- Florida lawmakers are at a standstill after three days of meetings about NIL deals.
- "NIL" lets collegiate athletes profit when their name, image or likeness is used to help a school or business make money.
- A federal court case involving the NCAA is raising alarms for some in the state.
- Listen to how much the settlement could cost Florida colleges.
BROADCAST TRANSCRIPT:
The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has a name, image, and likeness policy that went into effect in 2021 and was backed by the state legislature.
It allows college athletes to benefit from endorsement deals or sell merchandise on the web. The plan has recently been extended to high schoolers with a few limitations.
Mike Lofton, a football player at the University of South Florida, spoke on how NIL has changed his life at a recent Florida House workshop.
“I have a TikTok page. I like Cologne, I post that. A couple of years ago, I couldn’t do that," Lofton explained Tuesday to the Combined Workgroup on Collegiate Name, Image, and Likeness.
"I was not able to monetize. I was not able to use an affiliate link, or have people buy the cologne that I like, and get money off that. It’s huge. It’s also about branding myself."
Lawmakers held the 3-day workshop to address key issues surrounding NIL. They used the opportunity to learn more about the policy, and if anything can be done to improve it.
Miami-Dade Republican Representative Alex Rizo chaired the meeting.
“We will discuss the future of college athletics and a number of critical issues, such as legal rights of student athletes, legal responsibilities of our educational institutions, and the impact of those rights and responsibilities on the finances of our universities," said Rizo.
Among other things, the group of lawmakers discussed an ongoing legal battle between two former college athletes whose schools are members of the NCAA. The lawsuit, which is being taken up in federal court, is against the NCAA for allegedly not paying players.
The suing party hopes the NCAA will provide backpay to college athletes who came before NIL deals were introduced.
Sarasota’s Republican Representative Danny Nix responded to the allegations.
“I hate that we have lost the superiority of college football and its trickled down to an area I don’t think it should be, but we’re here and it’s not leaving us," Nix told the panel of lawmakers.
"But we got to remember before [NIL], kids were being paid and getting taken advantage of dramatically. It was just under the table.”
The NCAA could challenge the constitutionality of state laws that conflict with the House settlement. There's a legal playbook the NCAA could use and it's one the NCAA used successfully in the 1990s against the state of Nevada. I wrote about it this week: https://t.co/33AEToAVMp. https://t.co/zFpFM4iq9X
— Michael McCann (@McCannSportsLaw) February 26, 2025
Lawmakers said that the case should be settled next month. The settlement requires the NCAA to pay former and current college athletes nearly $3 billion for the next 10 years. And under the proposed settlement, schools with athletic programs, like USF and FSU, would need to share their revenue with their current athletes, starting out at $20 million.
“Waited on the NCAA, that was a bad decision. Then the courts took over, then eventually, the Legislature takes over," said St. Thomas University President David Armstrong.
Armstrong, like some lawmakers, had some concerns.
"We should not be here today talking about this," he added. "The university presidents should have solved this issue many years ago.”
Lawmakers in the House workgroup ultimately decided to table the discussion for later this year.
Rep. Rizo said it's best to keep the Legislature out of it until after the NIL settlement has passed. He anticipates having the discussion sometime in the Fall.
