N.I.L. refers to Name, Image, Likeness.
College athletes can now sell “those parts of themselves” to anyone interested in buying them for sponsorship or endorsement purposes.
I recently contributed the comments below to a college football discussion board. I won’t bother putting them in quotes.
N.I.L.
The socioeconomics of this are interesting.
Even though college football players have unique skills which set them apart from, say, workers at Amazon, those Amazon “grunts” are just as important to Bezos et al as college football players are to college football. No workers, no product.
(At least not until full-blown – potentially Orwellian – AI.)
Yet, FEW WITH MONEY are going to propose altering the wage scale – even marginally – for non-skilled labor at Amazon or anywhere else. Meanwhile, that same prosperity-class – or at least that portion of it enamored of college sports – can’t wait to wrap itself around NIL contracts.
So, what’s this say? To me, two things.
One, because college football players have something ENORMOUSLY LUCRATIVE to sell, they’re being admitted – that is, ALLOWED IN – to the OWNER-RENTIER ranks as at least NOMINAL STAKEHOLDERS, thereby allowing them to leave behind the “grunt” ranks of the average non-skilled laborer.
Two, NIL approval came about not as a matter of new law but as an interpretation of existing law via a 9-0 SCOTUS decision. Yet, while framed as an anti-trust decision, might it not have broader effect?
In fact, did it not further strengthen the system whereby monetize-able, income-stream asset-outlets meant to circulate and recirculate capital are promoted and can be extended by the OWNER-RENTIER class to whomever they designate?
Note that despite all of the economic-justice ink that’s been dedicated to this issue, no one in the unskilled labor world will EVER come close to such a deal.
Which is JUST HOW WE ROLL. No argument.
As long as we view this for what it is. A timely extension of stakeholder status to a group deemed essential to the trade.
Again, HOW WE ROLL.
As for equity, there is none, but only WHAT THE TRAFFIC WILL BEAR. Unlimited sums to athletes? That’s RUNNING THE GAME, not HOLDING A STAKE. THAT PART, I sense, will be challenged.