For my Business Ethics class, I am starting an awareness campaign to highlight the lack of structure and accountability in the current NIL system. I am framing the issue around the consequences of NIL, rather than arguing against athlete compensation. Comments encouraged.
NIL has caused the number of transfers to increase yearly. In 2021, after the court decided the NCAA isn't exempt from antitrust regulations, the NCAA quickly adopted an interim NIL policy that allowed student-athletes to benefit financially from their name, image, and likeness.
For my Business Ethics class, I am starting an awareness campaign to highlight the lack of structure and accountability in the current NIL system. I am framing the issue around the consequences of NIL, rather than arguing against athlete compensation. Comments encouraged.
I feel as if NIL is pushing college athletics away from values such as loyalty, commitment, and long-term development, and moving more toward profit-driven decision making, which encourages schools, collectives, and athletes to prioritize money over integrity of college sports.
Student-athletes emphasize financial freedom and career opportunities as many athletes have short careers and deserve compensation. At the same time, they often overlook the negative effects NIL has roster stability, team chemistry, and smaller athletic programs.
The NCAA presents NIL as athlete empowerment, modernization, and fair compensation. However, they often avoid the lack of regulation and the growing competitive imbalance across the college athletics landscape.
While mid-majors struggle, power conference schools are dominant stakeholders because their financial resources and NIL collectives allow them to shape recruiting and market trends.
Cont: Athletes are directly impacted by NIL opportunities, while the NCAA controls regulations and faces pressure to reform the system. Mid-majors are dependent stakeholders as they are heavily effected by NIL but lack the financial resources to compete with larger programs.
Using the Stakeholder Salience Model, I identified four major stakeholders affected by NIL: Student-athletes, the NCAA, Mid-Majors, and power conference schools. Student-athletes and the NCAA being definitive because they possess power, legitimacy, and urgency within the issue.
The lack of accountability has contributed to situations like the Rashada case, where promised compensation allegedly failed to materialize. My campaign will hold the NCAA accountable for failing to establish a consistent framework that protects all stakeholders involved.
Corporate governance is central to my campaign. Governance requires accountability, transparency, oversight, and risk management, which I feel the NIL system lacks due to no consistent oversight structure to regulate collectives, enforce agreements, or ensure transparency.
To start, let me explain NIL. NIL stands for Name, Image, and Likeness, which refers to the rights of college athletes to monetize their personal brand while still maintaining their amateur status, and earn money through endorsement deals, social media, and personal businesses.
@Bralen2020@cb1212121212@CountryMichSt With an off season to focus on it, with the freshmen we’re bring in who are great shooters, especially Jervis who is an incredible shot creator, having our best shooter, percentage wise, back from a season ending injury, I’m confident this team will be better than last years.