My crib of someone else's summary:

Current student-athletes are permitted to enter into NIL agreements with boosters meeting the following conditions:

The booster has no authority over intercollegiate athletics

Compensation is tied only to NIL activities

Compensation is not provided in exchange for athletic participation or achievement

Compensation is not provided as an inducement for or contingent upon enrollment

The compensation rate is commensurate with the fair market value of the goods, services, or money exchanged

To the best of their ability, the student-athlete discloses to the the School's Compliance Office that the agreement involving a Booster.

The surprise to me is that the policy does not seem to apply to recruits, where you would think the money would matter most to boosters. Expect a lot of handshake deals.

Let the fun begin...

NIL is here: Cal launches GOLDEN program to support student-athletes! https://t.co/KIYs5ua4L0 pic.twitter.com/fIhuScXKFb

— Cal Athletics (@CalAthletics) July 1, 2021

👀 pic.twitter.com/RxmNur1Xg9

— Cal Athletics (@CalAthletics) July 1, 2021

The Bears come out roaring! #CaliForNIL

wifeisafurd said:

---

My crib of someone else's summary:

Current student-athletes are permitted to enter into NIL agreements with boosters meeting the following conditions:

The booster has no authority over intercollegiate athletics

Compensation is tied only to NIL activities

Compensation is not provided in exchange for athletic participation or achievement

Compensation is not provided as an inducement for or contingent upon enrollment

The compensation rate is commensurate with the fair market value of the goods, services, or money exchanged

To the best of their ability, the student-athlete discloses to the the School's Compliance Office that the agreement involving a Booster.

The surprise to me is that the policy does not seem to apply to recruits, where you would think the money would matter most to boosters. Expect a lot of handshake deals.

Let the fun begin...

---

The part that confuses me in all of this (starting with Kavanaugh's opinion) was this point: "Compensation is not provided in exchange for athletic participation or achievement." I mean, isn't an athlete's NIL value based on his athletic participation or achievement? Would Nationwide pay a dime fo Peyton Manning to appear in its ads if he hadn't been a successful football player? Or is the argument going to be that so long as the athlete does something (e.g., have his picture taken with a product) and gets paid for that, it's no longer compensation for his athletic participation/achievement?

01Bear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

My crib of someone else's summary:

Current student-athletes are permitted to enter into NIL agreements with boosters meeting the following conditions:

The booster has no authority over intercollegiate athletics

Compensation is tied only to NIL activities

Compensation is not provided in exchange for athletic participation or achievement

Compensation is not provided as an inducement for or contingent upon enrollment

The compensation rate is commensurate with the fair market value of the goods, services, or money exchanged

To the best of their ability, the student-athlete discloses to the the School's Compliance Office that the agreement involving a Booster.

The surprise to me is that the policy does not seem to apply to recruits, where you would think the money would matter most to boosters. Expect a lot of handshake deals.

Let the fun begin...

---

The part that confuses me in all of this (starting with Kavanaugh's opinion) was this point: "Compensation is not provided in exchange for athletic participation or achievement." I mean, isn't an athlete's NIL value based on his athletic participation or achievement? Would Nationwide pay a dime fo Peyton Manning to appear in its ads if he hadn't been a successful football player? Or is the argument going to be that so long as the athlete does something (e.g., have his picture taken with a product) and gets paid for that, it's no longer compensation for his athletic participation/achievement?

---

Certainly the brand value of an athlete is tied to their athletic achievement.

IANAL, but I think the contracts can't have explicit bonuses tied to achievement/participation. e.g. NBA players might have bonuses tied to All Star appearances, # games played, etc - not just from their team but from sponsors like Nike.

My assumption is that sponsors will look at something like Twitter/IG followers when determining payment.

It'll be really interesting to see which schools are able to improve their recruiting the most. Cal has a chance to stay near the top of the conference, but Oregon is going to be even tougher to beat than before.

And there's going to be a race for states to ensure athletes can get paid. California needs to pass new legislation to fix the effective date to catch up to other states.
You can see the status of NIL laws for each state here.

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/31738893/ncaa-athletes-cashing-name-image-likeness

Some of the first NIL deals.

Not sure the NIL rules as written will be good for CFB. Really not on board with players spending time selling themselves as individuals in a team sport. It's could be quite exhausting to partake in and police as the rules are written.

Having major sponsor of entire teams negotiated/encouraged by the school would be way better. I thought the 'gold standard' of NIL would be for a company like EA to pay every player for use in a video game.

I did just see this re: Miami football. Local gym operator is offering $500/month for every player on the FB team. https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/31771563/dan-lambert-plans-500-month-endorsement-deal-every-miami-hurricanes-football-player-scholarship

Stuff like that is could make a much bigger impact on CFB than everyone peddling small time goods.

But I don't see how that Miami deal would be anything but conditional on participation in a sport - ie not really allowed under NCAA rules. But maybe if a state has their own rules that supercede?