Nearly eight months ago, the first talk about state athletes being able to profit off of their name, image, and likeness through sponsorships and third-party endorsements was brought to the forefront as California Governor Gavin Newsom signed the Fair Pay to Play Act (FPTP). The nationwide campaign supporting pay for college athletes has since gained increased momentum with Colorado passing a similar law to California’s. 

A long-standing, heated debate amongst the sports world, the ability for student athletes to monetize their identities stands against the NCAA’s traditional amateurism model: a system used to distinguish college sports from pro sports. In fact, ‘amateurism’ specifically bans college players from profiting off of their identities. It is interesting to note, however, that college students can profit from their own YouTube channels and post freely on social media, but college athletes, for the most part, cannot. 

While states are quickly starting to follow California’s revolutionary actions, it is Florida that will become the first state to put into effect a law of this kind. On July 1, 2021, Florida student athletes will become the first college athletes to profit off of their name, image and likeness. This leads both California and Colorado’s proposals by 18 months. 

In a press conference held at the University of Miami, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis explains that Florida’s law is one founded on the establishment of fairness and basic rights. Although the law does not require schools to directly pay their athletes, it does enable college athletes to profit from endorsements and sponsorship deals. The act also permits the use of agents. 

So, what exactly does “Name, Image, and Likeness” (NIL) mean for student athletes? As per the NCAA guidelines, the term “‘name, image, and likeness’ are three elements that make up a legal concept known as “right of publicity.” Put simply, the right of publicity means that one’s permission is required for the use of one’s identity. Now, student athletes will be able to promote products, become the face of a brand, and market themselves. This only begins to level the playing field for college athletes and grant them the same rights as other college students. 

Opposers of the bill postulate unfair recruiting advantages and a disruption to the competitive balance that NCAA’s amateurism rules were enacted to maintain. Yet, the NCAA’s notorious belief that these NIL bills allowing student athletes to monetize themselves will disrupt the competitive balance fails to disclose the already apparent partiality for the powerhouses. The reality is that certain teams have and continue to dominate college sports… take football powerhouse Alabama or Coach K’s legendary Duke basketball team, for example, whose schools spend copious amounts on recruiting measures and brand exclusives. Furthermore, Florida is committed towards addressing this issue at the federal level (see “Part 2: Florida For the Federalization of New NIL Policies”).

In permitting state athletes to profit off of their name, image, and likeness through third-party endorsements and sponsorships, states are bringing an end to NCAA’s traditional amateurism argument. States are continuing to join this pay for play movement and this has already pressured the NCAA into taking the first steps to allow college athletes to receive compensation for their talent.

Now for the federal level to address this…