English 1101
19 November 2021
NIL in the Hands of Millions
A college student who is also an athlete is walking around a huge mall and sees an
electronics store that is having a sale on televisions. In front of one of the largest televisions sets
in the store is a group of younger boys looking intensely at the set as they all concentrate on
playing a video game. The college student looks closely at the game being played and sees
himself larger than life on this huge screen. A video game about football is using the likeness of
this college student as one of the football players. NCAA Football ’98 is one of these video
football games that used the likenesses of young athletes. In 2014, this game made over 1.3
billion dollars. The athletes whose likeness used as players in the video did not make one cent of
money. These players were never asked if their likeness, mannerisms, jersey numbers and more
could be used in these videos. Simply put, these college athletes had absolutely no say. This is
just one example of the injustices college athletes have had to put up with for many years. Until
recently, the NCAA committee had not approved any money being paid to a college athlete for
NIL: Name, Image, and Likeness. Because of a lawsuit against the company who produces these
video games, in July of this year, legislation began being pushed through to change some of
these rulings. CNBC journalist Tim Mullaney successfully uses rhetorical strategies to persuade
an audience that the new NCAA ruling concerning the future of compensation for college
athletes is justified.
In the article “Supreme Court NCAA ruling and the new future of paying college
athletes”, Tim Mullaney, a writer and news reporter for CNBC, gives clear insight as to the
reasons this type of legislature needs to be passed. In the article, Mullaney uses rhetorical
2
devices, such as Kairos, as he describes a situation where a photo of the QB at Notre Dame
‘’Brandon Wimbush’’ was used for a full week in advertising an upcoming football game against
Miami. This huge promotion helped sell over 65,000 tickets and also brought in millions for
ESPN. Wimbush was the tool for marketing and he did not see a dime. There was no NIL then,
but Wimbush did help bring about a lawsuit concerning the video. The reality of the dollars and
cents of it all has the full attention of these players, the NCAA and the Supreme Court. The
NCAA is losing some of its control over athletes and the rules about a player’s financial gain
because of these NIL issues (Mullaney 3).
Energeia is the art of storytelling many descriptions of athletes that do not have enough
money to manage life at college. In an article written by Ashley Robinson, many scenarios are
presented about college athletes who did not receive full scholarships but wanted to take
advantage of the opportunity. Many of these athletes have difficult times having enough money
to be able to live comfortably, including housing and having enough to eat. This is where the
NIL can come into play to assist players who are waiting on that full ride as they work hard to
become important to the team. As the public gets to know the players, the NIL can help keep
these athletes from living in their cars. Video games/influencers are popular college athletes that
can be used to sell merchandise and games. The NIH rule can help make this legal. The more
popular the athlete becomes, the more these kinds of things through the NIL can happen
(Robinson 1).
All sports are affected by these rules. Katelyn Ohashi who once was a gymnast for the
University of California performed a perfect routine at a gymnastics meet in 2019. The video of
this routine went viral and the president of the NCAA called Katelyn to congratulate her. Her
response to him was “you should be thanking me” (Mullaney 3). Videos, billboards, games, etc.,
3
are profitable because of the athletes. The NCAA can no longer turn its back on the discussion of
financial compensation for these hard working athletes who help bring in thousands of dollars to
these institutions (Mullaney 4).
There are those who do not agree that athletes should be given any compensation through
“Pay to Play” or the NIL movement. Ray Green, a student athlete, wrote in The Observer,
If you look at athletes in the NFL once they are done playing football, 78% are bankrupt
or are in financial stress according to a report by CNBC. The same report said that only
33% of players in the NFL have their college degree. From those statistics, there is a
correlation showing that if student athletes don’t have a college degree they also end up
being broke (Green 1).
In addition, part of the excitement of college athletics is the competition itself. If universities
begin bargaining potential players through how much they can be paid, then the fairness for
athletes choosing where to play is taken away. According to Pay to Play: Should College
Athletes Be Paid,
“developing such an economy in the athletic department “would result in a monetary race
to buy the best athletes in the country.” Top colleges would get the superstar athletes,
while most colleges get the “rejects” (Green 2).
Losing the competitive nature of college athletics is not appealing and is one of the reasons the
ruling through the NCAA has continued to be in place. However, video companies making
billions of dollars through using college players’ personal contribution to the game is bringing so
much attention to the subject that decisions are now forced to be made.
4
Hearing about athletes that have worked hard to be the best they can be and therefore
become one of the top players in their sport is an American dream story we all know and love.
Knowing the blood sweat and tears that goes into constant training to be the best brings to mind
the word justification. Is it justified to not let those receive some kind of compensation that are
helping bring attention to a place, a sport, and with it millions of dollars? The stories of these real
and young athletes are enough to persuade over 60% of Americans that there should be some
kind of compensation made, with the number rising daily. The Supreme Court agrees as well as
the background stories continue to support the player’s vs the NCAA. Think about that college
athlete that saw the image of himself as a player in a very popular video game on the huge
television. No permission granted. No discussions were held about any of it. Athleticism is
fleeting and getting rewarded monetarily because your likeness as an athlete brings attention to a
game that is making millions of dollars is the fair thing to do. It just is.
Works Cited
Green, Rey. “Student Athletes Shouldn't Be Paid.” The Observer, 26 Jan. 2021,
https://cwuobserver.com/16759/opinion/student-athletes-shouldnt-be-paid/.
Mullaney, Tim. “Supreme Court NCAA Ruling and the New Future of Paying College Athletes.”
CNBC, CNBC, 23 June 2021, https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/21/supreme-court-ncaadecision-how-college-athletes-plan-to-cash-in.html.
5
Robinson, Ashley. “Should College Athletes Be Paid? an Expert Debate Analysis.” Should
College Athletes Be Paid? An Expert Debate Analysis, 6 May 2020,
https://blog.prepscholar.com/should-college-athletes-be-paid-why.
Snider, Mike. “'NCAA Football 14' Tackles July Video Game Sales Mark.” USA Today, Gannett
Satellite Information Network, 16 Aug. 2013,
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/gaming/2013/08/15/npd-video-game-salesjuly/2662777/.