Read on Twitter
A couple notable developments on the NIL front from this week& #39;s Div. 1 Council meeting. (Story coming soon)
Most interesting to me is that right now the NCAA is thinking it& #39;ll let individual schools decide how to handle any conflict between school sponsors and athlete sponsors.
Most interesting to me is that right now the NCAA is thinking it& #39;ll let individual schools decide how to handle any conflict between school sponsors and athlete sponsors.
In other words, if an athlete at a Nike school wants to sign a deal with Adidas, it& #39;ll be up to the individual school to decide if they want to allow that. The school will have to tell prospects ahead of time what those restrictions would be.
Another sort of nitty gritty, but new detail:
-Athletes could identify themselves by the school they attend when promoting camps or lessons they teach, but not in an advertisement.
-Athletes could identify themselves by the school they attend when promoting camps or lessons they teach, but not in an advertisement.
So, they could advertise private lessons by saying "Come learn how to play with Notre Dame quarterback Joe Smith." But Joe Smith couldn& #39;t do an ad for a local restaurant that says "I& #39;m Joe Smith, the Notre Dame quarterback, and I eat at Rocco& #39;s Pizza"
And lastly, there& #39;s still really no solution for how to decide when a bunch of money to endorse the local car dealership crosses a line from fair market value to a payment made for recruiting purposes.
NCAA will hope that transparency with all players reporting the deals they sign (likely to a third-party that tracks all the deals) helps and otherwise the rule-makers seem to feel they& #39;ll have to adjust on the fly if that becomes a huge problem.
