NIL a no-go for Ohio high school student-athletes

Administrators in Ohio voted – in a 538-254 margin – against allowing student-athletes to be involved in NIL activities and still maintain their high school eligibility.

Ohio High School Athletic Association member principals spent the last two weeks voting on the Name, Image and Likeness referendum. Schools had until 4 p.m. Monday to cast their votes. A simple majority would have made the NIL referendum a bylaw of the OHSAA. It would have become effective on Aug. 1.

“If NIL is going to enter the Ohio interscholastic landscape, we want the schools to be the ones to make that determination,” OHSAA Executive Director Doug Ute said in a statement. “Whatever we do moving forward, it will include discussion on this issue with our school administrators, Board of Directors, staff and leaders of other state high school athletic associations.”

The proposal would have allowed Ohio high school student-athletes to be involved in NIL activities as long as their teams, schools, and/or the OHSAA logos are not used. The proposition also would have banned endorsements from companies that do not support the mission of education-based athletics. This included groups involved with casinos, gambling, alcohol, drugs, and tobacco.

Dr. Scott Grant, president of Triple Threat Leadership and NIL-Education.com, said in a social media post timing and confusion aided in the referendum not passing. He also pointed to questions about enforcement.

“Once the question of ‘who is enforcing this’ turned into a conversation about school’s having to self-report, I think the concern grew further,” Grant said. “High School athletic directors and administrators have so many things going on that they deal with regularly. If you’ve never been one, it’s truly hard to even fathom. Adding something as big as this, without proper time and support, would have been extremely tough.”

Ohio decision adds to murky NIL situation

The National Federation of State High School Associations doesn’t track state associations that allow NIL. However, state high school athletic associations across the country have been having frank discussions about NIL.

“States are in catch-up mode,” Geoff Kimmerly, communications director with the Michigan High School Athletic Association, told Stateline. “It’s a very fast-moving process right now.”

In early April, the Louisiana High School Athletic Association joined a handful of other high school athletic associations – Alaska, California, Kansas, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York and Utah – that allow their student-athletes to participate in NIL without jeopardizing their eligibility.

The Pennsylvania Interscholastic Athletic Association recently said it’s ready to discuss NIL. It will make it a priority this summer. Other state associations, such as Oregon, Idaho, Nevada, North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Delaware and Massachusetts, are also discussing revisions to NIL rules. But in most of those states considering new high school referendums, NIL is currently against the rules.

There are currently 17 states that have laws providing student-athletes with the right to profit from their NIL. In addition, 16 states are considering new NIL legislation. But most high school associations – including major states like Texas, Florida and Georgia – prohibit student-athletes from participating in NIL. There are also 26 states that currently prohibit NIL altogether – at least at this point.

NIL has become a hot-button issue at the college level. The NCAA adopted a NIL policy on July 1, 2021, for all incoming and current student-athletes in all sports. Last week, the NCAA I Division I Board of Directors issued guidance aimed at limiting the impact of boosters who are using NIL ventures to lure top high-school recruits and target players in the transfer portal. Experts said the NCAA’s guidance did nothing to clear up the situation.

Will Ohio’s decision impact others?

It will be interesting to see if the decision in Ohio impacts other state associations. Before Tuesday’s news, there seemed to be a lot of momentum for NIL to become more acceptable at the high school level.

“There seems to be a split on the high school NIL issue,” said Dan Greene, a NIL expert and associate attorney at Newman & Lickstein in Syracuse, N.Y. “While some states want to be proactive, others think it’s too early to permit NIL at the high school level. Some see this as an opportunity for kids to help their families, and others are more fearful about the impact this could have on recruiting.

“While athletic associations in states like Louisiana and Colorado have recently passed revisions to their bylaws permitting high school NIL, Ohio is not the first state to push back on this issue. The Arizona Interscholastic Association added emergency legislation to its bylaws prohibiting NIL at the high school level a few months ago. We’ve even seen this divide at the state legislative level. A bill that now appears to have died in committee was introduced in Maryland permitting high school NIL, but there was also a bill prohibiting high school NIL in Virginia that was actually passed by the General Assembly but then vetoed by the Governor. Many states are probably going to monitor what happens in the states that currently permit these actions and then go from there. It will be interesting to see if Ohio’s rejection impacts the decisions of any other states, especially Pennsylvania, where the issue is scheduled to be discussed this summer.”

States with rules against it could be in jeopardy of losing stars to states where it’s not forbidden. One lawyer involved with contracts told On3 he expects an influx of transfers to states like California and Utah where it’s acceptable.