NIL at 1: Many questions remain for players, schools

The arrival of NIL “has opened the floodgates with players seeking to address several issues,” but it is also bringing “further questions about the long-term relationship between players and their schools,” according to Jeyarajah & Dodd of CBSSPORTS.com. Athletes “could benefit massively” from becoming employees as that status comes with numerous legal protections. It “would clear the way for players to form unions and collectively bargain.” That could “lead to revenue sharing, along with overtime pay and regulations covering their health and safety.” But leading officials across the sport “are reluctant to buy into the concept of athletes being defined as employees.” Pac-12 Commissioner George Kliavkoff called the idea an “existential threat to college athletics.” Conversely, players being contracted as employees “could create advantages in the realms of player movement and compensatory benefits.” Schools “could offer guaranteed contracts with buyouts or option deals.” They could also require athletes “to stay in college for a set period.” These are all “common features of professional sports contracts.” Jeyarajah & Dodd writes “of course, unintended consequences are sure to pop up as massive public educational institutions must start asking complicated questions about compensation”