The NCAA is weighing a rule that would require incoming Division I athletes to disclose name, image and likeness deals from high school or junior college to the NIL Go clearinghouse established under the $2.8 billion settlement from the House v. NCAA antitrust lawsuit that was approved in early June.
Athletes would report all noninstitutional deals dating to the first day of their junior year. Junior college transfers would report deals from the date of initial enrollment at a two-year college. All reporting of previous deals would be due to the College Sports Commission upon enrollment.
NIL compensation at the high school level has rapidly expanded in recent years. The high school sports associations in at least 40 states allow student-athletes in their purview to earn money off their celebrity status, including the GHSA in Georgia and the TSSAA in Tennessee. Alabama, Michigan and Ohio are among the states that have strict restrictions, along with Texas, which prohibits athletes younger than 17 from pursuing deals.
In December 2022, Boo Carter became the Chattanooga area’s first prep athlete known to have signed an NIL deal. Carter was a Brainerd High School junior at the time and was a basketball standout for the Panthers that winter. He had previously played football at Chattanooga Christian and spent his senior prep season in that sport at nearby Bradley Central before signing with the University of Tennessee football program, where he is now a sophomore who could contribute on defense, offense and special teams for the Volunteers this season.
Carter recently used some of the money he has made through NIL deals to donate new uniforms to Brainerd’s football program.
In 2023, five members of the Bradley Central’s girls’ basketball program — which earlier this year won its third straight TSSAA state title and ninth overall — signed a group NIL deal.
The proposed NCAA rule stems from the House settlement, which took effect July 1 and allows NCAA school to share millions with athletes directly but requires reporting of any third-party deal exceeding $600. NIL Go, developed by Deloitte and overseen by the College Sports Commission, evaluates whether deals reflect fair market value and serve a valid business purpose, a topic of some controversy.
The potential rule aims to prevent pay-for-play deals between prospective athletes and boosters or school-affiliated entities. The exact consequences of failing to comply are still being determined, but lost eligibility is a possibility.
“It’s unclear what the discipline would be for athletes or third parties that violate these rules, just like it’s just not entirely clear what the discipline will be for current college athletes,” said Gabe Feldman, the director of sports law at Tulane University. “The emphasis certainly seems to be on not unduly harming the athlete themselves and the team, whereas in the past, if an athlete had received an improper benefit, there could be significant repercussions.”
A tidal wave of lawsuits could stem from a new rule, but according to Feldman, the NCAA tends to like its odds — a recurring theme leading up to the settlement approval.
“The idea was that given how much money athletes would be making under these new rules, very few athletes would have incentive to sue,” Feldman said. “Even though there is still the risk of antitrust litigation, the risk is much smaller because the athletes are getting such significant compensation. But there is no guarantee that athletes can’t sue.”
Language in the House settlement kept the door open for future rule proposals, including “specifying that the NCAA and/or the conference defendants prohibit NIL payments by associated entities or individuals (individually or collectively) to current or prospective student-athletes.”
However, that may leave loopholes.
“The question remains,” Feldman said. “If an athlete is going to be held to these expectations once they are enrolled at a university, does this just incentivize boosters and collectives to pay these athletes before they’re enrolled?”
