NIL update: Georgia’s HB 617

As I mentioned in the podcast referenced in my previous post, this state’s NIL bill has passed the Legislature and awaits the governor’s signature.  But I think I need to amend/clarify part of what I said.  The bill, which is scheduled to go into effect on July 1st, went through a number of amendments, one of which provided that NIL compensation could not be paid directly to a player immediately, but, instead, would be placed in escrow until that player had been away from the school for a minimum of a year.  I believe I mentioned that in a previous post, and raised a concern that it might be weaponized against Kirby on the recruiting trail by coaches at programs that did not have similar restrictions on receipt of payment.

Somebody must have had the proverbial light bulb go off, because that’s no longer how the bill reads.  Here’s the pertinent part:

(B) Team contracts may provide for a pooling arrangement whereby student athletes who receive compensation for the use of their name, image, or likeness pursuant to this article agree to contribute a portion of the compensation they receive pursuant to such contract to a fund for the benefit of individuals previously enrolled as student athletes in the same postsecondary educational institution as such student athlete, provided that such pooling arrangement meets the following conditions:

(i) Student athletes shall not be required to contribute an amount equal to more than 75 percent of the compensation received for the use of their name, image, or likeness pursuant to this article;

(ii) Each postsecondary educational institution shall establish only for the purposes of this paragraph an escrow account in any bank or lending institution subject to regulation by this state only;

(iii) All contributions from student athletes who receive compensation for the use of their name, image, or likeness pursuant to this article shall be deposited in such escrow account by the athletic director of the postsecondary educational institution,or his or her designee;

(iv) Upon graduation or withdrawal for at least 12 months from the postsecondary educational institution, individuals who were student athletes prior to such graduation or withdrawal, shall be eligible to receive a pro rata share of the pooled contributions based on the number of months the individual was a student athlete; and

(v) The postsecondary educational institution shall provide for the implementation of the provisions of this paragraph in a manner that does not discriminate against or treat differently individuals based upon race, gender, or other personal status protected by federal or state law.

The arrangement is now voluntary, at the choice of the school.  In other words, it’s up to a school to determine if it wants to impose such a restriction, rather than it being automatically imposed by statute.  Before you dismiss that, remember this is the Georgia Way we’re talking about.  (If Richt were still head coach, I suspect they would have stuck him with that in the blink of an eye; presumably Kirbs ain’t playing that game.)

Note, also, the arrangement that the school can elect to impose on a student-athlete doesn’t just postpone payment.  It redistributes up to three-quarters of the money received for an individual’s NIL into a general fund to benefit that student-athlete’s contemporaries.  That thousand dollars a kid gets to meet and greet at a car dealership could get whittled down considerably.  You may think that’s noble — presumably the General Assembly does — but, again, I doubt that sits well on the recruiting trail.

The other interesting feature of that is contained in the very last subsection.  By a school inserting itself into the payment arrangement as the legislation contemplates, there seems to be a concern that things like Title IX might come into play.  If that’s the case, it’s an effective way to make a compromised situation worse.

Advertisement