Oregon joined 21 states and the District of Columbia in clarifying and extending the opportunity to sign name, image, likeness (NIL) deals to high school athletes on Oct. 10, 2022. NIL deals allow athletes to profit off of uses of their name, image, or likeness. In National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) v. Alston, the United States Supreme Court decided, on June 1, 2021, that federal antitrust laws were violated by the NCAA’s restrictions on education-related compensation of student athletes. Following the decision, various NIL state laws have gone into effect, and college athletes have been able to make brand deals and begin to profit off of their athletic careers, despite not technically being professional athletes. Now high school athletes will also have the opportunity to build brand relationships and potentially even profit.
Oregon’s NIL rules for high school athletes include reporting of all received compensation and items of value to the athlete’s school athletic director and that the athlete must not wear any member high school or Oregon School Activities Association (OSAA) logos in NIL activities. Additionally, student athletes cannot be compensated for specific performance or achievement within OSAA sports and activities. This means that students cannot be compensated for specific achievements such as number of points scored in a game in an OSAA sport.
Two Oregon high school athletes have signed NIL deals with Portland Gear, a local apparel company. Jesuit High School’s Sofia Bell and West Linn High School’s Jackson Helstad, both basketball players committed to University of Oregon, remain the only Oregon high school athletes who have signed NIL deals.
In other states NIL deals have led to significant profit for student athletes; Bronny James, son of LeBron James, tops On3’s NIL ranking lists in both NIL earnings in high school men’s basketball and all NIL earnings with a NIL valuation of $7.6 million.
NCAA NIL deals have drawn some controversy. While not likely to be an issue for high school athletes, NIL college collectives have been presenting a problem in the world of NIL. They are collections of boosters and donors that pool funds to arrange NIL contracts. Funds that might have once gone to college athletics programs are now going in the direction of individual athletes, creating a disadvantage for athletes within college programs that don’t have NIL deals and sports that are less likely to have many athletes with NIL deals. Most NIL deals go to athletes in football and basketball. More visible players are more likely to get deals even if they have roughly equivalent talent to another athlete on their team. Certain positions, such as football linemen, are significantly less likely to get offered NIL deals.
Additionally, NIL deals so far have perpetuated a pattern all too familiar in the world of athletics: the gender pay gap. Only two women make the top 20 of On3’s NIL valuation list: Livvy Dunne and Sunisa Lee. While providing a potential opportunity for non-male athletes to make a profit of their own, big NIL deals are offered to the athletes with the most visibility and non-male athletes are significantly less likely to have visibility.
Allowing NIL deals at the high school level is intended to help young athletes learn how to navigate the world of contracts and brand deals they’re entering. It remains unclear how these deals will play out at the high school level, especially protected from some of the issues facing colleges, but they appear unlikely to go away. Home to the Nike headquarters, Oregon could see an influx of high school athletes look for brand deals, as athletes have already begun uprooting their lives to move to states like California that allow NIL deals.
