Latest news with #Power5
Yahoo
17-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
What is ‘true' name, image and likeness in college sports? The courts might end up deciding
Four years ago, the century-old model for college sports was turned on its head. College athletes began earning name, image and likeness money in 2021. It didn't take long for boosters to exploit a loophole and weaponize NIL deals as a means to entice recruits and transfers. NIL collectives sprang up to manage the competitive field. Schools initially shunned them, but soon realized they had no choice but to embrace them. As of last week, those same schools are now at war with those collectives. Empowered by the game-changing House settlement, schools are mounting a grand last stand to declare once and for all that collectives can't claim pay-for-play is a valid business. An entire industry's business model — itself only a few years old — is now at stake, not to mention hundreds of millions in contracted payouts to athletes. The House settlement resolved a five-year-old antitrust dispute between former athletes denied the opportunity to earn NIL money against the NCAA and Power 5 conferences. In agreeing to allow schools to directly pay their athletes up to $20.5 million a year, the defendants gained the authority to implement a new enforcement arm with the authority to approve or deny NIL deals from outside parties. Last Thursday, that newly formed entity, the College Sports Commission, issued guidance regarding the NIL Go clearinghouse, which must approve any outside NIL transaction of more than $600. It's been well known for more than a year that the clearinghouse would determine whether a collective's payment to an athlete for, say, an autograph signing, fell within an approved 'range of compensation.' But this language went beyond that. It declared that collectives themselves do not meet a 'valid business purpose,' and thus can expect their deals for athletes to appear at a golf tournament or promote their merchandise will not be approved. 'Collectives in the form they've been going for the last three years, paying athletes directly with donor contributions, is going to be a thing of the past,' said Utah athletic director Mark Harlan. ''True' NIL is still being allowed, but just like in pro sports, where there is a hard (salary) cap.' 'All of their (athletes') deals are getting shut down by NIL Go,' said a leader in the collective space. 'Even deals of $5,000 or less.' Administrators like Harlan see the House settlement as an opportunity to wrest back control from the boosters and agents that have increasingly dictated the state of their rosters. That's why the Power 5 conferences (before the Pac-12 was gutted) created CSC and NIL Go. Some schools have already either shut down their collective (Georgia, Colorado) or folded it into the athletic department (Ohio State, Texas Tech). But the collectives still standing don't share Harlan's outlook. The head of a Big 12 collective said he convinced his school's athletic director they should keep operating their collective independently. 'Circumventing the cap is not going away,' he said. Collectives have been bracing for NIL Go for some time — many paid their athletes' 2025-26 contracts up front before July 1 to avoid the clearinghouse. According to Opendorse, a platform that processes NIL transactions for much of the industry, collectives' June payments were up 824 percent from the year before. Even so, some did not take kindly to the CSC's blanket decree invalidating their businesses. 'They said the quiet part out loud: We hate collectives and pay-for-play, and our sole purpose is to restrict that money and regain control,' said the head of a major program's collective. 'Now they have provided direct evidence for the lawsuits that will start flying.' In fact, it took less than 24 hours for the CSC's memo to raise the ire of some lawyers. Jeffrey Kessler, the lead plaintiffs' attorney in the House settlement, wrote a letter to CSC and the NCAA demanding they retract that guidance, saying it violated the terms of the settlement. If not, he said, they will seek relief from the court-appointed Magistrate overseeing the settlement. 'There is nothing in the Settlement Agreement to permit Defendants or the CSC … to decide that it would not be a valid business purpose for a school's collective to engage in for-profit promotions of goods or services using paid-for student-athlete NIL,' they wrote. 'The CSC's position that prohibiting collectives from paying athletes for doing nothing more than promoting the collective could be seen as consistent with the goals of the settlement,' said Gabe Feldman, director of the Tulane Sports Law program. 'But it could also be seen as unnecessarily restricting the rights of college athletes (and collectives).' A person briefed on the discussions said the attorneys had been made aware of the language before it went public and did not object at the time. 'They're just trying to advocate for their clients,' the person said. The dispute over what constitutes a 'valid business purpose' boils down to one central question. Between the two sides speaks to a broader question that hovers over the entire industry right now: What exactly is, as Harlan calls it, 'true NIL?' In commissioners' and athletic directors' eyes, it's cut-and-dried: Traditional athlete endorsement deals. Caitlin Clark in a State Farm ad. Quinn Ewers in a Dr. Pepper spot. Hundreds of athletes further down the ladder showing off their favorite brand's energy drink or workout gear on TikTok. 'It's what we've always hoped with NIL, that it wasn't going to be promised to a kid to come play for a school,' said Harlan. But that's exactly what it became. Schools were prevented by NCAA rules from making their own deals, and boosters saw an opening and began pooling their money to license potential athletes' NIL rights. Eventually, they were doing so for entire rosters. According to Opendorse, collectives accounted for nearly 82 percent of an estimated $1.675 billion college NIL market in 2024-25 — an enormous pot that athletes will no longer receive if collectives' deals are invalidated. Revenue-sharing may replace those dollars for some athletes, but certainly not all, including few women's athletes. Most schools are allocating as much as 90 percent of their $20.5 million to football and men's basketball. 'There are only a small amount of athletes that have real market value to command real commercial dollars,' said a second collective head. 'The vast majority are hurt by (the CSC) guidance. That will not play well in the court of law or the court of public opinion. Especially once these athletes start complaining about their deals being denied even though they were 'promised' that compensation.' But those 'promises' are exactly what the CSC is attempting to stamp out. NCAA enforcement made a short-lived attempt at the dawn of NIL to weed out booster involvement in recruiting, notably targeting Tennessee for its collective's eight-figure deal to quarterback Nico Iamaleava in 2022. But in early 2024, that state's attorney general filed an antitrust suit against the NCAA and successfully secured a preliminary injunction that explicitly allowed athletes to negotiate NIL deals with boosters and collectives. The parties reached a settlement a year later, making that policy permanent. The CSC represents the conferences, not the NCAA. And its policy does not say those parties can't negotiate with each other. They are, however, being told preemptively that the deals they're negotiating will not be approved. Which sounds to some like the next legal mess. This article originally appeared in The Athletic. College Football, Men's College Basketball, Sports Business, Women's College Basketball, College Sports 2025 The Athletic Media Company
New York Times
17-07-2025
- Business
- New York Times
What is ‘true' name, image and likeness in college sports? The courts might end up deciding
Four years ago, the century-old model for college sports was turned on its head. College athletes began earning name, image and likeness money in 2021. It didn't take long for boosters to exploit a loophole and weaponize NIL deals as a means to entice recruits and transfers. NIL collectives sprang up to manage the competitive field. Schools initially shunned them, but soon realized they had no choice but to embrace them. Advertisement As of last week, those same schools are now at war with those collectives. Empowered by the game-changing House settlement, schools are mounting a grand last stand to declare once and for all that collectives can't claim pay-for-play is a valid business. An entire industry's business model — itself only a few years old — is now at stake, not to mention hundreds of millions in contracted payouts to athletes. The House settlement resolved a five-year-old antitrust dispute between former athletes denied the opportunity to earn NIL money against the NCAA and Power 5 conferences. In agreeing to allow schools to directly pay their athletes up to $20.5 million a year, the defendants gained the authority to implement a new enforcement arm with the authority to approve or deny NIL deals from outside parties. Today the College Sports Commission issued additional guidance to schools about the definition of 'valid business purpose' and the importance of sharing information about entities involved in third-party NIL deals. More information is available here: — College Sports Commission (@theCSCommission) July 10, 2025 Last Thursday, that newly formed entity, the College Sports Commission, issued guidance regarding the NIL Go clearinghouse, which must approve any outside NIL transaction of more than $600. It's been well known for more than a year that the clearinghouse would determine whether a collective's payment to an athlete for, say, an autograph signing, fell within an approved 'range of compensation.' But this language went beyond that. It declared that collectives themselves do not meet a 'valid business purpose,' and thus can expect their deals for athletes to appear at a golf tournament or promote their merchandise will not be approved. 'Collectives in the form they've been going for the last three years, paying athletes directly with donor contributions, is going to be a thing of the past,' said Utah athletic director Mark Harlan. ''True' NIL is still being allowed, but just like in pro sports, where there is a hard (salary) cap.' Maybe this is just me, but has this group been under a rock? Makes me appreciate the team at the Crimson Collective who knew that after the settlement agreement, the game charged. True NIL….not that hard — Mark Harlan (@MarkHarlan_AD) July 10, 2025 'All of their (athletes') deals are getting shut down by NIL Go,' said a leader in the collective space. 'Even deals of $5,000 or less.' Administrators like Harlan see the House settlement as an opportunity to wrest back control from the boosters and agents that have increasingly dictated the state of their rosters. That's why the Power 5 conferences (before the Pac-12 was gutted) created CSC and NIL Go. Some schools have already either shut down their collective (Georgia, Colorado) or folded it into the athletic department (Ohio State, Texas Tech). Advertisement But the collectives still standing don't share Harlan's outlook. The head of a Big 12 collective said he convinced his school's athletic director they should keep operating their collective independently. 'Circumventing the cap is not going away,' he said. Collectives have been bracing for NIL Go for some time — many paid their athletes' 2025-26 contracts up front before July 1 to avoid the clearinghouse. According to Opendorse, a platform that processes NIL transactions for much of the industry, collectives' June payments were up 824 percent from the year before. Even so, some did not take kindly to the CSC's blanket decree invalidating their businesses. 'They said the quiet part out loud: We hate collectives and pay-for-play, and our sole purpose is to restrict that money and regain control,' said the head of a major program's collective. 'Now they have provided direct evidence for the lawsuits that will start flying.' In fact, it took less than 24 hours for the CSC's memo to raise the ire of some lawyers. Jeffrey Kessler, the lead plaintiffs' attorney in the House settlement, wrote a letter to CSC and the NCAA demanding they retract that guidance, saying it violated the terms of the settlement. If not, he said, they will seek relief from the court-appointed Magistrate overseeing the settlement. 'There is nothing in the Settlement Agreement to permit Defendants or the CSC … to decide that it would not be a valid business purpose for a school's collective to engage in for-profit promotions of goods or services using paid-for student-athlete NIL,' they wrote. 'The CSC's position that prohibiting collectives from paying athletes for doing nothing more than promoting the collective could be seen as consistent with the goals of the settlement,' said Gabe Feldman, director of the Tulane Sports Law program. 'But it could also be seen as unnecessarily restricting the rights of college athletes (and collectives).' A person briefed on the discussions said the attorneys had been made aware of the language before it went public and did not object at the time. 'They're just trying to advocate for their clients,' the person said. The dispute over what constitutes a 'valid business purpose' boils down to one central question. Between the two sides speaks to a broader question that hovers over the entire industry right now: What exactly is, as Harlan calls it, 'true NIL?' In commissioners' and athletic directors' eyes, it's cut-and-dried: Traditional athlete endorsement deals. Caitlin Clark in a State Farm ad. Quinn Ewers in a Dr. Pepper spot. Hundreds of athletes further down the ladder showing off their favorite brand's energy drink or workout gear on TikTok. Advertisement 'It's what we've always hoped with NIL, that it wasn't going to be promised to a kid to come play for a school,' said Harlan. But that's exactly what it became. Schools were prevented by NCAA rules from making their own deals, and boosters saw an opening and began pooling their money to license potential athletes' NIL rights. Eventually, they were doing so for entire rosters. According to Opendorse, collectives accounted for nearly 82 percent of an estimated $1.675 billion college NIL market in 2024-25 — an enormous pot that athletes will no longer receive if collectives' deals are invalidated. Revenue-sharing may replace those dollars for some athletes, but certainly not all, including few women's athletes. Most schools are allocating as much as 90 percent of their $20.5 million to football and men's basketball. 'There are only a small amount of athletes that have real market value to command real commercial dollars,' said a second collective head. 'The vast majority are hurt by (the CSC) guidance. That will not play well in the court of law or the court of public opinion. Especially once these athletes start complaining about their deals being denied even though they were 'promised' that compensation.' But those 'promises' are exactly what the CSC is attempting to stamp out. NCAA enforcement made a short-lived attempt at the dawn of NIL to weed out booster involvement in recruiting, notably targeting Tennessee for its collective's eight-figure deal to quarterback Nico Iamaleava in 2022. But in early 2024, that state's attorney general filed an antitrust suit against the NCAA and successfully secured a preliminary injunction that explicitly allowed athletes to negotiate NIL deals with boosters and collectives. The parties reached a settlement a year later, making that policy permanent. Advertisement The CSC represents the conferences, not the NCAA. And its policy does not say those parties can't negotiate with each other. They are, however, being told preemptively that the deals they're negotiating will not be approved. Which sounds to some like the next legal mess.
USA Today
22-05-2025
- Sport
- USA Today
Texas A&M HC Mike Elko is 'excited' about his starting QB's development this offseason
Texas A&M HC Mike Elko is 'excited' about his starting QB's development this offseason The 2025 college football offseason has entered it's "talk'n" phase when every Power 5 head coach begins to preview their rosters, including Texas A&M coach Mike Elko, who spoke to during Wednesday's Brazos Country Coach's Night. Ranging from senior running back Le'Veon Moss's health, improvement on defense, and starting quarterback Marcel Reed's progress this spring. While Elko's confirmation that Moss is set to be 100% healthy during fall camp after fully recovering from his season-ending knee injury was the breaking news on the night, the second-year head coach was more than positve while discussing Marcel Reed's progression as a pocket passer, fully expecting the redshirt sophomore to take the next step in his development during his first full season as the starting signal caller. "Marcel Reed's development is what I'm most excited about. His development as a leader and in the passing game is important. He was a great player last year, but you'll see a significantly better version of him this fall." A "better version" of Marcel Reed is a complete quarterback who can make the tough passes when needed, especially if the run game isn't working. Last season, after Le'Veon Moss went down, the offense relied on Reed's arm, and while he showed flashes in the 4 OT loss to Auburn, throwing for three touchdowns and nearly 300 yards, his poor performance against the Texas Longhorns resulted in lost confidence among the national media, and some of the Aggie fanbase. Still, while Reed's elite running skills will continue to be utilized in OC Collin Klein's scheme, the first two games of the season against UTSA and Utah State need to pose as tune-up games for Reed to gain comfortability in the pocket before the Aggies hit the road to face Notre Dame in Week 3. Contact/Follow us @AggiesWire on X (formerly Twitter) and like our page on Facebook to follow ongoing coverage of Texas A&M news, notes and opinions. Follow Cameron on X: @CameronOhnysty.
USA Today
20-04-2025
- Sport
- USA Today
Texas A&M flips 2026 four-star cornerback from Illinois out of Ohio
Texas A&M flips 2026 four-star cornerback from Illinois out of Ohio Texas A&M's 2025 spring game also serves as another opportunity for coach Mike Elko and his staff to host as many 2026 and 2027 prospects in College Station this weekend. The Aggies have picked up another commit for the second time today, flipping a 2026 four-star cornerback out of Toledo, Ohio. Following the spring game, it was announced that 2026 four-star Illinois commit Victor Singleton has flipped to Texas A&M. He makes the 11th commit of the 2026 class and the first cornerback. This is a big pick-up for the Aggies, who will need depth in the corner position with several upperclassmen on the roster. Before initially committing to Illinois, Singleton picked up nearly 30 scholarship offers from several Power 5 schools that showed interest. On top of being one of the top-rated cornerbacks in the country, he was added to the 2026 Polynesian Bowl roster. His junior season ended with a runner-up finish in the state championship along with 30 tackles, five tackles for loss, and four interceptions. A top-100 recruit, Singleton is currently ranked as the 57th-ranked prospect in the 2026 class, the 5th-ranked CB, and the No.1 prospect in Ohio by 247Sports. Contact/Follow us @AggiesWire on X and like our page on Facebook to follow ongoing coverage of Texas A&M news, notes, and opinions. Follow Jarrett Johnson on X: @whosnextsports1.
USA Today
09-04-2025
- Sport
- USA Today
Iowa basketball lures former Texas Tech assistant coach to staff
Iowa basketball lures former Texas Tech assistant coach to staff Ben McCollum has added a fourth assistant to his first Iowa basketball coaching staff. McCollum is adding former Texas Tech assistant coach Luke Barnwell to his staff at Iowa. Barnwell spent each of the past two seasons with the Red Raiders where he helped lead Texas Tech to consecutive NCAA Tournaments, including a trip to this year's Elite Eight. Along the way, Texas Tech ended Drake and McCollum's NCAA Tournament run with a 77-64 victory in the round of 32. 'I have known Luke for a number of years,' McCollum said of Barnwell. 'He is an elite recruiter, excellent coach and has had a ton of success at the prep level. He also has a lot of experience at the Power 5 level with one of the top coaches in the country in Grant McCasland. We're excited to have Luke join our program.' Prior to arriving in Lubbock, Texas, Barnwell spent 10 seasons as head coach at Sunrise Christian Academy in Wichita, Kan. During his stint at Sunrise, Barnwell was recognized as the 2021 and 2022 Naismith High School Boys Coach of the Year and led the team to the 2022 National Interscholastic Basketball Conference Championships. "I am incredibly blessed to be a part of the University of Iowa and coach McCollum's staff. My family and I look forward to being back in the Midwest to work for this university, community and program," Barnwell said of joining Iowa. Barnwell helped with the development of Big 12 Player of the Year and second-team All-American JT Toppin. The forward averaged 18.2 points and 9.4 rebounds per game this past season. Texas Tech forward Darrion Williams earned All-Big 12 first team honors and Red Raider guard Chance McMillian garnered All-Big 12 second-team recognition under Barnwell's direction. Barnwell also coached NBA players Kennedy Chandler, Kendall Brown, Gradey Dick and Ochai Agbaji and helped train Buddy Hield and Ron Baker. A native of Emporia, Kan., Barnwell played college basketball at Newman University and Emporia State before beginning his coaching career as a student assistant. Contact/Follow us @HawkeyesWire on X (formerly Twitter) and like our page on Facebook to follow ongoing coverage of Iowa news, notes and opinions. Follow Josh on X: @JoshOnREF
