4 Ways to Make “Name, Image, Likeness” More Equitable
Since “Name, Image, and Likeness” (NIL) became legal in June 2021, NIL has gained a lot of traction from the public, the NCAA, and athletes across the United States. NIL refers to the rights of college athletes to monetize their personal brand. This includes earning money from endorsements, sponsorships, social media, and other ventures that use their name, image, or likeness. As a collegiate athlete, I am keenly aware of the impact that NIL has had on athletes when they are making decisions about their college journey.
I’ve started looking across the vast landscape that is collegiate athletics from a DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) lens. When I started reflecting on how equitable NIL is, I couldn’t help but think of how companies decide which athletes should get their money.
Equity evaluates how fair systems are. An equitable NIL would ensure that barriers to access NIL would be removed so all athletes are able to thrive. Through my research I’ve noticed a couple of trends that made me wonder about how equitable the current system is. Here are the two main reasons the current NIL structure is inequitable:
#1 NIL favors athletes with unearned advantages.
While researching NIL, I stumbled across a lot of familiar names on the top of the NIL charts. Athletes like Bronny James, Shedeur Sanders, and Arch Manning are three of the highest paid collegiate athletes right now. All three have famous fathers that have played in the NBA and NFL. I don’t mention these names to discredit how talented they are or how hard they work. I'm simply trying to point out how some athletes may have unearned advantages that give them a leg up. It’s important for NIL to be aware of how the current process may favor athletes who have proximity to power.
#2 NIL lacks transparency around data.
As of August 2024, there is a lot the public doesn’t know about NIL. Some athletes do voluntarily disclose the value of their deals to the public but currently there is no requirement to do so. Athletes do have to notify their university once they receive more than $600 dollars, but besides that there are not many guidelines or regulations for NIL athletes.
There is also no national database or centralized place to store and track NIL data. This is important because a centralized information source would help non-NIL athletes learn more about potential opportunities. A lack of data also means we are not tracking the identities of the athletes who are getting NIL deals. This means we don’t have insight into the demographics of NIL athletes, like their division, school, gender, age, and race. Without data on who is getting these deals it is impossible to ensure that the system is equitable. With what little data tracking is available we already know of some flaws in the system like the disproportionate benefit to college football players and the gap between men and women athletes. Only three out of the ten highest paid collegiate athletes are women.
Recommendations
Some student athletes will have more access to power than others. That will never change. What we can strive for is to level the playing field as much as we can by working on the system as opposed to individuals. Equity is about changing systems, not hearts and minds.
Here are the suggestions I have to make NIL systems more fair:
Create a system to track NIL athlete demographic information. The first step towards equity is a comprehensive data tracking system so we can see trends over time. Demographic data will allow us to identify potential barriers to access. We can’t solve a problem if we don’t have the data to show what problems exist.
Market NIL opportunities to all athletes. The NCAA should create a database of national NIL deals that student athletes can access. This will give athletes a place to see what their options are. It will also allow them to track past and current deals.
Document and enforce regulations. As of August 2024, there are few NIL regulations that dictate what companies and athletes can and cannot do. The NCAA should consider standardizing policies and practices. For example, the NCAA could require all NIL athletes sign a contract that they will report their deals. The NCAA could also require athletes disclose basic demographic information (names aren’t needed) in order to receive funding.
Implement educational programs to teach athletes financial literacy. All athletes would benefit from learning how to invest, how to stay out of debt, and how to protect against fraud. Financial literacy evens the playing field because many athletes that are getting these deals aren’t used to having this amount of money. This education would help close the gap between athletes who come from varying backgrounds.
NIL rights have drastically changed the landscape of college sports in just 3 years. I personally think NIL rights positively benefit collegiate athletes. This move has been a long time coming, but NIL has a lot more work to do to ensure that all athletes can benefit from this change.
There are a ton of positives that come with this change, but as it is with most things in life, there is always opportunity to get better. With some data tracking, standardized rules, and a centralized system we can work towards an equitable system where every athlete across all divisions can benefit from NIL.
About the author
Kurby Brown is a rising junior studying global commerce at Denison University. He plans to graduate with a fluency in Spanish and the necessary tools to build a career in sports marketing. In addition to being a full-time student, he is also a defender/winger for the Denison men's soccer team. In his free time he plays basketball and spends time with friends. He is from Somerset, New Jersey and attended Berkshire school in Massachusetts.
