ADVERTISEMENT

DI board approves clarifications for interim NIL policy

Halldan1

Moderator
Moderator
Jan 1, 2003
189,087
105,316
113

Guidance centers on institutional involvement in deals for current student-athletes​


The Division I Board of Directors on Wednesday voted unanimously to clarify how schools can be involved with the name, image and likeness activities of enrolled student-athletes on their campuses. The new guidelines were recommended by a membership working group and supported by the Division I Council earlier in October.

The board's updated guidance (PDF), while not an exhaustive list of specific circumstances, is intended to clarify how existing NCAA rules apply to the interim policy for name, image and likeness, specifically how the current rules relate to Division I member schools' involvement in NIL activities.

"The NIL landscape is constantly evolving, and the Board of Directors decided it was important to offer further guidance with respect to a number of key questions that have arisen recently," said Jere Morehead, chair of the board and president of the University of Georgia. "As we continue to reinforce current NCAA rules, we expect to offer further guidance in the future on what should and should not be done when engaged in these activities. We are committed to fostering a fair and appropriate NIL environment that supports our students and complies with our rules."

Education/monitoring for current students​

The board noted that schools generally can and should provide education to current student-athletes, including on topics like financial literacy, taxes, social media practices and entrepreneurship. Schools also can provide NIL education to collectives, boosters and prospects. The board also noted that — when permitted by applicable state laws — schools can and should require student-athletes to report NIL activities to the athletics department.

School support for student-athlete NIL activities​

Under the interim policy, schools can inform student-athletes about potential NIL opportunities and can work with an NIL service provider to administer a "marketplace" that matches student-athletes with those opportunities. They cannot, however, engage in negotiations on behalf of an NIL entity or a student-athlete to secure specific NIL opportunities.

Schools also can support their enrolled college athletes in NIL activities directly by providing stock photos or graphics to either a student-athlete or an NIL entity or arranging space on campus for an entity and student-athlete to meet. Schools cannot, under the interim policy, provide free services (graphic designers, tax preparation or contract review) to student-athletes unless those services are available to the general student body, nor can schools offer equipment (cameras, graphics software or computers) to student-athletes to support NIL activities, unless that equipment is also available to the general student body.

The latest guidelines also clarify that member schools can promote student-athletes' NIL activities, provided the student-athlete or NIL entity pays the going rate for that advertisement (for example, on a video board during a game). However, schools cannot allow student-athletes to promote their activity while participating in required athletics activities (pre- and postgame activities, court celebrations and news conferences).

School involvement with collectives and other NIL entities​

The board also clarified that school personnel (including coaches) can assist an NIL entity with fundraising through appearances or by providing autographed memorabilia but cannot donate cash directly to those entities. School staff members also cannot be employed by or have an ownership stake in an NIL entity.

Schools also can request donors provide funds to collectives and other NIL entities, provided the schools do not request that those funds be directed to a specific sport or student-athlete.

Finally, schools can provide tickets or suites to NIL entities through sponsorship agreements, provided the terms of those agreements are the same as for other sponsors. Those same assets cannot be offered as an incentive to provide funds to an NIL entity.

Lynda Tealer, chair of the NIL Working Group and executive associate athletics director at Florida, emphasized that "the new guidance may require institutions and key stakeholders to modify practices, and some disentanglement may be necessary."

Enforcement of NCAA rules related to NIL policy​

For any violations that occurred before this additional clarification, the board directed the enforcement staff to review facts of individual cases but pursue only cases that are clearly contrary to the interim policy.

In addition to approving the new guidance for member schools, the board unanimously adopted a proposal for new allegation and conclusion standards when potential violations related to the interim policy occur. When information available to the enforcement staff indicates impermissible conduct occurred, the enforcement staff and Committee on Infractions will presume a violation occurred unless the school clearly demonstrates that the behaviors in question were in line with existing NCAA rules and the interim policy.

The board reiterated its previous position that the focus of its NIL guidance is not intended to question the eligibility of enrolled student-athletes.

Third-party administration of NIL activities​

The board received a report about the benefits and challenges related to the use of an independent, third-party administrator to collect student-athlete disclosures of NIL activities. Based on recommendations from the Division I Council and the NIL Working Group, the board did not take action on the third-party administrator concept at this time but noted the need for future discussion as the legal and political landscapes continue to evolve.
 
  • Like
Reactions: silkcitypirate
Is this a guideline for all schools no matter what state or do state laws override these guide lines ?
 
But in NJ we are back to square one as the NJ rules that are hindering SHU are not in effect yet.

Got to choose. Play on as close to an even field as possible or don't play at all. Halfway won't get it done.

Sha and Seton Hall are facing tremendous difficulty because as hard as it is recruiting at SHU it becomes ten fold more difficult with the NIL restrictions.

You are spending $52M on the Practice Facility. You hired Sha at $2.6M a year. Shouldn't you do all possible legally to get a return on those investments?
 
Didn’t the politicians already say they will modify the law if Rutgers asks them to? Assuming Rutgers feels the same way we do I think it’s guaranteed that law is never going into effect.

One of the primary pillars at my firm is “taking intelligent risk”. I think ignoring a law that doesn’t go into effect for 2 years and is likely to be changed is a perfect example of taking intelligent risk.
 
Last edited:
Didn’t the politicians already say they will modify the law if Rutgers asks them to? Assuming Rutgers feels the same way we do I think it’s guaranteed that law is never going into effect.

One of the primary pillars at my firm is “taking intelligent risk”. I think ignoring a law that doesn’t go into effect for 2 years and is likely to be changed is a perfect example of taking intelligent risk.
I have zero faith in the admin doing anything close to taking a risk as they have no balls and or strategic thinking. The 2 year away NJ state law was and still is lip service because they don’t want to say well we listened to our drinking and golfing buddy Kevin who told us we didn’t have to worry.
 
Didn’t the politicians already say they will modify the law if Rutgers asks them to? Assuming Rutgers feels the same way we do I think it’s guaranteed that law is never going into effect.

One of the primary pillars at my firm is “taking intelligent risk”. I think ignoring a law that doesn’t go into effect for 2 years and is likely to be changed is a perfect example of taking intelligent risk.
Again I think it is wise if Rutgers and us join forces and hire a NJ lobbying firm to get this future law changed or revised. Something must be done . A good friend of mine is in that business and I will ask him his thoughts.
 
After reading the article the more it makes sense to hire a lobbying firm . You need votes on both sides of the aisles to get this done. That is what lobbying firms do . Many NJ legislators are clueless on what NIL even is.
 
I know the law doesn’t go into effect until 2025 so there are no current implications, but hypothetically what does the law prevent seton hall and Rutgers from doing that puts them at a disadvantage?
 
Last edited:
Besides horrific leadership ?

someone needs to tell them they can’t be half pregnant.
Sorry my post had a typo. Will fix now - I meant what specifically is written in the law that puts us as a disadvantage?

All these articles reference the intention of the law is to allow players to profit off their NIL. What are the additional guidelines the state put in place that put us at a disadvantage (in 2025)?
 
Sorry my post had a typo. Will fix now - I meant what specifically is written in the law that puts us as a disadvantage?

All these articles reference the intention of the law is to allow players to profit off their NIL. What are the additional guidelines the state put in place that put us at a disadvantage (in 2025)?
Yeah that’s what I figured but does it matter when the admin is very transparent they don’t want to eat into their donations?
 
Didn’t the politicians already say they will modify the law if Rutgers asks them to? Assuming Rutgers feels the same way we do I think it’s guaranteed that law is never going into effect.

One of the primary pillars at my firm is “taking intelligent risk”. I think ignoring a law that doesn’t go into effect for 2 years and is likely to be changed is a perfect example of taking intelligent risk.
I'm sure Rutgers will try asking for an exception for public schools before asking them to repeal it completely lol
 
  • Haha
Reactions: SOBO1
Yeah that’s what I figured but does it matter when the admin is very transparent they don’t want to eat into their donations?
Yes, the administration doesn’t want to take a $1M haircut off the Pirate Blue budget. That makes sense from a micro perspective, but from a macro perspective the loss from not playing the NIL game is far greater. Basketball is the greatest marketing tool the school has - it drives donations across the board, directly impacts applications, etc. Basketball in a sense is the lifeline to the university and NIL is the lifeline to basketball.

I understand that seton hall self imposed rules preventing them from being involved with NIL - supposedly based on this future law - but I have never actually seen the details of this law. If the intention of the law is to have students control their own NIL rights, I don’t understand how allowing school involvement impedes that. Where’s the connection?

What value add does the state see from prohibiting Shaheen Holloway, Greg Schiano, pat Hobbs, or Bryan Felt from assisting in the process? That’s the only thing I’m having a hard time wrapping my head around.
 
Last edited:
Thankfully, Dick Codey is on this issue. The question is who is resistant?
 
Yes, the administration doesn’t want to take a $1M haircut off the PirateBlue budget. That makes sense from a micro perspective, but from a macro perspective the loss from not playing the NIL game is far greater. Basketball is the greatest marketing tool the school has - it drives donations across the board, directly impacts applications, etc. Basketball in a sense is the lifeline to the university and NIL is the lifeline to basketball.

I understand that seton hall self imposed rules preventing them from being involved with NIL - supposedly based on this future law - but I have never actually seen the details of this law. If the intention of the law is to have students control their own NIL rights, I don’t understand how allowing school involvement impedes that. Where’s the connection?

What value add does the state see from prohibiting shaheen Holloway, Greg schiano, pat hobbs, or brian felt from assisting in the process. That’s the only thing I’m having a hard time wrapping my head around.
What I want to know is what is the school's end game here? If they don’t make an effort to improve their NIL budget we will never get any decent players no matter how good Sha is.

No matter how much we win or how big our facility is no good players are coming to SHU. They can debate about the legality or the ethics all day long but if they don’t make a move they have doomed us to finish in the basement of the Big East for a long time to come.

Seriously though what are they so afraid of? Do they think NJ is going to come after them for helping with NIL in 2025 when it was legal in 2023. Doesn’t make sense.

Whatever sanctions they are afraid of can’t be worse than having a horrible basketball team and significant decrease in revenue and donations.

I also don’t think they should stress too much about losing pirate blue donations. You contribute to NIL, start getting better recruits, you are going to see improvement not just in bball but other sports well. When the SHU teams are doing well and in the public eye I’m sure more donations will follow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thehall07
Yes, the administration doesn’t want to take a $1M haircut off the PirateBlue budget. That makes sense from a micro perspective, but from a macro perspective the loss from not playing the NIL game is far greater. Basketball is the greatest marketing tool the school has - it drives donations across the board, directly impacts applications, etc. Basketball in a sense is the lifeline to the university and NIL is the lifeline to basketball.

I understand that seton hall self imposed rules preventing them from being involved with NIL - supposedly based on this future law - but I have never actually seen the details of this law. If the intention of the law is to have students control their own NIL rights, I don’t understand how allowing school involvement impedes that. Where’s the connection?

What value add does the state see from prohibiting shaheen Holloway, Greg schiano, pat hobbs, or brian felt from assisting in the process? That’s the only thing I’m having a hard time wrapping my head around.
With you here
 
Yes, the administration doesn’t want to take a $1M haircut off the PirateBlue budget. That makes sense from a micro perspective, but from a macro perspective the loss from not playing the NIL game is far greater. Basketball is the greatest marketing tool the school has - it drives donations across the board, directly impacts applications, etc. Basketball in a sense is the lifeline to the university and NIL is the lifeline to basketball.
We're all Seton Hall basketball fans here, but this is some dubious information. The university does use basketball in some marketing material when we're good enough to utilize it, but the effectiveness of that in converting actual enrollments is unestablished (If this is wrong, I'd love to see some data from enrollment management affirming it), and there is even less objective support for the idea that basketball drives donations to anything besides the basketball program or anything outside of athletics. The level to which our program has performed during the life of any current, traditional undergraduate (only our senior class were alive when we last made a Sweet Sixteen) has has near (if not absolute) zero effect on applications and enrollment. There is copious research around this idea that nullifies the idea of any schools outside of consistent Elite Eight-types deriving any real, lasting benefit from basketball as an enrollment driver.

The good thing about this is that our university -- you know, the actual academic entity -- is not dependent on basketball to survive. In reality, it exists mainly as an entity for its own means -- something to enjoy in and of itself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bobbie Solo
Cody is correct. The NJ Legislature should get out of the way and spend their time doing something that is much more important. Protecting the NIL of a few hundred athletes is not really where they need to be spending their time. Leave it to the colleges. The state could not ever enforce their laws anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: silkcitypirate
Thank you. Very helpful. Considering this was drafted 2 years before the current ncaa guidelines one would hope they would remove this piece. Makes no sense to have this if no other state has this limitation.

C.18A:3B-88 Compensation for certain purposes prohibited.
3. A four-year institution of higher education, an entity whose purpose includes
supporting or benefitting the institution or its athletic programs, or any officer, director, or employee of the institution or entity, shall not compensate or cause compensation to be directed to a current or prospective student-athlete participating in intercollegiate athletics for use of the student’s name, image, or likeness.
 
Thank you. Very helpful. Considering this was drafted 2 years before the current ncaa guidelines one would hope they would remove this piece. Makes no sense to have this if no other state has this limitation.

C.18A:3B-88 Compensation for certain purposes prohibited.
3. A four-year institution of higher education, an entity whose purpose includes
supporting or benefitting the institution or its athletic programs, or any officer, director, or employee of the institution or entity, shall not compensate or cause compensation to be directed to a current or prospective student-athlete participating in intercollegiate athletics for use of the student’s name, image, or likeness.
As I’ve said before, it seems to me even collectives will be barred under this rule. That would seem to be an entity “whose purpose includes supporting or benefiting the institution or its athletic programs.“
 
As I’ve said before, it seems to me even collectives will be barred under this rule. That would seem to be an entity “whose purpose includes supporting or benefiting the institution or its athletic programs.“
I’m not an attorney but certainly seems that way. I think it’s fairly safe to assume that the law will be adjusted.
 
Yes, the administration doesn’t want to take a $1M haircut off the Pirate Blue budget. That makes sense from a micro perspective, but from a macro perspective the loss from not playing the NIL game is far greater. Basketball is the greatest marketing tool the school has - it drives donations across the board, directly impacts applications, etc. Basketball in a sense is the lifeline to the university and NIL is the lifeline to basketball.

I understand that seton hall self imposed rules preventing them from being involved with NIL - supposedly based on this future law - but I have never actually seen the details of this law. If the intention of the law is to have students control their own NIL rights, I don’t understand how allowing school involvement impedes that. Where’s the connection?

What value add does the state see from prohibiting Shaheen Holloway, Greg Schiano, pat Hobbs, or Bryan Felt from assisting in the process? That’s the only thing I’m having a hard time wrapping my head around.

Don't tell that to SHUSource, I'm sure he'll be on your case shortly.

Edit: I see his reply already further down the thread!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: SHUSource
I don't want to beat a dead horse or come off as pedantic, but the facts are pretty clear on this. If we're talking about the value of basketball as an essential part of the university, it's relevant.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT