In the 2017-2018 school year, the National Collegiate Athletic Association obtained more than $1 billion in revenue from the men’s basketball tournament. Instead of receiving an income for playing, the athletes involved were paid with experience and scholarships.
As of Sept. 30, that changed. Athletes of 26 public colleges in the state of California will soon have the freedom to accept paid endorsement deals in order to make a profit off of their image and likeness. In the past, athletes from schools in this state would have been ineligible to play if they accepted any form of outside payment.
Because of this act, California is officially the first state to allow these players to receive endorsements that align with what professional athletes receive. This is the result of passing Senate Bill 206, which was signed by California Governor Gavin Newsom.
The Fair Pay to Play Act was introduced by state Sen. Nancy Skinner and will take effect in 2023. Even though this law only applies to California schools right now, nearly a dozen other states are starting to put themselves in the conversation. Colorado, Illinois and New York are just a few states that have a plan to introduce their own form of Senate Bill 206.
While this act has been passed already, current student-athletes will not be impacted by the new law because by the time it takes effect, most of them will have graduated.
The Fair Pay to Play Act does not mean schools pay students for playing a sport. Instead, according to an article written by Michael McCann in Sports Illustrated, they can be “paid to sponsor summer camps for young athletes and sign endorsement deals with apparel companies, sports beverages, car dealerships and numerous other businesses that would pay for an athlete’s public stamp of approval.”
Several professional athletes have expressed their feelings for the new law, including LeBron James, Kevin Durant and Draymond Green. In response to a tweet by Newsom, James said that this recently passed law will “change the lives for countless athletes who deserve it!”
This is going to cause a dramatic shift for both the colleges and the NCAA. The NCAA has been putting up a fight against this law because it does not adhere to their rules. In the regulations, it states that players cannot “Accept payment or a promise of payments (e.g., cash, prizes, gifts, or travel) for participation in your sport.” This rule is set to make the games fair by keeping athletes at an ameteur level.
This makes Steve Sellers, head golf coach, ask the question, “what happens when you say, ‘that’s a bunch of semi-pros and we’re just going to pay them?’”
“To a degree, that ameteur status really has hindered some of those athletes in the sum of opportunities, which maybe in some respects is valid but maybe in some other ways, needs to be reviewed to see if it’s something that works in today’s society,” said James Kluckhohn, assistant athletic director.
Although the athletes are not eligible to play if they receive income for their image and likeness, they get a good amount of other benefits. NCAA schools are given almost $3.5 billion in scholarships to divide up amongst student-athletes. On top of that, Division I schools may also offer cost of attendance and a Student Assistance Fund. Both of these can be made available for students who need them if their scholarships do not cover other essentials they may require.
Because of the new act, the rules will have to be adjusted to allow athletes to be eligible to play and make deals with sponsors. The NCAA has not yet announced how its rules will shift, but if multiple states look to put a similar law in place, pressure will be put on the association to make a change quickly. If they don’t, their own regulations prevent athletes from playing in the NCAA competitions. This would mean less broadcasting which would cost the NCAA too much money.
Draymond Green, former basketball player at Michigan State University, expressed his opinions on the new law during the Golden State Warriors’ media day.
“We spent so much time in college broke, with no money. Yet everybody else was living very well, universities making a ton of money off your likeness.”
In response to the Fair Pay to Play Act, President of the NCAA Mark Emmert said, “The biggest worry is that when you have complete unfettered licensing agreements or unfettered endorsement deals, the model of college athletics is negligible at best and maybe doesn’t even exist. Those deals would be arranged with support or engagement of schools … so they do become professional employees of schools. That is what most member schools are concerned about, not that people are opposed to have an appropriate way to get some form of (compensation for athletes).”
Since this will be a major shift in college athletics, there are some limitations in place. One important limitation is that players are not allowed to sign with a company that goes against a sponsorship of the school. If students have to choose between signing one of these deals or competing in their sport, these big schools could lose players.
“It could be disastrous for those schools … a lot of those students would transfer out,” said Jim Miller, director of athletics. For some athletes, if the competition isn’t there, they could go somewhere else to get it.
Something to consider is whether some universities would offer more for their players with the biggest image and likeness. If it weren’t for the NCAA, this would be a possibility at some schools, if they could afford it.
“Only 23 of 228 public schools in NCAA Division I — the most competitive level of college athletics — made enough money to cover their expenses in 2012. The other 225 schools subsidized their athletic programs with student fees, alumni donations and other sources of money,” said Allen Sanderson, senior lecturer in economics at the University of Chicago.
Since Division III students are not awarded athletic scholarships, they are volunteer athletes. So the possibility of getting a bigger scholarship than another team member because they have a greater image and likeness is not a concern for those players.
“We’re talking about maybe 0.5% of student athletes, those major athletes that can do those things and get that opportunity to make that money off themselves … and it’s not fair the NCAA takes advantage of those kids,” said Andrea Gamarra, head women’s soccer coach.
According to NCAA research, there are only a small number of professional athletic jobs available, meaning the likelihood of an athlete getting a college degree is much higher than becoming a pro athlete. In April 2019, only 0.9% become a pro in women’s basketball and only 1.2% in men’s basketball. To get to the professional level though, the players have to attend at least one year of college.
“It probably won’t have a big impact on a lot of the players … you look at the thousands of student athletes out there, probably very few will be able to take advantage of an opportunity to receive funds,” said Kluckhohn.
