What NIL (Name, Image & Likeness) Means For the Future of College Hockey:
On July 1, 2021, what it meant to be a college athlete and a college hockey player was forever redefined. College hockey players are now able to earn themselves some money off of the ice. It has been exactly one month since the NCAA adopted its new interim name, image and likeness (NIL) policy. This is a revolution for college hockey players, as archaic rules around NIL prohibited players from accepting compensation in order to maintain their NCAA eligibility and amateur status. The previously steadfast NCAA amateurism rules came crumbling down.
College hockey is perhaps changed for the better by finally having the interest of the players on par with the interest of the academic institutions that they play for. Moving forward, the balance of power has been altered and college hockey players can dip their toes into the real business world prior to graduation or prior to signing a professional contract.
Through the first month, college hockey athletes are branding themselves, coming out with their own logos, doing some trademark filings, engaging in memorabilia deals, and completing some NFT (non-fungible token) filings. NIL legislation, to this point, allows players to earn name, image and likeness compensation through the following avenues:
- Social Media
- Autograph Sales
- YouTube Channel Monetization
- Private Training Sessions (Camps, Clinics or Instruction)
- Merchandising and Endorsement Deals
Some hockey players are creating and selling their own designer apparel and being paid to appear on behalf of a local business. Others are entering into entrepreneurial deals with apps like Cameo or Twitch where fans can book athletes for virtual chats or pay to stream video games featuring athletes.
College hockey players now have more opportunities for financial gain by offering paid lessons, hosting their own hockey camp that features their own name, monetizing their own brand through a YouTube channel, or being featured in a future video game that has yet to be released. Players can vicariously take people along for the ride by documenting their everyday athletic journey on YouTube —They can now make money from their content like social influencers do in the real world. A lesser-skilled hockey player may not be able to make much money solely based on his or her athletic ability, but they can still choose to monetize their own brand on social media outlets.
Hockey players also have the option to associate themselves with third-party organizations (e.g., someone else’s brand) where they sign a contract to market some other company or product. Players are permitted to use their social media influence to market a restaurant or promote someone else’s brand. Social media is a great equalizer — For little to no money invested, an athlete (whether verified or not) can leverage their large social media following to build their own brand outside of school. That is where the real power will be — Telling stories via Instagram or Tik Tok, for instance.
NHL-drafted college hockey talent will have a unique advantage with the opportunity to benefit from their NIL once they step back on campus. Brands know that these higher-end players will be more sought after than other non-drafted players. Highly-regarded free agent college players will also garner greater interest from companies due to the potential they exhibit upon signing an entry-level professional hockey contract. These players will earn their opportunities and that is perhaps the best part of the new NIL rules. Players, both male and female, who are heroes in their small hometowns can now go run their own hockey camp or clinic that bares their own name. Although not a high-profile avenue for compensation, private instruction is a new opportunity that had not previously existed. It is also important to note that universities cannot take away collegiate scholarships from athletes based on NIL grounds. In fact, there are now penalties for a university themselves should a school attempt to prevent a student athlete from benefitting off their own NIL.
One would expect several regional NIL marketing deals with players specific to a local market. Imagine a world where the landmark ‘Red Pepper’ restaurant in Grand Forks starts partnering with North Dakota Fighting Hawks hockey players to push their classic grinder sandwiches on social media, or Chipotle partnering with Denver hockey players to highlight the first original Chipotle location on the University of Denver campus (East Evans Avenue). These brands and restaurants that already have a cult-like following will continue to benefit regionally from the exposure and social influence that hockey players provide in their local town or market. Regional synergies with hockey players just make sense for the athlete as well (Simply more than just free food & beverage benefits).
Some smart, resourceful players will likely find creative and novel ways to capitalize on their talents and find value. Think of an Ivy League hockey player at Brown University, Harvard or Yale who is involved in some unique startup or who is a musician or an author. These are the kind of out-of-the-box thinkers who may find new avenues to monetize their NIL and challenge the status quo. Here is the Ivy League’s take on NIL: https://ivyleague.com/news/2021/7/1/general-ivy-league-permits-student-athlete-name-image-and-likeness-opportunities.aspx
“One of the fundamental philosophies of the Ivy League is that student-athletes should have the same opportunities as all students, including the option to engage in projects that use their name, image and likeness.”
— Ivy League Executive Director, Robin Harris
On the National Hockey League (NHL) side, the Florida Panthers are the first NHL club to create an opportunity for college athletes (not only confined to hockey players) to join forces and profit alongside one another from a student-athletes’ name and celebrity (Tim Reynolds, Associated Press/The Hockey News). The Florida Panthers are aiming to provide student athletes in their region with the ability to earn income from merchandise or signed memorabilia such as jerseys. The aim is a partnership where the Panthers hope to tap into social media influencer marketing campaigns — The Panthers’ partner athletes will get paid by the social media post or by a specific social media campaign. More information on this initiative can be found here: https://www.si.com/hockey/news/nhls-panthers-reveal-plan-to-get-involved-with-nil-deals
We haven’t seen many large, more recognizable brands jump in just yet. The big brands are very strategic and logical about how they want to enter the NIL market with athletes. Larger, more commonplace brands are going to want to make a splash eventually, and it will be very telling when athletes step back on campus this Fall. Do larger brands create a massive land grab campaign with thousands of athletes (hockey and all sports included) to generate big shock value, awe and market share visibility? Or instead, do these brands wait until more niche-specific calendar events such as the NCAA Frozen Four or leading up to the Hobey Baker Award finalists announcement? This is a specific opportunity for brands to create exclusivity by only handing out larger opportunities to the elite college hockey players.
Hockey as a ‘Non-Revenue’ Sport as Compared to NCAA College Football & Basketball:
College athletes have found a successful legal strategy in bringing anti-trust cases against the NCAA, arguing that the NCAA engaged in anti-competitive behavior by arbitrarily limiting athletes’ compensation and market value. The NCAA believes that if athletes are allowed to make money, that most of the money will flow to those in revenue sports such as football and basketball with large conferences.
Although hockey pales in comparison to college football and basketball, there is ample room for the celebrity of college hockey players. At a school like Boston University (BU), which is not a basketball powerhouse and lacks a football program, hockey is everything. This is one prime example where potential NIL revenue could be realized, both on and off campus. Imagine a packed Agganis Arena at BU filled to the brim with 6,300 fans and the stands being peppered with Jack Eichel #9 sweaters. Think Cale Makar (#16) at UMass, Jonathan Toews (#9) at North Dakota, and Owen Power (#22) at Michigan — All examples of popular college players with a certain NHL celebrity pizazz about them. The revenue-producing potential is real, not to mention for college hockey die-hards who focus on nostalgia as their local heroes transition to the National Hockey League. This is the type of legacy that never graduates campus.
A school’s ability to foster NIL success for its athletes depends on geography, the supply and demand for a marketing relationship in the region, athletic heritage, winning percentage, and the school’s ability to tell its story. The hockey programs who are consistently at the top of the recruiting rankings are the schools that will undoubtedly have the highest earning potential for players who commit to those programs. More storied hockey schools like North Dakota, University of Michigan, Wisconsin, Boston University, Boston College, Denver, Minnesota and Minnesota Duluth are ultimately going to continue to recruit the top talent because they are the most visible programs. A player that goes to one of those types of hockey programs is a player who has more NIL earning potential as they will be more on the national scene during their time at school.
The size of the schools will have some impact, as those with larger alumni foundations are programs that have historically sold out most of their games during the season. Fan and alumni support is now a transaction where dollars can exchange hands via boosters. This will no doubt become a double-edged sword in terms of enticement in recruiting and/or the inducement ethics that go into the recruiting process with boosters. There is concern that lower profile sports such as hockey, perhaps considered a non-revenue sport on some campuses, might be hurt as a result.
However, depending on the campus or program where the crowds are larger and the fan following is more fervent, college hockey can be considered a revenue sport. The NCAA’s Frozen Four regional and national events are proven money makers. The thing that makes hockey unique is perhaps a more level playing field and a higher degree of parity than among football or basketball schools. A newer NCAA Division 1 hockey school like Arizona State (74,900 students enrolled), St. Thomas (9,880 students enrolled), or Long Island University (16,100 students enrolled) can start up a program and make the national tournament in their first five years of existence — Or a smaller, existing underdog Atlantic program such as American International College (AIC — 1,350 students enrolled) or the ECAC’s Union College can earn a tournament birth and win it all. Union College did just that, winning a national championship in 2014, despite being a private school with a small student enrollment of roughly 2,240 students.
Among the college hockey community, there seems to be the belief that with the right coaching and the right resources, any college hockey program has the possibility of making the national tournament and winning a national championship. It doesn’t necessarily come down to money. That being said, the last six NCAA Division I National Champions have been Massachusetts (UMass — 28,640 students enrolled) in 2021, Minnesota Duluth (UMD — 11,170 students enrolled) in 2019 and 2018, Denver (DU — 11,615 students enrolled) in 2017, North Dakota (UND — 10,160 students enrolled) in 2016, and Providence (4,735 students enrolled) in 2015 — all schools where hockey would likely be considered among the bigger ticket athletic events on campus and a higher revenue sport. These are the types of hockey programs with the largest NIL potential for both themselves and their players.
How Some College Hockey Schools are Treating NIL:
In large part, it seems that athletic administrators and coaches are embracing the new NIL rules and leaning into the possibilities with their hockey athletes. There is a steep learning curve of adjustment, but college programs have already begun to adapt to the new branding possibilities that their hockey athletes can benefit from. Schools are scrambling to craft policies and compliance departments are overwhelmed.
Some schools, such as the University of Vermont (UVM), are requiring their athletes to disclose their activities to UVM prior to entering into any NIL deal. The school has created an online form for athletes that is directed through Vermont’s NCAA compliance office for review. Vermont cannot funnel money directly to student-athletes and they cannot be involved in arranging or soliciting individual sponsorships for players. Thus, Vermont Catamount players can now make deals with boosters or agents, but only if those agreements do not violate NCC and UVM policies. Details can be found here: https://uvmathletics.com/news/2021/6/30/general-uvm-athletics-set-to-implement-name-image-and-likeness-guidelines-for-student-athletes.aspx
The University of Wisconsin Badgers have launched a program called “YouDub” to help facilitate NIL payments. Through a deal with Opendorse, a sports tech company that educates athletes on how to market themselves and find platforms, athletes can gain a better understanding of their earning potential on social media and how to build their brand. Details can be found here: https://uwbadgers.com/news/2021/6/9/football-wisconsin-partners-with-opendorse-to-launch-youdub-program.aspx
UMass is one school that quickly sought to create their own ‘Student-Athlete NIL Plan’ for their athletes. This plan defines, provides structure, policy and guidance for their athletes seeking to capitalize on their NIL. This policy outlines that UMass hockey players can state that they play hockey for UMass, but they are not permitted to use the school’s logo, marks, trademarks, mascot, unique colors, copyrights or other intellectual property without the express written consent of the institution. Details can be found here: https://umassathletics.com/sports/2021/7/1/student-athlete-name-image-and-likeness-nil-policy.aspx
In fact, at most schools, athletes cannot use their school’s colors and logo to monetize their NIL. Meanwhile, at a big college football program like LSU, athletes are permitted to use the LSU colors and logos — This is the type of difference that will impact a potential recruiting edge for some schools because that could mean a lot more income for athletes if they can wear those logos or colors in a commercial or a cameo. Some schools and athletic departments, such as USC basketball, have taken steps to support their athletes by helping them create their own logos or by launching specific programs aimed at assisting student-athletes with their own individual branding. One can expect a similar approach from schools with elite hockey programs — They will want to partner to facilitate their players’ growth.
The University of Michigan athletic department has started partnering with dozens of current Wolverine football players to sell officially licensed custom jerseys with their names and numbers (Andrew Lind, SportsLogos.net). Currently, in most cases, there is no difference in cost if a fan chooses their own number and name or that of a current Michigan student athlete. More than 50 players have signed an agreement with the Michigan team store (‘The M Den’) which nets the student athlete just over $10 per jersey sold at around a total cost to the customer/fan of $120 to $180 per jersey. This is reportedly twice as much as NFL players currently make from the sale of their own NFL jerseys. In the near future, college hockey schools are likely on a similar path, whereas one can expect schools to begin selling customizable jerseys with current hockey player names in the team store, thus benefitting the student athletes’ pocketbook. More info on these Michigan jerseys can be found here: https://news.sportslogos.net/2021/07/19/michigans-retail-store-selling-jerseys-with-names-numbers-of-current-players/college/
With some schools being specific Bauer, CCM, Warrior, Adidas, Under Armour, or New Balance schools, other hockey brands are missing opportunities to affiliate with athletes at those schools. Conflicts with pre-existing brands who have already carved out their own deals with schools are now front and center. For example, University of Vermont players cannot endorse or agree to a deal if it conflicts with Vermont sponsors — Vermont has a four-year contract with Nike and they do not want their athletes publicly promoting products that directly conflict or compete with Nike.
Group licensing creates many potential benefits. I believe we will see more group licensing programs with schools where the NHL Players’ Association (NHLPA) could potentially back a company like Upper Deck or Panini trading cards to work with NCAA hockey programs. This provides a more level playing field and a source of income for lesser-known players such as a backup goaltender or a red-shirt player who might not play every game during the season.
The biggest takeaway is that schools are taking creative approaches to NIL. Some schools are holding off and waiting while others made immediate statements on July 1st. Different rules exist for different schools, and there are a wide variety of deals happening in many different directions currently. It is ‘The Wild West’ somewhat due to that fact that some states have NIL rules and others do not. Schools and administrators probably want to be located in a state that does not have current NIL laws established. Athletes certainly want to have some more flexibility too.
What Potential Issues Loom Ahead For College Hockey and the NCAA?
Other than running championship events, one must wonder what the NCAA’s value proposition is moving forward. The NCAA is experiencing a changing of the guard. There has to be somebody playing the role of investigating these new NIL deals. From the NCAA’s perspective, in terms of state-level and school-level rules, the NCAA does not want the schools to be behind these types of deals where school boosters are the ones paying athletes through fundraising dollars — The NCAA does not want the school directly or indirectly attached to that dollar exchange. Maybe this will be the NCAA’s continued role moving forward — Compliance.
In a question-and-answer memo distributed to school athletic directors and compliance departments, the NCAA clarified that athletes can enter into NIL agreements with boosters “provided the activity is in accordance with state laws and school policy, is not an impermissible inducement and does not constitute pay-for-play.” Additionally, prospective student-athletes still in high school may also engage in the same types of NIL opportunities without impacting their NCAA eligibility. Similarly, such opportunities “may not be used as a recruiting inducement or as a substitute for pay-for-play.” Perhaps the future includes a new role created for an independent, third-party (outside of the NCAA) who can enter the fray and attempt to play NIL gatekeeper.
Unfortunately there is a lack of uniformity currently with the NCAA. This lack of uniformity creates certain situations where some marketing opportunities may be dictated by the state. Some universities reside in states without any NIL laws in place — For this circumstance, the NCAA has passed a rule to permit individual schools to create their own compensation rules and policies.
The NCAA is a bureaucratic machine with complex and multilayered systems and processes that are designed to maintain uniformity and control. By creating a new patchwork of different rules, the NCAA has created confusion between state laws and school policies and a massive lack of uniformity — Many grey areas now exist. With no federal bill in place, nobody exactly knows who is supposed to enforce what yet and the value of the NCAA is being challenged.
“With the variety of state laws adopted across the country, we will continue to work with Congress to develop a solution that will provide clarity on a national level. The current environment — both legal and legislative — prevents us from providing a more permanent solution and the level of detail student-athletes deserve.”
— NCAA President, Mark Emmert
As new NIL issues arise, everybody will have to learn and adjust on the fly. Since many student athletes have never had a legitimate job before or limited real-world business experience (as being an athlete is a full-time job in many cases), they will now be representing themselves and they will need to become familiar with different language used in contractual marketing deals with a variety of companies. A lack of education may be a detriment to young student athletes. Along with money comes increased responsibility for athletes. Budgeting and income tax implications now come into play. Financial literacy will be key for athletes. How much of a distraction does this become to an athlete who is already trying to balance their sport season alongside academics and their social life on campus?
The NCAA has argued that allowing student-athletes to be paid for athletic performance would undermine the balance between academics and athletics and that it would change the nature of college sports, eroding the appeal for fans, alumni and students. Mark Emmert, the current NCAA President, has stated that he wants the NCAA to “ensure that college athletes are not inadvertently being converted into being employees because he feels that the relationship with the students is really important.”
The NCAA is terrified of college sports turning into a “pay for play” model where athletes become employees of their universities or athletic departments. There is a broad fear that NIL reform would open the door for athletes to eventually receive salaries. We don’t know who will be writing the rules that govern NIL in the future. It could be the federal government, it could be the NCAA, it could be state legislatures, or it could be the supreme court. Future bills, of which there are currently seven in Congress focusing on NIL, could continue to provide college hockey players further rights where they can make money, from revenue sharing to collecting wages from the NCAA and their universities.
In the future, there is a distinct possibility that college athletes are declared employees and that NCAA amateurism is saved. This could lead to players unionizing and entering into a collective bargaining agreement with the NCAA and its member schools. Conceivably, with players’ unions and CBA terms being exempt from antitrust law, the NCAA might attempt to save some of its original business model, but that would be a shocking development as some states do not allow for the unionization of public employees.
“The NCAA as an institution could be legally picked apart to the point that it becomes impotent in its attempts to organize. And as a result, we may just see random fiefdoms of regional conferences and sports operating independently as conferences with no national governance. Maybe the fiefdoms is the way to go. There’s an argument that the conferences should be autonomous.”
— Sports Attorney & UNH Law Professor, Michael McCann
In NIL Summary:
Finally, college hockey players are no longer barred from marketing themselves to benefit from their own name, image and likeness (NIL). It is quite clear that college hockey players, alongside their college athlete counterparts, will be diving headfirst into uncharted waters. Businesses, big brands, regional brands, and even boosters will no longer direct all of their money only toward the universities. College hockey players have an opportunity to participate in the business of the NCAA. They get to participate in the revenue that is generated in several different industries through sport. Players are now put into a position where they can become entrepreneurs. Student athletes can join the party which, without question, will be a massive undertaking for all stakeholders involved.
