Link

The NCAA has been searching for a framework to regulate name, image and likeness, or NIL, since the policy was established in June 2021. Four summers later, a possible foundation is near, but no change will be without implications, especially for top athletic programs like the University of Florida. 

These changes have loomed for almost a year. President Donald Trump publicly considered an executive order May 2 to examine the state of NIL payments. Schools and athletes must heavily consider how these developments will impact their programs.

The prominent NIL discussion surrounds the House settlement. Lawsuits by current and former college athletes are pursuing a settlement of nearly $2.8 billion that will attempt to establish a future framework for NIL agreements. 

Philip Nickerson, a Troutman Pepper Locke law firm associate who represents universities and collectives in NIL matters, said the settlement contains four major parts: allowing schools to pay athletes themselves for use of their NIL with an annual budget of $20.5 million, the potential for roster caps, NIL compliance and enforcement oversight, and backpay for former and current athletes who were unable to profit from their NIL. 

In his personal interpretation, this could mean many of UF’s resources responsible for its success could become less prominent, Nickerson said.

“It puts a limit on how much they can spend, which means that smaller schools that maybe don’t have the same athletic budget or donor base have a chance to compete for the prized recruits and remain competitive,” Nickerson said. “I think it’s going to level the playing field across all college sports.” 

UF would be forced to rely on its coaches and recruiting staff even more to out-recruit other schools for star high school athletes and in the transfer portal. 

Christopher Batts, an attorney at ShuffieldLowman, represents students and institutions navigating NIL deals. 

“I think the real impact is going to be on the school, and then that’s going to trickle down to the athletes,” Batts said. “Trying to divide up $20.5 million amongst a bunch of really good athletic programs is going to be way more difficult than for schools that are known just for basketball or just for football.” 

Title IX compliance will complicate the issue, he said, but it will also prevent schools from putting all of the allotted $20.5 million into their higher-revenue sports like football and men’s basketball.

Even with these changes, Batts said there’s likely more to come. 

“I think it opens just as many new issues as it resolves,” he said. “It doesn’t address Title IX. It doesn’t introduce collective bargaining.” 

UF Director of NIL Strategy Ben Chase said Florida is more than ready to handle whatever changes head its way.

“Our goal here at Florida is to make sure that we give our athletes the opportunity to compete at a high level across all the sports we have,” Chase said. “There’s a lot of schools out there that are cutting sports, including at the Power Four level, and we don’t plan on doing that.” 

He doesn’t foresee the changes affecting investments from donors and partners who have been a huge part of the success of Gator sports, he said. Instead, Chase sees benefits in the new settlement because it allows the UF Athletic Department to share the revenue with its athletes. 

Chase said he’s excited about the opportunities UF’s athletes will have going forward, including more NIL deals. 

“I think that where we are headed is true corporate NIL partnerships that are with athletes that may have never gotten those deals before,” he said.  

A decision is expected to be made on the settlement in the next few months if executive action isn’t taken sooner. 

Contact Ava DiCecca at adicecca@alligator.org. Follow her on X @avadicecca24.

A New Era for Michigan Football

Justice Haynes, a standout figure in collegiate athletics, has recently ignited conversations across the sports landscape with a pioneering NIL (Name, Image, Likeness) agreement that magnifies the progressive shift underway at Michigan. This development marks a significant milestone not only for Haynes personally but also for the Wolverines’ program, a testament to Michigan’s unwavering commitment to its athletes under the transformative leadership of head coach Sherrone Moore.

The Sherrone Moore Vision

Head coach Sherrone Moore has been at the helm of Michigan’s endeavors to harness the power of NIL opportunities for its athletes, a task he famously describes as occupying “50% of my day, if not more.” Moore’s devoted focus on securing equitable compensation for his players underscores a broader mission: to ensure that student-athletes receive the recognition and financial rewards they deserve. This investment of time and energy is beginning to yield significant returns, as evidenced by Haynes’ groundbreaking deal.

Justice Haynes: A Trailblazer in the Making

Justice Haynes has become an emblem of the evolving intersection between sports and branding, setting a new precedent in collegiate athletics. His unique NIL agreement is not just a personal triumph but a beacon for fellow athletes navigating this new territory. By taking this bold step, Haynes exemplifies the modern athlete’s dual role as both competitor and entrepreneur, showing that excellence on the field can indeed be paralleled by strategic acumen off it.

Impact on the Wolverines Program

The implications of Haynes’ achievement extend far beyond an individual victory; they symbolize the collective progress of the Michigan Wolverines. Under Moore’s guidance, the program is fostering an environment where athletes can thrive not just through their sporting prowess but also through the burgeoning opportunities NIL presents. This holistic approach to athlete development can attract future talent to Ann Arbor, making Michigan a desirable destination for aspiring stars who wish to excel in both sports and personal branding.

Reflecting on the Future

As Justice Haynes blazes the trail with his innovative NIL deal, he not only strengthens his own brand but also sets a robust example for his peers. His success serves as a reminder of the evolving landscape of collegiate sports, where the power dynamics are shifting, offering athletes new platforms for growth and expression. Michigan, with its strategic embrace of these changes, is well-positioned to lead in this new era, offering a blueprint for integrating athletic achievement with personal and financial development.

Guardian caps are soft-shell pads that are attached to the outside of helmets to decrease the impact of head contact and reduce the number of concussions football players suffer. Since their invention, over 500,000 football players across the country at every level have been using guardian caps, including the NFL, which mandated their use in practice for certain positions starting in the 2022-23 season in every practice from the beginning of training camp to the second preseason game, and allows players to opt into wearing them during regular-season games.

While not all studies attest to the efficacy of guardian caps, the league has reported a 52% reduction in concussions suffered by players in positions wearing guardian caps and boasts 12 years of on-the-field data supporting their continued use as a preventative measure against brain injuries. However, despite the profundity of scientific evidence released in the past decade about the risks and consequences of getting CTE from football and the proven success of guardian caps in mitigating these risks, why do only 5-10 NFL players wear them during games in any given week? The answer is quite simple: Guardian caps look atrocious, and NFL players want to look good. If you asked the average NFL player why they don’t wear guardian caps, they’ll give a similar answer. A player’s ‘swag’ is an integral part of their game; guardian caps detract from that.

While it may be easy to dismiss these concerns as superficial or shortsighted because guardian caps will “take the swag points a few down”, the reality is more complicated. Looking at a player’s incentive structure through an economics-based lens reveals that these decisions are grounded in a complex and real incentive structure that all professional athletes face, and one that the NFL needs to recognize if it hopes to secure the safety of its players. One helpful way to illustrate this tradeoff between ‘swag’ and ‘safety’ is through an indifference curve.

Indifference curves are tools economists use to model the utility or satisfaction individuals derive from different combinations of two competing goods or factors. In this case, the factors are ‘swag’ and ‘safety.’ Players wear guardian caps only if their safety outweighs the cost of looking less stylish.

A player who prioritizes long-term health and injury prevention will have a curve that values safety. A player who deeply values looking good and building a personal brand may have an indifference curve that bends in the opposite direction to heavily favor swag, showing they are willing to sacrifice a lot of safety for a little more style.

For players that value safety, the combination of safety and swag from wearing guardian caps lies on or above the indifference curve for guardian cap wearers, and thus is an optimal decision for them to make. For players like Kylen Gransen, even a bulky or awkward-looking guardian cap is worth it if it reduces the risk of concussions, because “no amount of aesthetic” could outweigh “what a TBI (traumatic brain injury) could do to [you].” While endorsements and brand deals might help players provide for their children and families in the future, it may come at the cost of remembering their children and families’ names.

Most NFL players, however, do not wear guardian caps. Many choose not to for the same reasons they might wear one shooter sleeve instead of two, let their back plates hang out, roll knee pads up to their quads, or turn pregame and postgame entrances into their own runway fashion shows.

To quote NFL Hall-of-Famer Deion Sanders: “You look good you feel good, you feel good you play good, you play good they pay good, they pay good you live good…” Prime Time’s famous mantra captures the psychology of many NFL players in a single sentence. 

In a league where contracts are short, careers are shorter, and public image can be just as important as performance, how you look on the field matters. NFL players are not just athletes–they’re brands. Their uniforms, cleats, visitors, and even celebrations are carefully curated parts of their identity that are scrutinized by millions of people every Sunday. A sharp or iconic look can lead to endorsement deals, jersey sales, and sponsorships. A bad look, however, can cost you recognition. NFL players are highly visible public figures, and their appearance is a critical aspect of how they market themselves. 

NFL players face opportunity costs, and in this case, they face a very consequential trade-off: Do you protect your name or your brand? Given that there appear to be somewhat mixed opinions on the effectiveness of guardian caps, NFL players are presented with the choice of either looking like a bobblehead wrapped in bubble wrap on Sundays in exchange for, at best, marginal safety benefits, or accepting the higher risks of having a permanent, debilitating neurological condition without damaging their brand.

While some players have overtly stated that, despite the added protections, “the fashion part” is the only reason they will not wear them, others feel that they won’t derive enough utility from the added protection. Some hitters, like Jabrill Peppers, value the added protection. Others, like Michael Wilson and Marvin Harrison, don’t see the need due to limited contact at their positions or a lack of concussion history. Kyler Murray suggested a “manly” stigma influence because other players may look down on those who wear them, implying that some players might perceive wearing them as a sign of weakness or fear of judgment from peers.

Given the state of the NFL’s current helmet technology, many players feel like they must choose: Wear safe, ugly gear like guardian caps, or stick with traditional helmets and have more autonomy in their image. While the NFL can solve this problem by simply mandating guardian caps for both games and practices, that may only create further backlash from players who see it as infringing on their autonomy or damaging their brand. Instead, the NFL should prioritize innovation and developing newer, more advanced helmets with better protection. One helpful way to look at this is through the NFL’s helmet technology Production Possibilities Frontier (PPF).

In their current state, guardian caps grant players a higher level of safety than current helmet technology alone does (as demonstrated by the combination of swag and safety offered by a guardian cap being at a point above the current PPF). However, for players who prioritize swag, there is no intersection between the guardian cap tradeoff line and their indifference curve, meaning that these players would never opt to wear a guardian cap even with the safety benefits.

The NFL, however, does not need to view this frontier as fixed. The NFL can continue what it has already been doing, which is introducing newer, more advanced helmets tailored to specific positions. VICIS’s new lab-tested and highly rated position-specific helmets, for example, offer greater protection against head injuries than other brands, making them a popular alternative. The NFL has also given players the option to wear guardian caps or new, innovative helmets. Pro Bowl safety Budda Baker, for example, switched helmets to avoid wearing the guardian cap in practice.

This should be the NFL’s path forward. This means investing in new helmet research, continuing to partner with forward-looking equipment manufacturers, and perhaps even allowing players to have a say in customizing their helmets. In so doing, the NFL can ‘push’ its PPF curve outward, offering helmets that look good and provide better protection.

The science is clear: concussions are dangerous, repeated head trauma even more so, and safer equipment reduces risk. The economics are also clear: adoption will remain limited unless safety gear complements player identity. Bridging that gap is the league’s responsibility.

The NFL has helped many players achieve the American dream. But that dream shouldn’t come at the cost of cognitive decline. If the NFL can shift the culture by recognizing the trade-offs its players face and expand the frontier between swag and safety, it can ensure longer careers, healthier retirees, and a safer, more appealing game.

Tyler Turman is an Acton Institute Emerging Leaders Fellow and partner with Stand Together’s Koch Internship Program.

Michigan’s Elite RB Turns Heads by Making Major NIL Move originally appeared on Athlon Sports.

The college football transfer portal saw over 4,000 entries between the winter and spring portal windows, allowing a plethora of teams to make significant additions.

Advertisement

Although there were plenty of talented players in the portal, one of the hottest commodities was Alabama transfer running back Justice Haynes. The former five-star recruit spent two seasons in Tuscaloosa before deciding to transfer, with 247Sports ranking him as the No. 1 running back in the portal.

He ended up transferring to the program that handed Alabama its final loss of the season in the Michigan Wolverines, and will look to become the program’s featured back as it hopes to return to title contention.

While fans are already excited about his play on the field as he rushed for 51 yards on six carries in the team’s spring game, according to On3, they are also just as enthused about his ventures off of it. As shared to X on Monday, Haynes inked an NIL deal with Loom Juice, which will see him have an ownership stake in.

“Go blue! Loom juice will be stocked shortly,” wrote one fan.

Advertisement

“NIL! Go Blue,” exclaimed another.

“Remember when this was the vision for NIL instead of who has the biggest donor base,” suggested a third.

“Equity ownership stake. The ichigan difference,” commented a fourth.

“Actual NIL! Very refreshing to see,” said another.

“OWNERSHIP over ENDORSEMENT,” added another.

According to the company’s site, Loom Juice is a “juice water” with no added sugars. They were named one of the best new brands in 2024 by BevNet.

As for Haynes, On3 currently has his NIL Valuation at $684,000, with this being his first recorded NIL deal since transferring to Michigan. The Wolverines will open the 2025 season against the New Mexico Wolfpack on Aug. 30.

Advertisement

Related: Rule of Legendary NFL Coach May Prevent Arch Manning From Entering 2026 NFL Draft

This story was originally reported by Athlon Sports on Jun 2, 2025, where it first appeared.

The Virginia Tech Hokies finished the 2025 baseball season with a 31-25 record, including a disappointing 12-18 mark in ACC play. After defeating Stanford in the first round of the ACC Baseball Tournament, the Hokies fell to No. 14 Clemson in the second round and suddenly their season was over.

Head coach John Szefc made some moves once the season ended, firing pitching coach Ryan Fecteau. Fecteau has been with Szefc since his final season at Maryland in 2017 and all eight seasons in Blacksburg. Also, the director of player development, Kyle Sarazin, was let go.

Advertisement

Now, for the players. The NCAA transfer portal opened this week, and two players—junior first baseman Garrett Michel and freshman pitcher Tucker Swails—announced they are entering it.

Michel hit .272 with a .398 OBP and .866 OPS. The Denver, North Carolina, native battled injuries during his time with the Hokies. He could be drafted in the 2025 MLB draft, too.

Swails is a native of Patrick County High School in nearby Stuart, Virginia. The 5-foot-11, 185-pounder redshirted during his only season at Virginia Tech. Swails starred as a pitcher and shortstop in high school.

We wish the best for these two Hokies as they move forward in their careers.

Advertisement

More from gobblercountry.com: