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.



Filed under Georgia Football, Political Wankery

21 responses to “NIL update: Georgia’s HB 617

  1. Granthams Replacement

    Pandora’s box. More shit will continue to come out……

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Dylan Dreyer's Booty

    Aw crap. Leave it to our legislature to take a fairly simple idea and completely muck it up.

    Liked by 4 people

  3. NotMyCrossToBear

    FFS, just give them the damn money.

    Liked by 4 people

  4. “Previously enrolled…”?? As in ever? A woman tennis player from 1967 gets a cut of today’s money? I can’t be reading that correctly. Even if applied only to those enrolled as of the date of enactment of the bill or applied to those enrolled in the same class year, what is the Lege trying to accomplish by letting an AD decide that NIL money earned by the QB should be distributed in part to all other SA’s? Why exclude non-SA’s under whatever logic this is trying to address?

    I can’t be reading this right. If I am, the best I can come up with is a most awkward way of allowing the AD to control the NIL money in some weird way. Those who think players will waste the money, wait until some small college AD absconds with this account.


    • Gaskilldawg

      The was no women’s tennis team at UGA in 1967 but I get your point. For some reason the legislature seems to want to limit what athlete can get.
      All of the athletes potentially getting”influencer” money I have read about are women. A woman tennis player or golfer trying to decide between UGA and UF may be concerned that a product may get her $50, 000 and at UF she gets it all and at UGA she get $12,500.00.

      Liked by 3 people

  5. What is the reason for the need for the escrow account? It just feels like this is a poison pill. I’m guessing there is no way our collective group of coaches are going to go into recruiting with one arm tied behind our backs (then again, we did it for the last 8 years of the Richt era).


  6. classiccitycanine

    I’m guessing (hoping) Kirby will put the kibosh on any attempt to implement this voluntary escrow BS. Just let them have their money. It’ll save UGA headaches and be more fair to the athlete.

    Liked by 2 people

    • tiredofidsearch

      And keep us level with other schools. Anyone really think (name your school here – example Alabama or Auburn) wont be giving kids 100% immediately and use this against us in a big way ?
      I would, I’d be all over it if I was recruiting against Georgia if the implement this. And you know what ? I’d be pretty successful. Most of the big power 5 programs that top tier SA consider can “get you to the league”.

      Liked by 3 people

  7. 69Dawg

    I wouldn’t worry too much about the women’s sports, I think they will do ok. If their Facebook and twitter accounts get real busy and that money is included in the NIL. The Uconn women’s basketball player had like 2,000,000 followers. The Gym Dawgs should do ok.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Got Cowdog

    Except for the ridiculous pool/escrow option it seems to be fairly reasonable. The only thing I didn’t see was where the school could negotiate a contract for compensation if the SA was representing the brand. Speaking of representation; Did I miss the section where the SA could acquire an agent?

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Dawg in Austin

    So the GA legislature is on this issue capitalistic with a chance of socialism? 😉

    Liked by 1 person

  10. unionjackgin

    I will refer everyone to this article (again). I have no idea for why they want to provide the schools the opportunity to pool money but I do think there are some who will be surprised when the highest earners at school end up being female athletes.

    Also keep on eye with what happens with this:

    This is how Evan Mobley announced he was declaring for the NBA Draft. The Luka Garza NFT is up to around $75k. The Mobleys one is still pretty low but has 10 days left.
    “This NFT is limited to 1 unique edition that is digitally signed by me and won’t ever be minted again. In addition to being awarded the artwork, the highest bidder of this initial auction will be gifted a signed jersey from my college days, a signed jersey from my upcoming pro team and 2 tickets + a meet and greet at a mutually agreeable game in the future. The winner must be holding this NFT at the end of the auction on April 19, 2021 in order to access the unlockable content to redeem this offer.”

    I just think a lot of legislator’s have no clue about how to do this and completely unaware with landscape of earning potential for these athletes.

    Liked by 1 person