If athletes are entitled to compensation for NIL usage, wouldn’t it make sense for schools to receive a portion of what they earn?
With the relatively recent introduction of NIL to college sports, nobody is talking about whether student-athletes are entitled to a portion of their NIL earnings.
After all, it’s difficult to argue that a university’s brand does not contribute to the name, image, or likeness of the athletes that attend them. Universities provide a platform for athletes to showcase their skills, and that unique opportunity is not replicable elsewhere. So, why have schools not demanded a share of their student-athletes’ NIL earnings?
Here are two reasons why. In a way, they are already profiting from their athletes’ names, images, and likenesses because without them playing, there wouldn’t be a product to put on the field or court. Besides, think of the backlash that schools would receive from the public if they took a share of what student-athletes earn from NIL,
So, in essence, while schools may be theoretically entitled to a share of their athletes’ NIL earnings, there are good reasons why they do not.
