Name. Image. Likeness.

Some of you cringe when you hear those words. Others feel they help rectify a longstanding unfairness.

They have changed college sports to the point that it’s probably no longer accurate to call college sports “amateur.” But it’s not just college athletics that are being impacted.

As of this writing, 45 states have passed laws regulating NIL deals. 17 states (including Texas, Florida, California & New York) are considered “full permission states,” allowing athletes to fully capitalize on their name, image, and likeness while maintaining eligibility.

Ready or not, NIL is coming to high school sports. Which begs the question - is that a good thing or a bad thing?

High School NIL - Athlete Empowerment Or Athlete Entitlement?

Here’s a brief summary of some of the arguments on both sides of this issue:

Pro NIL 

• Free market economics - no one is forcing anyone to pay student-athletes. They are being paid because someone else believes they will bring value to their business.

  That’s the way the market works. This is a voluntary transaction on both sides.

• A lot of athletes are unable to work & earn wages - many high students work in addition to going to school. For athletes, this is much harder.

  Almost all high school sports expect a year round commitment. This prevents many student-athletes from being able to hold a job. NIL can help those student-athletes who want to work but can’t due to their athletic responsibilities.

• It’s not going to change the game - many believe that NIL will have a small impact at the high school level. Very few athletes have the name recognition that warrants being paid.

  In other words, the concern is much ado about nothing. 

Anti NIL

• NIL will ruin the amateur part of high school sports - high school sports exist for a number of reasons - competing with your friends, learning life skills through sports, developing physical fitness, etc. Making money is not one of them.

  If high school athletes start to focus on earning money, those other reasons will be minimized, lessening the positive impact of high school athletics.

• It will make HS sports less competitive - schools with more resources will benefit more from allowing NIL. Those schools are more likely to have boosters or alums with the financial means to pay high school athletes.

  This will make high school sports “the have’s v the have not’s,” harming schools who already are at a disadvantage.

• It will make high school sports more about ME than WE - NIL money will go to the athletes with the most name recognition. This will incentivize young athletes to focus on themselves, even at the expense of the team.

So, what do you say?

I’ve thought quite a bit about this recently and am not sure where I stand. I’d love to hear from some of you!

Please reply to this email with your thoughts - should high school sports embrace NIL or steer clear?

Comments Most Likes First   Oldest First   Newest First

Leave a Comment Name : Email (not published) : Thirteen plus five is equal to?  (Prevents Spam) Answer :  Load New Question Comments : Leave this Blank :