Will The NCAA allow for NIL advertising?

[FinnGopher]

I admittedly know very little about NIL collectives.
Can an NIL collective receive corporate sponsorship of athletes with the idea that they can add advertising to the jersey?
In other words, if General Mills wanted to add $3 million to the NIL collective with the agreement that its logo be placed on the jersey, would that be allowed by the NCAA?

I ask this because it seems that the way to grow an NIL collective in a city with a number of Fortune 500 companies is to get those corporations in the NIL by providing advertising in exchange.

Is this even possible?

 

[60's Guy]

I admittedly know very little about NIL collectives.
Can an NIL collective receive corporate sponsorship of athletes with the idea that they can add advertising to the jersey?
In other words, if General Mills wanted to add $3 million to the NIL collective with the agreement that its logo be placed on the jersey, would that be allowed by the NCAA?

I ask this because it seems that the way to grow an NIL collective in a city with a number of Fortune 500 companies is to get those corporations in the NIL by providing advertising in exchange.

Is this even possible?

Interesting for sure. Pro teams definitely do it. Nike, Under Armour etc display their logos.
You'd think it must be a rule?
Could all these programs just be asleep?
But, I don't believe I have seen it and I very much like your idea.
Different minefield, I guess...How about Fan Duel, betting sites and the like advertising? Legal or no by NCAA?
Googling research seems to suggest it is/was a gray area. Also suggesting it was a coming thing but the Google hits are from 2021. So, not sure why it stalled.

 

[2nd Degree Gopher]

I admittedly know very little about NIL collectives.
Can an NIL collective receive corporate sponsorship of athletes with the idea that they can add advertising to the jersey?
In other words, if General Mills wanted to add $3 million to the NIL collective with the agreement that its logo be placed on the jersey, would that be allowed by the NCAA?

I ask this because it seems that the way to grow an NIL collective in a city with a number of Fortune 500 companies is to get those corporations in the NIL by providing advertising in exchange.

Is this even possible?

Right now, this wouldn't work. Even if the on-jersey ads were allowable, that would be an agreement with the school, not the student athletes and that money would not flow to the SAs. General Mills could contract with the SAs directly (or through the collective), but there have been few instances where large national or international corporations put significant money into that type of advertising. But I would not be surprised if there is someday a framework in place where the schools, the SAs and the advertisers are allowed to work together so that the SAs can market themselves using the school's name, trademarks, etc. in relationships beneficial to all three entitles.

 

[short ornery norwegian]

Well, I would think that a company could sign an NIL deal with an athlete, and feature the athlete in a TV commercial that could run during a game.

"Company X is proud to support student-athletes like Joe Stud."

 

[60's Guy]

Right now, this wouldn't work. Even if the on-jersey ads were allowable, that would be an agreement with the school, not the student athletes and that money would not flow to the SAs. General Mills could contract with the SAs directly (or through the collective), but there have been few instances where large national or international corporations put significant money into that type of advertising. But I would not be surprised if there is someday a framework in place where the schools, the SAs and the advertisers are allowed to work together so that the SAs can market themselves using the school's name, trademarks, etc. in relationships beneficial to all three entitles.

I agree with how you broke it down. For me the solution is for the school's athletic department to broker the deal with the corporations. Put the money into a collective for all 85 scholarship players to receive monthly checks. Done
Now, line up another one and buy them all trucks.
Recruiting would improve.

 

[Ron Johnson Super Fan]

Right now, this wouldn't work. Even if the on-jersey ads were allowable, that would be an agreement with the school, not the student athletes and that money would not flow to the SAs. General Mills could contract with the SAs directly (or through the collective), but there have been few instances where large national or international corporations put significant money into that type of advertising. But I would not be surprised if there is someday a framework in place where the schools, the SAs and the advertisers are allowed to work together so that the SAs can market themselves using the school's name, trademarks, etc. in relationships beneficial to all three entitles.

Just have General Mills sign a sponsorship deal with the U for 10 bucks and then General Mills could “coincidentally” give $2,999,990 to the collective.

 

[CPTMidnight]

The teams and conferences are not going to give up their advertising revenue to 3rd parties or the players.

Where is it headed?

Where this is headed is sponsoring a player becomes a structured deal for a group of players (current stage), which then is superseded by team/school-wide deals and ultimately conference enforced deals. Ultimately it could look like each Bigten player gets an equal check but there are incentives built in for individual and team success (so the best player on the best team might get paid the most). The Bigten being involved protects the Bigten revenue stream and probably furthers the dominance of the league because they can probably pay the most.



I could see some battles down the road where these forward thinking conferences protect their interests by demanding the other conferences follow a similar structure or they refuse to play them. For example the BigTen could invalidate the results of a member team playing team like Miami which is throwing big dollars at buying a championship - go ahead and play them but the record books will show it as exhibition. Make a big deal out of it and we wont renew your contract.



At this stage the conferences may threaten the NCAA to just hold their own end of year tourney or there may be other independent tournaments rising up (a return to 100 years ago). Ultimately the legacy structure is breaking - the NCAA is losing its grip on power. A new structure is needed for the future. I am not sure exactly what it looks like.



The one thing I am sure of is that there is too much money at stake for the players to get away with it for too long. Eventually that money will find its way back to the Universities' and other power brokers that profit from college sports. It kinda parallels the populist movement in politics. The players have realized they hold all the power over the authority but the authority will eventually strike back by forcing compromise, scheming, dividing them into groups to keep them fighting each other, buying off individuals, and making examples out of troublemakers - in the end the governmental structure wins but hopefully the hard fought concessions stick around for a while with the players continuing to get a check along with their Scholarship.

 

[MplsGopher]

A company like GMills putting in $3M to the U -- for anything -- has to have a hefty ROI calculation involved. That's just corporate America. To get that kind of gift approved, it has to go through committees and be signed off by executive leadership.

"What are we getting for our money" will have several slidedecks reviewed by many eyeballs.


Point is: what you propose nets them relatively very little for the money. That kind of money would be "better" spent on things like: putting their name on a building, or just plain buying the advertising directly (say at the stadium during games, or on TV).


The truth about NIL is that there really isn't that much value in it for the donors. It's really just an over the table way (currently, with the lack of rules) to give a player a McD's bag full of cash.

And the only people who are actually interested in doing that, are the same guys who've been funding the bagmen in the past.

We don't have those people, at the U. At least right now.


The dream of the collectives is to say "yeah true, BUT if we can get a high percentage of regular joe fans to donate even $20, that can have the same effect".

Agree ... on paper. It's a nice idea. That I don't think moves the needle at most places, except those places that already are haves. The rich get richer.

 

[Wet_Blanket_Guy]

Interesting for sure. Pro teams definitely do it. Nike, Under Armour etc display their logos.
You'd think it must be a rule?
Could all these programs just be asleep?
But, I don't believe I have seen it and I very much like your idea.
Different minefield, I guess...How about Fan Duel, betting sites and the like advertising? Legal or no by NCAA?
Googling research seems to suggest it is/was a gray area. Also suggesting it was a coming thing but the Google hits are from 2021. So, not sure why it stalled.

The schools would be too greedy and use it as revenue for the athletic department.

It’s a great idea, but I doubt the schools would let all that money slip through their fingers.

 

[GopherBlood777]

The schools would be too greedy and use it as revenue for the athletic department.

It’s a great idea, but I doubt the schools would let all that money slip through their fingers.

Agreed, no way is the school is letting a player advertise on their uniform without taking a cut. I can't believe that would be allowed as schools would probably be arranging those deals as we speak.