NCAA Ready To Adapt To Changing Environment

It appears as though the NCAA will start adapting to a world where student-athletes can profit off their name, image and likeness.

On Tuesday, the working group tasked to look at NIL benefits and cons are expected to recommend some form of change. How much evolution the governing body of college sports is willing to go through is not yet known.

Nevertheless, it's likely to be an arduous process.

Recently, California passed a bill that will allow college athletes to profit off their name, image and likeness in 2023. Since SB 206 went through, despite the NCAA initially pushing back on its structures, implying doomsday scenarios lurk around the corner, several politicians in various states began to write similar bills.

Depending on the working group's findings, and then how the NCAA enacts their own bylaws, it could do away with individual legislature likely differing from one state to another.

In theory, whatever is presented by the working group to the NCAA at Emory University in Atlanta might take years before it's put in motion. That's not inherently a move made to impede progress, as even SB 206 has to wait a few years until its enacted.

"I don't expect a report saying that we're going to stay exactly like we are. I don't think we're going to get a status quo report," Atlantic 10 Conference Commissioner Bernadette McGlade said last week. She said she expected it to be the first of many steps, "certainly not a final report."

Assuming the working group does suggest an approach embracing NIL rights, it would be several steps removed from how some of its members talked about SB 206 over the last several months.

Gene Smith, a working group member, is on the record going against the bill, so far as claiming he would vote against NCAA schools outside California playing universities operating within it.

"I'm a single vote in that," Smith said, via USA Today. "My guess is our membership would say yes because one of our principles is fair play, and even in the working group that I'm on, we're focused on trying to make sure we deal with this in a fair-play way - as best as we can have a level playing field. We know it's unlevel in a lot of ways, but this could make it unbelievably unlevel.

"So, my position would be, yes, and actually I would really be interested in how the Pac-12 (Conference) will handle those schools who are not in California that are members of the Pac-12. And how those schools will compete against those schools in California who have an unfair advantage because they'll be able to offer student-athletes benefits that the other schools will not be able to offer. So, yeah, my position would be we walk."

It has to be made clear, though, this isn't a paid-to-play model. SB 206, and all other bills being drawn outside Kevin Parker's in Brooklyn, would directly cost schools zero dollars. A student-athlete being able to star in a local car dealership commercial doesn't come out of a university's budget, but that of the dealership.

There can be concerns about companies choosing the athletes over the universities; although, if schools begin to suggest that as a possible scenario, it would imply a world where the athlete has as much, if not more, value than the programs they play for. In turn, it would leave room for the slope to get slipperier, with ideas of a direct-pay model becoming a necessity.

Speaking to the Associated Press, McGlade made it clear this would benefit the NCAA's university members, as it's unrealistic to expect the governing body to operate on a state-by-state basis, but did emphasize how she doesn't see a direct pay model coming.

"And I don't think that it's possible to have state-by-state legislation or laws," she said. "But I also believe strongly in that the model should not move so far to the point that there is a 'pay-for-play, employee-employer relationship' with student athletes."

Until the briefing happens on Tuesday, however, much of this is conjecture. Moreover, just because the working group might suggest something, it doesn't necessarily mean the NCAA will adopt a brand new policy.

Still, at the time of this writing, the working group is expected to recommend to the NCAA it begins to accept NIL rights as a part of doing business in college sports.