Doubts over new NCAA likeness bill

The NCAA recently passed a bill that will allow athletes to profit on their name, image, and likeness. This bill is receiving many critiques and opinions, and it seems like that will continue for some while.

“This modernization for the future is a natural extension of the numerous steps NCAA members have taken in recent years to improve support for student-athletes, including full cost of attendance and guaranteed scholarships,” said Michael Drake on the official website of the NCAA. Drake is the head of the NCAA board and the president of Ohio State University.

The NCAA has been tinkering with ways to get this done for years now, and their decision comes shortly after California and New York passed state laws to allow NCAA athletes to profit from their name, image and likeness.

I think the passing of this bill is going to cause more problems than it will fix. With the numerous rules in place in the NCAA sphere, such as Title IX, I think that this rule is going to end up harming smaller private universities while enhancing the success of larger state schools. Simply, the rich get richer.

The Title IX rule, which comes from the Education Amendments of 1972, states “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”

Being that Title IX is a requirement, it means that male and female athletes have to be equally compensated while in college. For example, if Nike chose to use Charlie Brewer (starting quarterback for Baylor University), and Kylie Ross (Baylor soccer player) for an advertisement, they have to be paid the exact same amount for the advertisement regardless of their sport, or how much money their sport brings in.

The issue really comes into play when a high-profile athlete is trying to choose where they want to play college sports. In the past, the recruiting tactic that has worked well for schools like Baylor goes something like this: “If you come to our school, you can start immediately and make a difference for the program.” But now with money involved, it changes the pitch entirely.

An example here, is a 2023 LSU Wide Receiver commit named “DeColdest Crawford.” Crawford is going to have an opportunity to trademark his name and slogan under the LSU brand, and receive compensation for that. He had plenty of offers to choose from, but making more money under a school like LSU makes more sense for him compared to coming to a small private university like Baylor.

I’m interested to see how this new rule plays out, and honestly, I would be happy if it worked the way the NCAA intended it to. Only time will tell.

Brooks Lakin
Finance major