LOS ANGELES _ Only weeks after the NCAA called California's Senate Bill 206 "unconstitutional" and an "existential threat," the NCAA Board of Governors voted unanimously Tuesday to permit college athletes to benefit from the use of their name, image and likeness "in a manner consistent with the collegiate model."
On the surface, that is a major turnabout by the NCAA. But if name, image and likeness rights are granted to players in a way that falls in line with how things have always been done _ with artificially set limits for compensation and regulation _ then the organization's attempt at national-level reform will not meet the free-market standards set in California's Fair Pay to Play Act, signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom in late September.
"We must embrace change to provide the best possible experience for college athletes," said Ohio State President Michael V. Drake, the chair of the NCAA Board of Governors. "Additional flexibility in this area can and must continue to support college sports as a part of higher education. This modernization for the future is a natural extension of the numerous steps NCAA members have taken in recent years to improve support for student-athletes, including full cost of attendance and guaranteed scholarships."
In its news release, the NCAA laid out principles that its working committee on the name, image and likeness issue recommended, which will guide the philosophy behind any rule changes to come.
Among them:
_ "Assure student-athletes are treated similarly to non-athlete students unless a compelling reason exists to differentiate."
_ "Ensure rules are transparent, focused and enforceable and facilitate fair and balanced competition."
_ "Make clear the distinction between collegiate and professional opportunities."
_ "Make clear that compensation for athletics performance or participation is impermissible."
_ "Reaffirm that student-athletes are students first and not employees of the university."
_ "Protect the recruiting environment and prohibit inducements to select, remain at, or transfer to a specific institution."
With those principles in place, could any change the NCAA embraces be meaningful to the college athletes in football and men's basketball who help to bring in hundreds of millions of dollars each year?
California's law, which has spurred similar bills to be put forth, does not set any limits on what an athlete can receive from use of his name, image and likeness. Will Newsom and state legislators be open to compromise with the NCAA based on what it said Tuesday? Or will the NCAA have to go further in the future?
The NCAA said that its working committee on name, image and likeness use will "continue to gather feedback through April on how to best respond to the state and federal legislative environment and to refine its recommendations on the principles and regulatory framework. The board asked each division to create any new rules beginning immediately, but no later than January 2021."
SB 206, as it currently stands, would not go into effect until January 2023.
