As the landscape of college sports’ name, image, and likeness (NIL) continues to evolve, so does the rules and regulation surrounding the NCAA’s landmark policy change.
According to a recent report from On3, a piece of legislation called House Bill 2804, is making its way through the Texas House of Representatives and could have a lasting impact on NIL efforts made by collectives. The bill is similar in nature to that of the Texas Bill 1784, though legal observers noticed a subtle yet noteworthy change made last week.
The revised bill reads as follows:
“An athletic association, an athletic conference, or any other group or organization with authority over an intercollegiate athletic program at an institution to which this section applies may not enforce a contract term, a rule, a regulation, a standard, or any other requirement that prohibits the institution from participating in intercollegiate athletics or otherwise penalizes the institution or the institution ’s intercollegiate athletic program for performing, participating in, or allowing an activity required or authorized by this section.”
The legislation reads similarly to that of Oklahoma’s Senate Bill 840, which overwhelmingly passed by a vote of 84-5. The bill drew high-profile conversation because it included a section that appeared to provide protection for schools such as Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Tulsa, and others from being punished by the NCAA for any NIL-related violations, including any committed by collectives that have been set up to support student-athletes through deal facilitation.
This recent legislation making its way through the House of Representatives would, in essence, provide protection to a number of Texas schools from NIL-related violations made, including those by collectives. The Lone Star state has a handful of high-profile NIL collectives, headlined by the Texas One Fund at Texas and of course, Texas A&M‘s 12th Man+ Fund.
Texas A&M’s NIL initiative, which allows donors to add to a fund that goes directly to athletes, was the first of its kind when announced back in February and immediately drew the attention of the NCAA. The governing body has notably been investigating “pay-for-play” deals choreographed by collectives ahead of when student-athletes sign binding national letters of intent or before they enter the Transfer Portal.
Per NCAA rules, boosters can’t pay players directly or be part of the recruiting process, and the organization says it is actively investigating multiple bad actors in the NIL space.
It will be key to follow any developments as this bill makes its way through the House, but the important reaction to observe will be that of the NCAA. Should it pass, will NCAA leaders attempt to combat this or will they look to spin the conversation into warranting NIL regulation at the federal level?
As the NIL landscape continues to evolve so will the conversation around whether, and how it should be regulated.
Contact/Follow us @AggiesWire on Twitter, and like our page on Facebook to follow ongoing coverage of Texas A&M news, notes, and opinions. Follow Pete on Twitter: @PeteThreee
[lawrence-auto-related count=3 category=800]
[mm-video type=playlist id=01fvdd4pnb49trk727 player_id=01f5k5y2jb3twsvdg4 image=]
