is to add a section to existing code specifically addressing HS UIL athletes. It says athletes 18 yo & older are allowed to earn compensation, which means certain HS athletes could earn compensationhttps://t.co/U6Bdax0fud pic.twitter.com/34LNkC69nt
— ๐จ๐๐๐ ๐บ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ฌ๐๐. (@YourPotential4) February 1, 2023
The UIL โexists to provide educational extracurricular academic, athletic, and music contests.โ It is strange that this sort of change to ostensibly allow high school athletes to monetize their NIL is a change to the Education Code and not a change to the Texas NIL laws. This act โtakes effect immediately if it receives a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, as provided by Section 39, Article III, Texas Constitution. If this Act does not receive the vote necessary for immediate effect, this Act takes effect September 1, 2023.โ
The proposal does not mention SB 1385 which governs NCAA NIL monetization in Texas, but is rather amending the Education Code Subchapter D, Chapter 33 Title 2 which relates to public education in TX, but not higher education.
— ๐จ๐๐๐ ๐บ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ฌ๐๐. (@YourPotential4) February 1, 2023
In addition to this proposed change that could affect high school athletes, another House Bill was introduced into the Texas legislature to amend the NIL laws relating to college athletes. House Bill 2804 would make many notable changes in the law including allowing an โemployee of the institution, may identify or otherwise assist with opportunities for a currently-enrolled student-athlete to earn compensation from a third party for the use of the student athlete โs name, image, or likenessโ, with some specific restrictions. Previously, employees of institutions could not assist with NIL deals for college athletes. If this bill receives the requisite votes then it will go into effect July 1, 2023, however, if it does not, then it will go into effect September 1, 2023.
We will see states begin to amend their laws related to NIL monetization and some even repeal those laws, but with everything in the space changing so fast, what is the best move? New Jersey, for instance, has NIL legislation known as the New Jersey Fair Play Act, but it does not go into effect until 2025. High school athletes in New Jersey can also monetize their NIL as of January 2022.
This sort of approach seems to be the most logical so a state can assess the landscape without limiting the athletes’ and schools’ ability to navigate the new ecosystem freely.