The state dates for NIL no longer matter. The effective date for all NCAA institutions and all states was June 30th 2021. This uniform policy (all NCAA divisions ) will remain in placed an can only be superseded by federal legislation.
instagram.com
It’s a little complicated. The State of CT passed legislation creating an effective date of September 1, subject to individual CT college rules. The UConn Board of Trustees subsequently issued rules for UConn athletes that NIL deals could commence on July 12, today.
So if a school makes upwards of $100 million off of media rights, merchandise sales and alumni donations, all a star college athlete is entitled to is tuition, room and board in your opinion?
What's the cut for a student on scholarship that aids the university in securing patents for something they help research and develop?
Apples to oranges. Almost all research is privately funded by outside companies or government entities whose grant agreements specifically state that they maintain all developmental rights, patents, etc. College sports is a business run by, and solely for the benefit of, the respective colleges.
So what was the relationship to state legislation? And why haven't we heard about signings? And why did Azzi say in a recent interview that she was waiting for the starting pistol to crank up her clothing business?
The state legislation was never needed because it has always been legal to profit from your NIL. It was used as a stick to get the NCAA to act because otherwise they'd sit around and debate it for the next ten years. Personally I don't believe the government should have gotten involved in that sort of thing because if people don't like the NCAA's rules they are not required to be a member of the club, and what's to stop the Ohio or Alabama legislatures from passing a law that allows schools in their states to pay football players directly or loosen other eligibility requirements? Do NCAA rules even matter anymore if states can just override them?
There is no relationship to the state legislation because the state legislation has nothing to do with NCAA eligibility. Think about it- Azzi resides in Virginia and plays basketball in CT and operates a national online clothing business. Which state would allow her to start the pistol? The answer is no state. The NCAA is the one that will decide if/when Azzi can resume her online clothing business and still maintain her eligibility. The intention of the state legislation was to get the NCAA to act and now that the NCAA has acted the numerous state legislations have become obsolete. Simple example: Azzi would lose her eligibility if she were to endorse alcohol, tobacco, gambling or adult-type products per the NCAA NIL guidelines. Virtually none of the pending or implemented state legislations had all of these restrictions. Then there are students like Nika and Dorka-which state would govern their NIL rights.
That’s not exactly correct. The NCAA Board of Governors ruling on June 28 specifically states, “College athletes can engage in NIL activities that are consistent with the law of the state where the school is located.” So Azzi, Nika, Dorka and all the other UConn Huskies are subject to the bill recently passed by the CT state legislature and signed into law by Governor Lamont.
The foreign players apparently can't participate because they would lose their visa. One of the German football players at Syracuse tweeted they couldn't participate. That needs federal action.
This is merely legalese CYA language from the NCAA as there is no state in America that bans people from earning income from their NIL. Plenty of college kids already do, and have for years no state legislation required. Saying "consistent with the law" basically means Paige can't make money from criminal activities like stealing cars or the rims or the catalytic converters from them. The only thing that was really needed was the NCAA dropping its objection to student-athletes making money on the side, but we'd all readily admit the NCAA wouldn't have moved as quickly without legislatures forcing their hand.
No, that’s not it at all.
Yes, that is correct. It is the difference between a student visa and a work visa.
