Ohio lawmakers have introduced a pivotal piece of legislation—House Bill 660—that could reshape the landscape of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) agreements for student-athletes in the state. Spearheaded by Republican representatives Adam Mathews and Jay Edwards, this bill seeks to clarify the legal framework surrounding NIL deals in Ohio while enhancing the recruitment capabilities of its universities.

At Saluja Law, we recognize the profound impact HB660 could have on college sports and student-athletes in Ohio. Under this bill, universities would be authorized to directly engage in NIL negotiations with athletes, compensating them for the use of their NIL or financially supporting independent NIL collectives. By allowing universities to play a direct role in NIL agreements, the bill aims to enhance Ohio's competitiveness in recruiting top talent—especially with powerhouse programs like Ohio State University generating significant NIL revenue for their athletes.

Enhancing Recruitment Through NIL Agreements

This legislative proposal comes at a time when NIL deals have become a critical factor in the recruitment process. HB660 would give Ohio universities an edge by allowing them to directly facilitate NIL compensation, potentially drawing more elite athletes to the state's colleges. Ohio State football players, for example, reportedly earned around $20 million in NIL compensation last year—a testament to the transformative power of these agreements in modern college sports.

However, this aspect of the bill has sparked debate. While it undeniably bolsters the recruitment capabilities of Ohio's universities, critics argue that giving schools direct control over NIL negotiations could lead to conflicts of interest or exploitative practices. Ensuring that student-athletes are not coerced or unfairly influenced by their institutions is a critical challenge lawmakers must address. As such, Saluja Law emphasizes the importance of implementing strong protections for athletes to safeguard their financial autonomy and well-being.

NIL Restrictions and Compliance

One key provision of HB660 is the imposition of restrictions on the types of products and services student-athletes can endorse. The bill would prohibit NIL agreements related to industries such as tobacco, marijuana, alcohol, vaping products, adult entertainment, and gambling. These restrictions are designed to maintain ethical standards and protect the reputations of both the athletes and the institutions they represent.

Additionally, the bill outlines limitations on how athletes can use their school's facilities, uniforms, and equipment in NIL-related advertisements. These restrictions help ensure a clear separation between a university's official activities and the personal endorsements of student-athletes.

While these provisions align with broader public policy concerns, they also raise questions about how much control athletes will have over their NIL ventures. It is essential that these restrictions do not overly limit the earning potential of student-athletes or create unnecessary barriers to their financial success.

Protecting Athlete Autonomy

A critical component of HB660 is its prohibition on restrictions that would prevent student-athletes from receiving NIL compensation or from hiring agents to negotiate agreements on their behalf. This measure is crucial in maintaining the independence of student-athletes as they navigate the increasingly complex world of NIL contracts.

Saluja Law views this aspect of the bill as a necessary step in protecting athletes from potential exploitation. Universities should not be permitted to impose undue restrictions that could stifle the financial opportunities available to student-athletes. Instead, the focus should be on fostering an environment where athletes can capitalize on their NIL rights while pursuing their education and athletic careers.

The Path Forward

Ohio has already made significant strides in the NIL space, with Governor Mike DeWine's 2021 executive order ensuring that Ohio schools could remain competitive by allowing athletes to profit from their NIL. As the legal and financial landscape surrounding NIL continues to evolve, it is critical that HB660 strikes the right balance between empowering universities and protecting the rights of student-athletes.

At Saluja Law, we will continue to monitor the progress of this bill and provide updates on its potential implications for student-athletes, universities, and the broader college sports landscape. With limited legislative sessions remaining after the November elections, the future of HB660 is uncertain, but its introduction marks an important chapter in Ohio's ongoing efforts to refine its approach to NIL agreements.

As NIL negotiations become an integral part of college sports, lawmakers must ensure that any new regulations are fair, transparent, and in the best interests of student-athletes. HB660 presents an opportunity to create a more structured and competitive NIL environment in Ohio, but only if it is carefully crafted to preserve the autonomy and financial freedom of the very athletes it aims to support.